<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dave,<br>
<br>
I do not believe the footprint is that much less than it used to be
pre-turnaround. We may have pulled in the ends somewhat but we have
also pushed out perpendicular to the flight line, particularly with F3A
rolling circles. I
don't recall doing old-style turnarounds much further out than a 175
meter turnaround that breaks the box a bit does. The sport flyers at
any
field are pushing the limits of visibility and flying further out as
well.<br>
The main issue was noise. That is an issue that could and should have
been addressed as a separate issue from a conversion to turnaround. <br>
My original point was that we would not have considered turnaround
pattern in
this country if the FAI had not shown us the way and we were willing at
that time to follow. I also believe that if the FAI were to establish a
new direction of that magnitude today, that the pattern
community/leadership would reject such a change out of hand.<br>
It is arguable as to the cause for a drop in attendance but it does
appear to start about the same time as the conversion of pattern to
turnaround. There are a lot of ex-pattern flyers dating from that
period. Our latest contest here in Albuquerque had eight contestants.
The spring contest had 15. If I want to attend another contest, I
have to travel at least 450 miles. That would gain me1-3 contests next
year. Any more and I'm up to 700-1000 miles travel one way. This part
of the
country(pre-turnaround) was very active in pattern. Colorado alone used
to have at least 5 contests and now they are struggling to bring back
just one of them. Utah, Montana and Nevada used to have contests- now
nothing. <br>
<br>
For the entry level Sportsman class, I am advocating the establishment
of a skill progression relative to flying pattern schedules. This is
independent of the maneuver complexity. Clearly there should be more
maneuvers if only the center is judged. <br>
<br>
For Masters, it has been argued that this is the destination AMA class.
If this is truly the case, then the maneuver difficulty should be
increased to support this class as an alternate goal to F3A . If it is
a feeder class for F3A, then it also should support some simple
roll/loop combinations. My opinion is that it is neither of these.<br>
<br>
Your last paragraph about armchair quarterbacking and comments based on
incomplete data is somewhat insulting. I'm operating in the dark with
my comments because the leadership of the NSRCA has kept me there.
Where are the "sequence guidelines" published? And why can't the
general membership see the current state of development of the new
patterns now. If we don't see them until next year, all we are going to
get is an up or down vote. <br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
<br>
Dave wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:2C0DE94B75384CBF857F2206C7949D69@davedesktop"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"> <o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City">
<o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
pre
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsonormal, li.ecxmsonormal, div.ecxmsonormal
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsochpdefault, li.ecxmsochpdefault, div.ecxmsochpdefault
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsonormal1, li.ecxmsonormal1, div.ecxmsonormal1
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
span.ecxmsohyperlink1
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxmsohyperlinkfollowed1
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxemailstyle191
{font-family:Calibri;
color:#1F497D;}
p.ecxmsochpdefault1, li.ecxmsochpdefault1, div.ecxmsochpdefault1
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxecxmsonormal, li.ecxecxmsonormal, div.ecxecxmsonormal
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle31
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</o:SmartTagType></o:SmartTagType></o:SmartTagType></o:SmartTagType>
<div class="Section1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">The ONLY
REASON?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Hmmm…..pattern
would have all but
died in many parts of the country had it not been for reduced
overflight
requirements of turnaround, the reduced noise, and the reduced noise
footprint. In the <st1:place w:st="on">Northeast US</st1:place>,
pattern
was dead in many areas because of noise and overflight problems, and 20
years
later, some clubs are just now starting to understand that pattern is
no longer
a field killer. I was part of the group in the late 80s that penned
the transition to turnaround, and I was a diehard AMA flyer at the
time. Yes,
some dropped pattern because they did not want to change to turnaround
style,
but many of those would not have been able to continue flying non
turnaround
because of the noise and overflight issues.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">To suggest
that the AMA community is fully
rejecting FAI concepts is, I think, a gross overstatement. FAI has
always
done some stupid things, and like any large bureaucracy, it will likely
do so
in the future. On a regular basis, there is advocacy to do what FAI
does,
and on a regular basis there is opposition to ABSOLUTE congruency with
FAI…..AMA
can always CHOOSE to follow an FAI lead, but should never establish
legislation
REQUIRING it to do so.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">I’m not
clear whether you want to
increase or decrease the difficulty of Sportsman? Eliminating
turnarounds
would make it easier. Adding back 3 roll and 3 loops would make it
harder? And if Sportsman were made less difficult, and Masters were
made
more difficult, then the difficulty between classes would increase
…another
always hot topic. My opinion, I would like to see the Sportsman class
simpler, and I’ve been involved with the Sequence Committee for 20+
years, and 90% of the time I’ve been called an elitist for trying to
take
away the “fun” and “challenging” maneuvers from the
Sportsman. I’d like to see pattern competitors stay in a class
until they have mastered the elements in that class, not simply gotten
to the
point of being able to consistently fly the sequence with no scores
<5. I’d
like to see competitors realize that they can practice the next
sequence BEFORE
getting there, and there is some personal responsibility in preparing
for the
next class. Everyone needs to understand it is simply impossible to
have
difficulty gaps between classes that everyone finds to be appropriate –
it is continually adjusted by the Sequence Committee based on feedback
from the
pilots that voice their opinion during the design process.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">For Masters,
the biggest difference
between it and FAI, aside from 2 schedules, is the integrated loop/roll
(rolling
loops, rolling circles) element. Masters pilots have repeatedly in
substantial
majorities expressed the desire to NOT HAVE integrated loop/roll
elements in
Masters. If you want integrated loop/roll elements, there is a class
for
that – it is FAI. The other element in FAI that is not in Masters
is combination roll / snap maneuvers – again, because Masters pilots
have
repeatedly expressed the desire to NOT HAVE this in Masters.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">I’m glad to
see the prolific number
of posts on this (and similar topics) in the past month……I’m
sure it means many people will volunteer AND contribute to the next
Sequence
Committee. There is a very good system in place (that is quite
flexible
and accommodating to reflect progress and evolving ideas) for designing
sequences, but it does not work without participation, and as with many
other
endeavors, it does not do very well accommodating armchair
quarterbacking and
occasional comments from sidelines base on limited or incomplete data.
The
length of time it takes to draft, propose, review, and implement rules
is
always a hot topic, and it certainly doesn’t get any shorter with late
entries to the game or increasingly larger numbers of people involved.
I
can assure you that the active core of the current Sequence Committee
is
listening, and nothing is being done in a vacuum.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Dave Lockhart<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; color: windowtext;">
<hr tabindex="-1" align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font color="black" face="Tahoma" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: windowtext; font-weight: bold;">From:</span></font></b><font
color="black" face="Tahoma" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; color: windowtext;">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>]
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">On Behalf Of </span></b>John
Gayer<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, October
20, 2009
11:39 AM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> General pattern
discussion<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re:
[NSRCA-discussion]
Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><font color="black"><span
style="color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">As I recall, the ONLY reason
AMA is now flying
turnaround is because F3A went to a turnaround format. The
"powersthatwere" were concerned that our team would not have the
relevant experience to compete on the world stage. This started a
process of
conversion to turnaround by including the FAI pattern and then expert
turnaround in AMA pattern contests.<br>
The pendulum has now swung the other way where the AMA pattern
community, while
overly committed to turnaround, rejects the patterns, rules and
concepts of the
FAI.<br>
<br>
While I no longer see a need to use the current(or past schedule as we
have
already done) F3A pattern as the Masters pattern, I believe it is
important to
address whatever is new and challenging in the upcoming F3A patterns
and
consider introducing similar elements into the Masters pattern.<br>
<br>
At the other end of the spectrum, I believe that the Sportsman class
should
have the turnaround elements removed completely. Perhaps some of the
center
maneuvers could be upgraded in difficulty at the same time. The
sportsman flyer
needs more focus on learning the maneuvers and where to place them.
Making them
fly the box simply insures that they aree not in position to do a
proper center
maneuver. This is not intended as a first step in getting rid of
turnaround but
rather creating a progression in the learning process.<br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze wrote: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">Ed:</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">Why are we tied to FAI?
Ed, certainly you must
realize that we are tied to FAI so that every 2 years we can send a
handful of
model flyers to some foreign land to compete in a contest, the results
of which
will be of interest to only a handful of people here, and, certainly,
won't
boost interest in pattern for the general model flying community.
That's
why!</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">So there!</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">Bill</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-style: none none none solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color black; border-width: medium medium medium 1.5pt; margin: 5pt 0in 5pt 4.2pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 4pt;">
<div style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">----- Original Message
----- <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div
style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial; background-attachment: scroll;">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0% 50%; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;"><b><font
color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;">From:</span></font></b><font
face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> <a
href="mailto:ed_alt@hotmail.com" title="ed_alt@hotmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">Ed Alt</a> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;">To:</span></font></b><font
face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> <a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
title="nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA
List</a> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></font></b><font
face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> Monday,
October 19, 2009 9:33 PM<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div style="font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></font></b><font
face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;"> Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Re. the notion of robotically
accepting
whatever FAI P sequence comes our way as our Masters sequence, let's
keep
it simple. What problem, exactly, are we trying to solve? And what
exactly is it about giving up all autonomy with respect to creating our
AMA Masters sequences in this country that leads us to believe that
this
represents a solution?<br>
<br>
I think that you need to look no further than the P-11 and F-11 to
fully
understand why this should not be done. On the one hand, you have a
prelim sequence that was done either with complete lack of
understanding of
what the box boundaries are, or perhaps worse yet, contemplates that it
is best
to fly at 220m in order to stay within them while maintaining
consistency with
roll rates and maneuver size throughout the sequence. And then you
have
snaposaurus F-11. I quit IMAC in favor of Pattern after 2003 for
some good reasons, and these two 2001 FAI sequences harken back to that
time
for me. Let's not start introducing the mindless application of snap
rolls and lack of thought for what the aerobatic box is there for,
just to
make it easier to flit between Masters and FAI during the season. <br>
<br>
Joe Lachowski and Dave Lockhart put a great deal of of thought and
energy into
creating sequence design criteria, which is a good tool to help design
better
sequences. I think that we should continue to refine this approach and
use
it to our advantage to make the best sequences that we are capable of,
rather
than just adopt something that we have essentially no control of.<br>
Ed<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr id="stopSpelling" align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">From: <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:jlachow@hotmail.com">jlachow@hotmail.com</a><br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:24:03 -0400<br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<br>
<br>
If we go this route, I for one will definitely quit.<br>
<br>
We already have new sequences designed for 2011 for all the classes.
And we have been adopting a maneuver here and there from
the FAI sequences. They will be presented in the K-factor sometime in
the
future. There are even two different sequences put together for
Masters. One is
the traditional length and the other is the same length as FAI.<br>
<br>
The new FAI sequence for next year is a real
good example not to flat out adopt a P sequence as it is.<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr id="ecxstopSpelling" align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">From: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net">burtona@atmc.net</a><br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:56:40 -0400<br>
CC: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:tom_babs@bellsouth.net">tom_babs@bellsouth.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"
size="2"><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">It
seems to me that
adopting the FAI “P” schedule for the Masters class with
“changes” is not the way to go. A better alternative IMO is to
fly FAI P schedule under FAI rules as a separate class. Those of us
with
some age remember when this was done years ago as “D” expert and
“D” Novice classes. As I remember AMA class “D” was the
FAI event back then. This would have the advantages of two classes
flying
under the same rules and the benefits of more flyers/judges familiar
with
the same rules and maneuvers. It would also eliminate the work involved
in
coming up with a new Masters sequence every three or so years as a new
schedule
would be automatically be invoked FAI changed. I’d like to see a
proposal
for this change submitted to the Contest Board.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"
size="2"><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Dave
Burton </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div
style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;">
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><b><font color="black" face="Tahoma"
size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma; font-weight: bold;">From:</span></font></b><font
face="Tahoma" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma;"> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>]
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">On Behalf Of </span></b>Vicente
"Vince" Bortone<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Monday,
October 19, 2009
11:29 AM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> General pattern
discussion<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re:
[NSRCA-discussion]
Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">Hi Lance,</span></font><br>
<font face="Arial"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><font color="black" face="Arial"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;">Just to
clarify. I am not the
only one making this proposal. Don Ramsey and Charlie Rock helped me
to put it together. I am going to try to respond to your questions
below. Please read below in <strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;">bold. </span></font></b></strong>Thanks
for
bringing this discussion to the list. <br>
<br>
Vicente "Vince" Bortone<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com"><patterndude@tx.rr.com></a><br>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></a><br>
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 11:51:30 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<br>
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">I know official
discussion hasn't
started but this list is one of the good vetting forums. Vince
proposed
Masters flying FAI P, which is clear <strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;">(this is for sure the most important
statement)</span></font></b></strong>,
but if the logic behind the proposal as written causes confusion it may
make a
less convincing case. <strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;">Good point. We assumed that was easy for
someone that is very
familiar to pattern to digest the intent of the proposal. Your
conclusions are correct. We are assuming that the current procedures
we
use to design the Master schedule are not changed. We adopt the
current FAI P schedule with the appropriate changes to suit the
Master class. This is the reason why we didn't try to discuss other
details. </span></font></b></strong>For example, it says "there
is an evident pile up f pilots in the Masters class" but never clearly
states how flying the same sequence would change that. He may be
implying
that people will more freely move between classes to balance the lines
because
they are flying a similar sequence but the sequences may not be
identical and
the judging rules are not identical. <strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;">Correct. You actually saw what happened
in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Tulsa</st1:place></st1:City>
this year.
There were 10 pilots in Masters and you decided to divide the group in
two
and five flew Masters and five flew FAI. This also happened
already in other local contest around KC. It happens at <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Fort</st1:PlaceType> <st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Scott</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>
contest also. Pilots will be more willing to do this we fly
the same schedule. </span></font></b></strong>At another point it
says "This will make judging of both classes very accurate" but doesn't
address the obvious differences in judging criteria between AMA and
FAI, which
is the current burden that Masters and FAI pilots currently bear when
the fly
one class and judge the other.<strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;"> I am sure that we will agree that it will
be a lot
easier to deal with these differences if we fly the same schedules.
The
proposal intent is not to address the differences in judging criteria
between
AMA and FAI. I believe that it will become natural as we start
to fly the same schedule and the differences will go away with
time. </span></font></b></strong>Finally, there is no exact wording
proposed on the form where it is expected, but later in the logic it
refers to
the idea of replacing some FAI maneuvers where appropriate. <strong><b><font
face="Arial"><span style="font-family: Arial;">We are assuming that
the current
procedure to design the schedules is still in place. The
committee will check the current FAI P schedule and proposed a final
one with
the changes to make it suitable for Masters. For example, P11 the only
portion I will change is the integrated half loop on the figure M. I
will
suggest something like 2 of 4 or 1/2 roll on bottom to replace the
integrated 1/2 roll. I believe that all other maneuvers are
suitable for Masters. </span></font></b></strong>Without exact
wording, its not clear how this is done, or if the maneuver
descriptions will
be re-written in the AMA rules, or referenced to the FAI descriptions
like the
sequence. <strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;">The
committee will decide whatever is appropriate. If they feel that the
FAI
descriptions are appropiate we could use it as is.</span></font></b></strong>
Oh, and how does AMA deal with the fact that FAI changes schedules in
odd
years?<strong><b><font face="Arial"><span style="font-family: Arial;">
We
will need to follow FAI schedule. I think that this is very
possible and should not be a problem. </span></font></b></strong></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">My intent is simply to
point out
aspects that detract from it's thoroughness. I do not yet have a stance
on
the issue.<strong><b><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-family: Arial;"> We
put this together just taking at the 2008 Nats. I remember that I have
to
judge FAI and I never had the chance to judge FAI before the Nats. I
was
trying to study the FAI schedule at the same time that I was trying to
fly my
own contest. This is clearly an additional pressure on the
contestant. If this proposal pass it will make our life easier at
the local contest and when we judging at the Nats or any other
contest.
Also, clearly will make the judging level very high because Masters and
FAI
pilots will be very familiar with the schedules we fly and the details
requires
to judge each of the maneuvers. Finally, the balance in local
contest will be easier to fix since we will more willing to fly FAI
when
required. </span></font></b></strong></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">--Lance</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black" face="Arial" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial;"><br>
_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion
mailing list <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Hotmail: Free, trusted and
rich email service. <a
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/"
moz-do-not-send="true">Get
it now.</a> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Hotmail: Free, trusted and
rich email service. <a
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/" target="_new"
moz-do-not-send="true">Get it now.</a> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><font
color="black" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"></span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre style="text-align: center;"><font color="black"
face="Courier New" size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">
<hr align="center" size="4" width="90%">
</span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;">NSRCA-discussion mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
</div>
<pre wrap=""><hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>