<!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>
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.<br>
<br>
However I will repeat that I feel strongly that if there are new
sequences already generated then they should be published now along
with the guidelines used. They must be in a more or less final form now
if they have been presented to District 2 for comment.<br>
<br>
If you are looking for volunteers in the next rules cycle, consider me
volunteered.<br>
<br>
Also see +++ comments below.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
<br>
Dave wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:954289E6BB9C403B9BA26732ABF1C986@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="State">
<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="country-region">
<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;}
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.ecxmsohyperlink1
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxmsohyperlinkfollowed1
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxemailstyle191
{font-family:Calibri;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle29
{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></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;">John,<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;">Thanks for
the response – seriously –
I know you put thought into your responses.<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;">Your point
on the rolling circles in F3A
is spot on – it is an excellent example of why AMA should never blindly
follow FAI. Circles are absolutely contrary to the reducing overflight
requirements and noise footprint. There are a number of people
including
myself who have advocated against rolling circles – and apparently we
are
in the minority or it has fallen on deaf ears at FAI.<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;">Comparing
current day turnaround 2M planes
to ballistic style 63” wingspan piped 2C 60s is not really a fair
comparison. When turnaround went into effect, the airspace used
definitely decreased. As the airplanes have gotten larger (another
example
of unintended consequence of another short sighted FAI rule change),
the
airspace requirements have gradually crept up to the current day.<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;">You are
correct that noise could have been
addressed separately (to an extent) from the style of flying. However,
the noise footprint is the product of the volume of noise and the
amount of
airspace used. I don’t find it coincidence that both were addressed
at the same time.<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 think at
the time that FAI showed us the
way to turnaround, it was embraced in the US/AMA to the degree it was
because
it was clearly an aid to reducing noise footprint, which was a huge
problem in
many areas of the country. If FAI were to introduce another
“magnitude”
of change, I think you are correct, US/AMA would not follow unless the
benefits
were revolutionary.<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 understand
your history of reduced
contests/contestants and the timing with turnaround in your area. I’ve
talked with Jeff Carrish many times (former D1 guy, in D5 for ~12 years
now,
and hopefully getting back into pattern with encouragement from Dan).
I
think the same story exists in many parts of the <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>.
In the <st1:place w:st="on">NE US</st1:place>, I think the drop
started before turnaround, and it started
because of the loss of flying fields that could handle the ballistic
pattern
noise footprint and airspace needs. In the <st1:place w:st="on">NE US</st1:place>,
it was very apparent a change was needed, and turnaround looked to have
obvious
benefits (and it did), and the net result may well have been short term
losses
for long term sustainability.</span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
+++++++++I saw both Jeff and Dan in August at the first AAM contest in
about a decade. Hopefully Jeff will start flying competitively again.
Jim Eide showed up to judge.<br>
I certainly agree that the move to turnaround, gradual as it was, was a
good thing. It is clearly more challenging and interesting. It has led
to aircraft that are a delight to fly and almost too quiet if you fly
at an open field.<br>
In this part of the country, it did run off a lot of top level pilots
and, I believe, lead to a gradual decline of pattern in the Rocky
mountain region. I can't speak for other parts of the country although
I used to fly at the Aeroguidance field in the 60s.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:954289E6BB9C403B9BA26732ABF1C986@davedesktop"
type="cite">
<div class="Section1">
<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">“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>
***********Ok. If I understand your clarification, a full turnaround
sequence
is more challenging than a non or partial turnaround sequence when both
have
the same maneuvers, because simply flying in the box adds to the
challenge. If
I got that right, we are in agreement. Whether or not the progression
of
classes should start with flying in the box, or learning specific
maneuvers,
that, to me, is a philosophical question/debate for which I think both
sides
have merit. Almost a chicken and the egg kind of thing. I really
don’t think it is possible to completely separate the two, and based on
coaching beginner pattern pilots for 20+ years, I think the current
Sportsman
class is pretty solid, albeit maybe a bit long.</span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
+++++++++ Removing the judging and the specificity of the turnaround
maneuvers does not eliminate the need to get on the correct track for a
center maneuver through the use of a turnaround maneuver. It does take
the pressure off and should insure that the contestant is not trying
to do an outside loop in the next county or overhead for that matter.
The emphasis as always is the teaching of wings level, rudder comes
later.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:954289E6BB9C403B9BA26732ABF1C986@davedesktop"
type="cite">
<div class="Section1">
<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;"> <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.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">***********I believe you are
partially correct. The
current Masters class is a destination for some, and others are passing
through
on their way to F3A. The current difficulty level of Masters is based
on feedback
from Masters Pilots in prior NSRCA Surveys (and as I’ve noted
previously,
integrated loop/roll combinations and roll/snap combinations were not
desired
in this class). Pilots that think Masters is too difficult can stay in
Advanced (I sincerely doubt any Advanced pilot who is cleaning up in
Advanced
won’t be able to handle Masters) and those that want more of a
challenge
can take a look at F3A (which varies substantially depending on the
year).
We can’t control F3A. We can control Masters. I personally
think Masters should be a little more difficult, so some of the pilots
will
stay in Advanced longer and reduce the top heavy class structure
(talking AMA
only) we currently have. As others have stated (and I agree), guys
that
want to fly F3A will, with or without “official” feeder classes.
Even if Masters were a feeder class to F3A, I see nothing wrong with an
absence
of integrated loop/roll maneuvers, just as I don’t see a problem with
the
absence of spins in Intermediate. If new elements are not
progressively introduced,
what do we end up with? Snaps and spins in Sportsman? Years ago we
had the problem of escalating difficulty within a class….and Novice was
inserted under Sportsman, and then Pre-Novice was inserted under
Novice. Silliness.
That is a large driver in why the sequence design/criteria documents
were
written (more on that later).</span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
+++++++++++I agree that Masters should be more difficult. I'm not sure
how you would do that without introducing some elements of roll/loop or
roll/snap combinations. Right now the pattern is not up to the quality
of pilot that is sitting at the top of Masters whether you consider it
a destination class or a feeder class.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:954289E6BB9C403B9BA26732ABF1C986@davedesktop"
type="cite">
<div class="Section1">
<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;"> <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.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">***********My intent was not
to be insulting, but if
it came across that way I apologize. I freely admit to being
frustrated
by the lack of support and interest in taking part in the Sequence
Committee,
only to have (by comparison) voluminous commentary after the process
has begun
(and is actually close to completion). Certainly anyone coming into
the
game after it began is not guilty of armchair quarterbacking.</span></font></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
+++++++++I understand your frustration in getting participation for
these committees. I believe that the leadership has an e-mailing list
for the full membership. The districts also have mailing lists. Was
there a mass mailing explaining the function of the sequence committee
and asking for volunteers? Has this been done for the Event Director of
the World Championships? Until these things are done, you cannot sit
back and complain that you are not getting support.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:954289E6BB9C403B9BA26732ABF1C986@davedesktop"
type="cite">
<div class="Section1">
<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;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The structure of the Sequence
Committee and the
process to be completed was outlined at the onset, and there was buy-in
from
the NSRCA Board, and no dissent from the Membership. The process did
not
include oversight by the general membership, just as the NSRCA Board
does not
include the general membership in every email and phone call.
Development
of the sequences is a process, and putting it on hold, or going
backwards to
include additional people is counter productive. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<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;">The “sequence guidelines” – I
don’t
think they are published anywhere, not that they are a secret. They
are a
collection of word documents that are all related – basically an
outline
for developing sequences as a related group, and then specific docs for
each
class that include design criteria / class objectives, and a maneuver
catalog
for each class. They are intended to be modified as needed based
Survey
results, the inclusion of new maneuvers in a sequence, or changes in
the rules
that would affect flying/judging criteria of specific maneuvers. I
will
send a separate email to the Sequence Committee and Prez Derek to see
about
posting them.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<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;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
Dave<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<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="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
5:26 PM<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;">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 <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Albuquerque</st1:place></st1:City>
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. <st1:State
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Colorado</st1:place></st1:State> alone
used to have at least 5
contests and now they are struggling to bring back just one of them. <st1:State
w:st="on">Utah</st1:State>, <st1:State w:st="on">Montana</st1:State>
and <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Nevada</st1:place></st1:State>
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: <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;"><u1:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"><u1:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"><u1:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"><u1:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<u1:shapedefaults u2:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<u1:shapelayout u3:ext="edit">
<u1:idmap u3:ext="edit" data="1"/>
</u1:shapelayout>
</xml><![endif]--></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType>The
ONLY REASON?<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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 u4:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Northeast
US</st1:place></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.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Regards,<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">Dave Lockhart<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="navy" face="Arial" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;"><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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
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>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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p><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: <u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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
----- <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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%; -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> <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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> <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></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<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="black" face="Times New Roman"
size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p><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>
<u1:p></u1:p><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
href="mailto:jlachow@hotmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">jlachow@hotmail.com</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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>
<u1:p></u1:p><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 href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">burtona@atmc.net</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:56:40 -0400<br>
CC: <a href="mailto:tom_babs@bellsouth.net" moz-do-not-send="true">tom_babs@bellsouth.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <u1:p></u1:p><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
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">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><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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 href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><patterndude@tx.rr.com></a><br>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true"><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><u1:p></u1:p><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 u4:st="on"><st1:place u4:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Tulsa</st1:place></st1:City></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
u4:st="on"><st1:PlaceType u4:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">Fort</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> <st1:PlaceName u4:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Scott</st1:PlaceName></st1:PlaceName></st1:PlaceType></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><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxmsonormal"><font color="black"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> <u1:p></u1:p><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><u1:p></u1:p><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 href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></font><u1:p></u1:p><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;"><u1:p> </u1:p><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> <u1:p></u1:p><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> <u1:p></u1:p><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 href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p><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;"><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;"><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 style="text-align: center;"><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;"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;">_______________________________________________<u1:p></u1:p><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<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><a
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre><font color="black" face="Courier New" size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><a
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre>
<pre style="text-align: center;" wrap=""><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>