<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:v = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16625">
<STYLE>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
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","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody lang=EN-US leftMargin=0 link=blue topMargin=0 vLink=purple
CanvasTabStop="true" name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>I totally agree! I have "skin in the game"
too, and now insist that all of the other classes sequences be shortened as
well. Heck, I go to contests, I sit in the judges chair for other classes
than Masters, I pay my dues and I find it inconvenient that these other classes
combined take up my time as much as they do. Clearly, the shear number of
combined figures in those other classes is a problem. They are interfering
with the flow of Masters flights, which has numerical superiority and ought to
have the right to demand that other classes have a shorter sequence than they
currently do. Let's get to work on this ASAP!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>Sheesh.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri><BR>Ed</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=burtona@atmc.net
href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net">Dave Burton</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 22, 2010 6:05 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">'General pattern discussion'</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011
and beyond</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Derek,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">I
really object to your definition of who has “Skin in the game” - <B>We all
do if we pay our dues and attend contest</B>.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">The
“skin” is the impact of a long vs. short sequence for every Masters flyer, Flyer
who will be flying Masters in the next two years, every flyer/non flyer who
judges at a contest, and every other flyer in all the other class who have to
wait until the typically large Masters class finishes whatever sequence they
fly.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">So,
whether I fly Masters in the next two years or not, I intend to let my opinion
be known to my district VP and I expect him to give my view the same weight of
any other opinion from “Masters” flyers or others. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">This
is an issue that should not be decided by only “Masters”
flyers.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Dave
Burton<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Derek
Koopowitz<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 22, 2010 5:31 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
General pattern discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA
sequences for 2011 and beyond<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Over 10 months ago the NSRCA Sequence Committee completed its
work on the new sequences. These were posted on the NSRCA website for
review and comment - see below:<o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><A
href="http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html">http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html</A><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Included in all this material was a draft document that
outlined the process on how sequences are developed, tested and approved and the
makeup/content of the sequences based on the class it is meant to serve.
This document is titled "NSRCA Procedures, Standards and Guidelines for
AMA R/C Precision Aerobatics Sequence Development". A mouthful, but it
does outline a lot of information. It details the charter for the Sequence
Committee, sequence development standards and guidelines for all classes,
catalog of maneuvers for all classes and the process that the NSRCA will follow
in designing, testing and approving changes to sequences, or for proposed
sequences. These sequence development standards and guidelines have been
in place for about 4 years now and have been used very successfully to build the
current set of sequences that everyone is flying today, in addition to the prior
Masters sequence (and the new one as well).<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Overall we received positive comments on the proposed
sequences from Sportsman through Masters. As you know, there were two
sequences developed for Masters, a long sequence using the standard 23 maneuver
count and a short sequence using 19 maneuvers. In the time since we posted
the sequences, some informal surveys were also made on the NSRCA website as well
as on RCU asking for a preference of either the short or long Masters schedule.
The overwhelming majority of respondents chose the short sequence.
However, these surveys were a little flawed in that we didn't really know
who was voting for them - were they all judges/pilots who voted because they
didn't want to judge a long sequence, or were they really current and/or future
Masters pilots that really did want to fly a shorter
sequence.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>Since the release of the proposed schedules, and some post
Nats comments, the sequence committee has been hard at work making some tweaks
to the short schedule with a view to increasing the difficulty level of the
short Masters sequence to bring it into line with the long Masters sequence and
also to ensure that we weren't lowering the bar in difficulty by introducing a
shorter sequence. Bear in mind that the short sequence is only 19
maneuvers (17 of them flyable) so raising the difficulty level is a challenge if
one is to avoid using some existing F3A type maneuvers, or "airplane killers",
and to only use maneuvers that match the philosophy that we've embraced for a
number of years. Since we've never developed a short Masters sequence, we
need to make sure we get it right and that it not only provides a challenge to
those that fly it but that it still provides a somewhat relatively higher jump
for those pilots that are moving up from Advanced. We realize that
creating a perfect schedule is not going to happen - we won't be able to please
every pilot that moves up from Advanced, nor will we be able to please some
former F3A pilots that think the schedule is too easy and isn't enough of a
challenge. There has to be a balance. The Sequence Committee came up
with some good positive changes and these are being vetted/tested as I write
this. They've received extremely positive feedback from everyone that has
either flown the newer short sequence on a simulator or using their pattern
plane at the field. By the end of this weekend we'll know for sure whether
it is a keeper or not.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>When we do post the revised sequence I would like all of you
that have "skin in this game", meaning you are a current Masters pilot or will
be moving to Masters in the next year or two, to please contact your NSRCA
District VP and let them know what your preference is - short or long sequence.
The reason they need to know is that the NSRCA board will vote in the next
couple of weeks to approve all the proposed sequences and also to select which
sequence the Masters class will be flying in 2011/2012.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>The Sequence Committee is comprised of Joe Lachowski, Dave
Lockhart, Verne Koester, Bill Glaze, Archie Stafford, and Richard Lewis.
They've put in an extraordinary amount of work on these sequences and
documentation and deserve huge kudos from everyone! Thanks guys - your
work is very much appreciated!<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal>We've also created a Sequence Committee section on the NSRCA
website which will have more information soon. It will contain the updated
draft documentation and all the proposed sequences in one location. You
can get to the new section from the main menu - just look for Sequence Committee
- it is near the bottom of the menu.<o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">No virus
found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<BR>Version:
9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3152 - Release Date: 09/22/10
02:34:00</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BODY></HTML>