<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>I'm much happier with it too. I didnt think the sequence cmte would be this responsive but doing so begins to prove the point of having control of the process. This sets a good precedent even though late changes like this is not a clear part of the proposed new cmte process. Maybe it should be because my guess is that it may become the norm that they get lots of feedback late in the cycle and now I can see they will he able to deal with it<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Sep 27, 2010, at 6:36 PM, Derek Koopowitz <<a href="mailto:derekkoopowitz@gmail.com">derekkoopowitz@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>Everyone,<div><br></div><div>The updated short Masters sequence and associated maneuver descriptions and downgrades have been posted on the NSRCA website:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html"><a href="http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html">http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html</a></a></div>
<div><br></div><div>The updated Aresti for the short Masters sequence will be posted shortly. In addition, the draft Sequence Development guide has also been posted.</div><div><br></div><div>The Sequence Committee did a great job of modifying the short sequence and it has been tested by a number of pilots from around the country - all with very positive feedback.</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></div></blockquote></body></html>