<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">I remember when, as a lark, Jason Shulman entered a high wing trainer-type airplane in the Advanced class at an Andersonville, GA contest about four years ago. Many don’t know it, but Jason jumped from Advanced to F3A many years ago, so he is still eligible to compete in Advanced. He finished second and was embarrassed by the placing, since he did it just for fun.<div><br></div><div>In the hands of an accomplished pilot, an average airplane can still be a winner.<br><div><br></div><div>Ron Van Putte</div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 28, 2014, at 8:20 AM, Chuck Hochhalter via NSRCA-discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="auto" style="font-family: ArialMS; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div>I disagree with average not being good enough to compete with. I have flown and competed successfully with avg equipment.</div><div><br></div><div>One can also purchased very good used equipment from top pilots that has "better than avg" stuff in it often.</div><div><br></div><div>Chuck<br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Jul 27, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Gary Switala via NSRCA-discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1;"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"> My comments on the new Advance schedule. I have 20 + flights on it with both other pattern guys and club members observing. The comments of the club members are: “Why is everything upside down?“; “ makes no sense to me“; from the pattern guys “ugly, damn ugly”; and “WTF.” From the flights I have put in I see that it’s not for the average Advanced flyer with an average plane with an average motor with an average battery set and with an average ESC . So looks like more $$$$ needs to be spent. Some of the maneuvers are bad enough, but the way they are arranged the true difficulty in their relationship to proceeding and succeeding maneuvers are not taken into account. As in # 5 to #6 and #9 to #10 to #11. I also do not understand why the figure 9 is only a K Factor of 1?? And why is the Shark’s tooth given the same K as the one we’re doing now. The new proposed one is an entirely different maneuver and considerably more difficult as proposed. This is a descending maneuver at 45 degs. doing 2/2 reverse rolls trying to slow the model down and hold a straight line and have enough speed and power to get through the outside Avalanche. I also take exception with the way the Hourglass has been butchered. It would make more sense replacing it with the Standing Eight starting in the center with options as it would add some of the missing gracefulness needed.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">Caution<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; line-height: 17px; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p> </o:p></p></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></blockquote>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>