[NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
Jon Carter
joncarter60 at comcast.net
Mon Mar 15 16:44:09 AKDT 2010
Hey guys – Let’s refocus the discussion! This thread will only address the
FAI class and my proposal on how to offer the “F” sequence in some contests
this year.
Per Tony’s point earlier in the thread, if I count up the responses that I
have received so far, both private and on the list, I would break them down
into three categories.
1) The proposal is acceptable for the remainder of this year. Let’s
have the FAI pilots as a group, have some discussion later in the year in
attempt to come up with a more viable alternative for next year. 6
respondents fall into this category.
2) They don’t really like the proposal but if that is the best we can
do for the remainder of this year they will go along with it but they really
hope to bring “F” in next year. 3 respondents fall into this category.
3) Don’t like the proposal. 0 respondents fall into this category.
Please bear in mind that this was originally started by Tony’s post on RCU
which Matt and Jim Kimbro responded to with the idea of giving our local FAI
pilots who are going to the Nats a chance to fly the “F” sequence in front
of judges and get scored (in a “modified” fashion). I think that my proposal
does allow that and provides a possible springboard, if the majority of FAI
pilots desire it, to include “F” in future seasons. I have not heard from
Matt or Jim so I do not know if they like my proposal or not. I am the first
to admit I used some of Matt’s ideas (that he posted on RCU) with some small
changes based on input from several FAI pilots. If Matt and Jim don’t read
this list maybe someone could forward this discussion to them.
Per Don Atwood’s point, the CD runs the contest per AMA rules. If we decide
to move forward with my proposal, I will e-mail it to all of the CD’s in D7.
If they decide to offer the pilots the “F” option, I have asked that they
publish it on the web and in their contest flyer. That way, nobody gets
surprised! If they do not want to offer “F” for whatever reason, I cannot
force them to.
As I stated in my proposal, I think that due to several factors, the season
already having started is only one, the District 7 Championships (CD’ed by
me) will be competed for as the best 4 out of 6 rounds of the “P” sequence.
Now if every FAI pilot in the district came to me and said “please let us
fly “F” at the D7 Championships” I will certainly allow it but I think that
you all realize that is not going to happen!
Per Bob Gillespie’s points in an earlier e-mail: people who choose this
option to fly “F” at a local contest will have, by using the “P” K-Factors,
an ~ 17% scoring “hit”. The whole point of this is that, at least for this
year, this is a voluntary thing so that an FAI pilot can get some experience
flying “F” in front of judges. You are still going to have 4 rounds of “P”
to count towards every local contest (unless you can fly “F” more than 17%
better than anyone else can fly “P”!) If this does have an effect on the
final standings at a local contest, so be it. That is the possible issue
with getting to fly “F” in front of judges at a local contest. As a CD I
acknowledge that my proposal will make for a slight increase in work for the
CD (re-arranging FAI pilots for the last two rounds and finding “F” judges!)
and a more significant addition of complexity for the judges who get to
judge “F” (The scorekeeping is unchanged as the “F” scores are simply
entered as if they were “P”). While this is certainly not the perfect
solution, (We’ll try for that next year!) I do not think this will have a
significant distorting or negative impact on the FAI class in D7 as a whole.
If anyone has any further questions or comments please e-mail me. If I do
not hear any major negative feedback, I will send my proposal out to all D7
CD’s on Friday the 19th of March.
Thanks
Jon Carter
NSRCA D7 VP
_____
From: nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of atwooddon at aol.com
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:59 PM
To: nsrca-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
Thanks Steve
I probably mixed up part of what you were saying about Masters judging with
the FAI proposal. I agree, Masters should be it's own thread to avoid
confusing people (like me).
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hannah <shannah1806 at gmail.com>
To: CA, AZ, HI, NV, UT <nsrca-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
Cc: CA, AZ, HI, NV, UT <nsrca-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Mon, Mar 15, 2010 2:55 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
I shouldn't have mixed the topic of judging and flying F. They are different
and unrelated. But I am not asking to shorten masters to satisfy FAI. I am
asking to do that for the sake of anyone who sits in the judges chair. I
like that a and b idea. That could really help. Maybe this should be it's
own thread.
I still think we should offer F. I'd rather see it mandatory but that isn't
what the proposal offers. So in order to move onward I'll support whatever
proposal we adopt to include it in someway. In the spirit of consensus, I
don't really like the proposal but I can live with it.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2010, at 3:15 AM, Chris Fitzsimmons
<homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com> wrote:
Steve,
Are you saying to shorten the masters sequnce if too many guys show up in
masters? I don't see how making masters change to satisfy fai that is
shrinking because of difficulty. How fair is that? Hopefully I perceived
your comment incorrect.
Pattern was fun a few years ago. Im not quite having the same amount of fun
lately it seems. With this issue we have people moving back to masters or
saying they will. Where does the issue lay? In masters or fai? If people
want to fly f, it will most likely make sure at all contests that all fai
pilots will get a trophy. Is that what people want? I'd rather fly against
10+ masters guys than 2 fai. Would the fai pilots rather fly against 10 guys
flying p, or maybe 1 or 2 flying p and f? Cuz I could take a guess that that
is what would happen.
Just my opinion I guess.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 15, 2010, at 6:34 AM, Steve Hannah < <mailto:shannah1806 at gmail.com>
shannah1806 at gmail.com> wrote:
Bill
I support your idea to split the class. I'd rather do two short stints vs
one monster long one. Talk about things that can drive FAI flyers away, that
long sequence and marathon judging sessions is about ready to do it to me. I
think the CD should mandate a shortened sequence any time there are more
than 5 fliers. Plus you should split the line if more than 8 show up.
As for FAI F: I don't support the pilots option or CD option. The current
proposal is effectively doing nothing beyond what we have right now. Either
we do it or we don't. If I have the choice to optionally throw away two
rounds then I'll probably opt to not do that and fly P. If I have 4 solid
rounds and my choice is to drive home early or fly F then I might fly F even
though it wouldn't have any bearing on the outcome.
Pilots already fly F on the P score sheets. I'd hope that we could introduce
an F seuence somehow but the voluntary optional thing doesn't work for me. I
can do that now but the results don't mean anything. So I'll fly P until
further notice.
Do it or don't do it.
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 15, 2010, at 10:20 AM, "Wallace, Bill" <
<mailto:WallaceBill at bfusa.com> <mailto:WallaceBill at bfusa.com>
WallaceBill at bfusa.com> wrote:
Tony:
My take on this is that we are not going to dictate to the CD’s hoe to run
their contest. John has suggested that if the FAI flyers want to fly the F
sequence, then the CD can run the last 2 rounds as either F or P to be
decided by the pilot. If he decides to fly the F then he will be scored at
the P schedule K factors. In my opinion, this is a fair way to run it, and
is how I am going to run the Hemet contest. If the FAI pilots don’t like
this, then they should speak up now or don’t gripe about it come contest
day. Let’s face it, we are never going to make everyone happy, but this
proposal does the best job of it – again in my never to be humble opinion.
Since Jon proposed this, and I think he will be running the Dist.
Championships, then I think we can assume that this is how they will be run.
Again, if you are a FAI pilot and you don’t like this suggestion, speak up
now. Now Jon – if I am wrong on this let me know. A more pressing problem,
IMO, is the heavily loaded Masters class we have in Dist. 7. At Yuma – half
of the registered pilots were in Masters (8). If we have a good size
contest (ie Riverside or Hemet) we could have 12 – 15 Masters pilots. This
will create havoc for the CD and the poor FAI and Advanced pilots who have
to sit in the chair for 2 – 2 ½ hours. My thoughts are to split the class
if the number gets over 10 and have the same judges for 2 rounds, but they
would only have to judge ½ the pilots each round. Then we would hold off
normalizing until the end of the 2nd round. I am thinking this would make
the judging a little more tolerable. Looking for comments and or other
suggestions. Thanks.
Bill Wallace
Fleet Sales Manager
Bridgestone Bandag Tire Solutions
4000 E. Mission Blvd.
Ontario, CA 91761
Cell Phone - 951-385-2605
Fax number - 615-493-2333
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is
addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential information which is
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are prohibited from disseminating or distributing this
information (other than to the intended recipient) or copying this
information. If you have received this in error, please notify me
immediately at <mailto:bwallace at bandag.com> <mailto:bwallace at bandag.com>
bwallace at bandag.com or at 951-385-2605. Thank you.
From: <mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org?> ] On Behalf Of Anthony
Frackowiak
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:17 PM
To: CA, AZ, HI, NV, UT
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
Hi Jon,
Somehow this slipped through on my email, so I'm just responding now.
With all due respect (whenever I say that I think of Ricky Bobby!) I don't
see why there can't be some sort of approval by the majority of the F3A
fliers. A simple yes/no and posting the results would suffice. Without that,
it looks like just one guys ideas being pressed forward.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the entire idea of this discussion
was to come to an agreement amongst all the F3A pilots on what to do in this
district? If you leave it up to the individual CD's, will the D7
Championships be decided by that CD?
Thanks!
Tony
On Mar 10, 2010, at 10:18 PM, Jon Carter wrote:
Tony – There is no real “official” process per se to vote on this proposal.
As I said, I believe that this is a first “doable” step in a process and
unless I hear some strong objections from some FAI pilots my intention is to
forward my proposal to each CD who is running a D7 contest with my
recommendation to implement it if possible for their contest. Please keep in
mind that this decision is ultimately the CD’s of the individual events.
Thanks
Jon Carter
NSRCA D7 VP
_____
From: <mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
mailto:nsrca-dist7-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Frackowiak
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 8:08 AM
To: CA, AZ, HI, NV, UT
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
Hi,
I will have no problem supporting this if this what the majority of the F3A
pilots have agreed upon. Is there a process to come to a majority agreement?
Tony
On Mar 9, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Jon Carter wrote:
Local contests and FAI: A modest Proposal.
As I have indicated on the D7 list and in e-mails to most of the D7 FAI
pilots I think that we need to come to a decision/recommendation for the FAI
class at local contests as soon as possible. At this point I have spoken
with almost every D7 pilot who flew in an FAI contest during the 2009
season. I would like to begin by stating some facts, some assumptions and
some goals.
Facts:
* The 2010 contest season started in Phoenix on 11/14/2009 and we are
3 contests into the season.
* Since we have already begun the season, I do not support adding “F”
as a required element at the D7 Championships for the 2010 season.
* There are strong opinions on both sides of this issue.
* Adding the “F” schedule at local contests is a significant change to
the way we have “traditionally” flown FAI.
* It is up to each individual CD to structure and run his contest in a
manner that follows the rules and satisfies the needs of his club and his
pilots.
Assumptions:
* Most D7 FAI pilots support an option to assist the pilots who go to
the Nats by providing them with a way to fly judged “F” sequences.
* Many D7 FAI pilots think that flying the “F’ sequence at local
contests would be fun, challenging and a way to more fully align ourselves
with what it means to fly “FAI”
* There will be a significant “learning” curve in judging the “F”
sequence.
Goals:
* Arrive at a set of guidelines for the 2010 season that will give an
event CD a framework for running the FAI class this year and allow pilots
who choose to, the ability to fly “F” and receive scores.
* Provide a path that will allow us to offer the “F” sequence at local
contests and the District Championships in 2011 and going forward if so
desired.
* If we make changes, ensure that a process of review is completed to
determine the positive or negative impact of the changes after the season
Proposal for the remainder of this year
Any FAI pilot who wants to may fly two rounds of F at a local contest, with
the CD’s permission. To simplify things for the CD I think that this should
be limited to the last two rounds on Sunday. If the CD is willing to permit
this, it must be mentioned as far in advance as possible. (On the website
and in the contest flyer at the minimum) If the CD does not want to fly the
“F” sequence, or no pilots want to, FAI will be flown as usual with a best 4
out of 6 “P” sequences.
The F schedule scores will simply be entered into the computer as a P
schedule. This will apply the “P” K-Factors to the “F” sequence. This is
obviously a “handicap” for the pilots who choose to fly the “F” sequence
(~17%). It does though allow them to fly the “F” sequence in front of judges
and receive scores that they can review for areas that need improvement.
All other scoring, i.e. count the best 4 out of 6 rounds, will be kept as
is.
District Championships
The District Championship will be flown as a Schedule “P” contest only. As I
mentioned up above, we are 3 contests into the 2010 season and I do not
think that it is proper to make a change of this magnitude for the District
Championships at this time.
The Future
I believe that we should observe these changes and their impact on our local
FAI contests for the remainder of this season. If they appear to be positive
and the majority of the FAI flyers like them we could make another step next
year. If the idea has strong local FAI pilot support, I would support making
our local FAI contests a best 3 out of 4 “P” and a best 1 out of 2 “F” for
2011. Please keep in mind that by trying something different this year we
are not committing ourselves to any changes for next year. If we adopt this
proposal we have most of a year for pilots to see “F” flown locally and for
the rest of us to learn how to judge it! Remember our goal is to compete,
improve our piloting skills and have fun!
Thanks
Jon Carter
NSRCA D7 VP
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> <mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com/> <http://www.avg.com/>
<http://www.avg.com/> www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/>
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2735 - Release Date: 03/10/10
11:33:00
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> <mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> <mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
<mailto:NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org> NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
=
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2748 - Release Date: 03/15/10
00:33:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-dist7/attachments/20100316/842daf0e/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-dist7
mailing list