[NSRCA-dist7] A proposal for FAI at the local level
Anthony Frackowiak
frackowiak at sbcglobal.net
Mon Mar 15 19:37:24 AKDT 2010
That may be the best solution. How about 5 rounds of P and then the
top three fly 2 rounds of F? Final score of the finalists will be the
best three of P and the best F? Sounds like a good start! Might create
some real interest in watching the fly-off.
Tony
On Mar 15, 2010, at 7:46 PM, James Oddino wrote:
> In the old days, I think it was the days of A, B, C, D novice and D
> expert, we flew some number of flights in the contest and then the
> top three guys in D expert had a fly off for a separate trophy.
> Makes the day a little longer but seems to me it would make everyone
> happy. (if one doesn't care to fly in fly off he doesn't have to)
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Mar 15, 2010, at 2:55 PM, Steve Hannah wrote:
>
>> 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 <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" <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 bwallace at bandag.com
>>>>> or at 951-385-2605. Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> From: 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: 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
>>>>> 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: 271.1.1/2735 - Release Date:
>>>>> 03/10/10 11:33:00
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-dist7/attachments/20100316/febe257c/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-dist7
mailing list