<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Yes, Ron, you're right, it is. (See Ron's statement at the end of
this message.)
<br>And, despite recent statements about the "flow," the IMAC contestants
are satisfied; at least, those I talked to at many contests. They
feel that they have an ongoing input and, while they may not always prevail,
they can be assured that there will be a change next year. A change
in which they have a direct word. Further, (and this has happened) if a
figure turns out to be inappropriate, it is<font face="Andy"> changed by
the will of the contestants themselves in the affected class by immediate
action.</font><font face="Andy"></font>
<p>(And, by the way, if you want to see a clumsy flow, just fly the Intermediate
Class after the CB truncated the ending of the sequence. It leaves
you floating around the sky like the Noon Balloon From Rangoon.)
<p><font face="Andy">It is a mystery to me as to why some folks are satisfied
to hand over the lifeblood of the contests, (the sequences) to a committee
some of whom have little or no idea what we are doing. It makes little
sense.</font><font face="Andy"></font>
<p><font face="Andy">And, we seem to have some sort of a dichotomy here:
some of the people speaking about the stagnant growth of the sport, while
at the same time not wanting to make changes. Well, it just isn't
possible to have it both ways.</font><font face="Andy"></font>
<p><font face="Andy">As you may know, I was on the scene and a part of
the folks that engineered the transformation of the IMAC processes.
It wasn't easy. But it was worth it.</font><font face="Andy"></font>
<p><font face="Andy">Bill Glaze</font>
<br><font face="Andy"></font> <font face="Andy"></font>
<p>Ron Van Putte wrote:
<blockquote TYPE="CITE">BUDDYonRC@aol.com wrote:
<p>> Not a bad idea.
<br>> What if the NSRCA became the Precision Aerobatics Division of IMAC
then
<br>> we could use their annex system.
<br>> Honestly if you make the effort to go to their site and investigate
what
<br>> the IMAC group has put together you will find a well thought out
and
<br>> planned system that implements what we are trying to do. We are not
<br>> there yet and it will take many hours of R&D to get to where
they are
<br>> today. Hat's off to those In IMAC who put it all together they did
a
<br>> good job. and obviously AMA thought so to.
<p>However, If you look at the actual rules pertaining to the IMAC
<br>maneuver/schedule change process, you will find that it is LESS DETAILED
<br>than what I wrote for the annex proposal. Hmmmmm. I find
that very
<br>interesting.
<p>Ron Van Putte
<p>=====================================
<br># To be removed from this list, send a message to
<br># discussion-request@nsrca.org
<br># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
<br>#</blockquote>
</html>