<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
John:<br>
Your feelings are considerably milder than some of us. I would note,
however, that under the proposed return to the two year cycle, you will
have the opportunity to be disappointed a lot more often. As long as
we continue to do business in the same-old-same-old mode.<br>
Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
John Ferrell wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid034601c43789$8fccd6f0$0502a8c0@xppro">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I am disappointed at the prospect of
flying the same maneuvers in the Sportsman/intermediate and Advanced
classes for the next three years but I suppose it will all work out.
Them who get tired of it will move on, the Masters & Fai will
continue. </font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">However, I am acquainted with all
but three of the Contest Board members and I feel they must have had
reasons for voting as they did. I hope those reasons were for the good
of all. </font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">At any rate, what you see is what we
got. The time for bickering is past. Clearly, the AMA wants direct
communications rather than the assistance of the NSRCA and in the
future I expect we need to all send them the detailed communications
and let them deal with it. Failure to endorse the survey is a simple
statement that we are not allowed to play in their sandbox.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">The proposals are at <a
href="http://www.modelaircraft.org/Comp/2005rulesproposals.htm">http://www.modelaircraft.org/Comp/2005rulesproposals.htm</a></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">If you compare the T&L sequences
with FAI's you will see they are not near as rigid.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Note there is no longer a penalty
for an aborted takeoff(whatever the reason), and no need to call the
maneuver. The need to call the landing is removed as well. I hate to
show my ignorance in public but I am still trying to figure out
what "upwind and downwind markers" are. In this district we normally
mark the boxes, the centers and the landing zones. If the terrain is
rugged, sometimes the box markers are pretty close on one side, and not
so close on the other.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>John Ferrell <br>
<a href="http://DixieNC.US">http://DixieNC.US</a><br>
</div>
<blockquote dir="ltr"
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="vanputte@cox.net" href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">Ron Van
Putte</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="discussion@nsrca.org" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Sent:</b>
Monday, May 10, 2004 10:36 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: Rules Proposals Final Vote</div>
<div><br>
</div>
John Fuqua asked me to forward the following to the NSRCA discussion
list.<br>
<br>
Ron Van Putte<br>
<br>
Begin forwarded message:<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>From: </b>"John Fuqua" <<a
href="mailto:johnfuqua@gdsys.net">johnfuqua@gdsys.net</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>May 10, 2004 9:09:23 PM CDT<br>
<b>To: </b>"Ron Van Putte" <<a href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: RE: rules proposals final result<br>
</b><br>
Please pass on to the group that the Board is an AMA Board not a NSRCA
Board. If we were an NSRCA Board Ron Van Putte's proposal on the annex
system would not have been rejected by the AMA Excutive Council.
While I respect the NSRCA survey and look at the results I represent
AMA District V not NSRCA District 3. Same for the other Board
members. Just as the Board is not in lock step with me, or anybody
else for that matter, the Board is not in lock step with the NSRCA nor
should it be. Each District member must feel out his District. If he
gets input from NSRCA members from his District than all the better.
Just for the record I received zero, nada, 0 written or email inputs
from my District members on these proposals. Others in my District
have talked to me and there was no clear consensus one way or the other
leaving me to vote my feelings.<br>
<br>
I submitted the takeoff and landing proposal, again, having had another
of my district members submit it the last cycle where it failed. Just
like flying by class vice frequency of some years ago, some ideas take
time to develop. I think the proposal is superior to what we have now
for a lot of reasons. Go look at the rationale in the proposal to see
the issues. One last thought. If takeoff and landing were aerobatic
manuevers, the FAA would require all airline passengers to wear
parachutes.<br>
<br>
John Fuqua<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>