<DIV>Wow, you really want to open up a can of worms!!!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Short answer: NO.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't believe we should think about creating world class flyers. We should mainly be concerned about increasing participation in the US. The more people we get started in pattern, the more likely we are to find a diamond in the rough.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Way back when I was a district VP, I asked a lot of people about the Masters class. Should it be a stepping stone to FAI, or should it be a destination class. I felt rather strongly at the time that it should be a stepping stone to FAI. Others felt strongly that it should be a destination class. (I've since changed my opinion.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>IMHO, I think Masters should be very close in difficulty to FAI. Not necessarily AS difficult, but close if not the same. There will be a lot, probably the majority, who will never fly FAI since they have no desire to compete on a world class level against many who are sponsored. For this reason I think we should treat the Masters class as the top level AMA class.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Remember the Expert class. It was the only turnaround class in AMA at one time. You could argue it was the only class that prepared anyone for FAI. What prepared anyone for Expert? Nothing -- but practice.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>At the other end of the spectrum, Sportsman, I think absolutely no consideration should be given to the "prepare for FAI" question. It has absolutely nothing to do with FAI, it has to do with getting participation by US and AMA members -- nothing more. I think the sequences should be slightly challenging only from the perspective of someone who has never flown pattern. The maneuvers should not be challenging to fly, only challenging to fly well.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As one moves up through the pattern classes, equipment should not automatically become obsolete. IOW, you can pick a plane to fly Sportsman with that will also fly Masters very well. There is no such thing as a plane that is perfect for Masters that is not perfect for Sportsman. However, don't design the maneuvers for Sportsman that require anything more than a well behaved sport plane. An Ugly Stick should be just fine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Everything in between -- ramp up accordingly. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Masters should follow FAI somewhat, but only because it WILL be the stepping stone for those that wish to move up.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I also don't think we should make the classes more difficult every year, just different to keep everyone from being bored. Especially in the lower/middle classes -- those classes are transient in nature.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bob Richards.</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Bob Pastorello <rcaerobob@cox.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2523" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dave, as always, thoughtful input....thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> I, for one, (and perhaps the ONLY one) would like to know pure and simple from the majority of folks playing AMA pattern....a yes or a no to this question...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> <STRONG>"Should the progression of classes within AMA precision aerobatics be designed to prepare a person for the FAI class?"</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would like to have this question put to all pattern fliers, and let the answer shape the design of our sequences. Period.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> (I know this is a good example of " be careful what you ask for ", but has it ever been asked??)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199 AMA 46373<BR><A href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A href="http://www.rcaerobats.net/">www.rcaerobats.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>