<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Mark:<br>
this is similar to theway IMAC builds sequences to achieve their
"building blocks." Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
Atwood, Mark wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="midF8676F58A0C4494997A6FD9D4CF484221D5C73@mailhost.paragon-inc.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Just to pose the question...'cause I haven't been involved in the sequence process in the past...
I would think that sequences could be developed for each class "stand alone"...using some predefined ideas to maintain the level of difficulty. This would eliminate the requirement of voting in an entire schedule of sequences all or nothing. I know this was a problem the last time around...that many wanted one ADV sequence...without the associated Masters...etc.
For example... Intermediate Schedules would contain only certain elements, and be limited in K-Factor. Looping elements, stalls, standard rolls, limit of one inverted segment, etc.
Advanced would introduce rudder elements... Point rolls, slow rolls, extended inverted segments, positive snaps and spins.
Masters would be somewhat unlimited, introducing more multi-element maneuvers (obviously adv. would have some too), complex rolling segments, sustained inverted sequences, an over all "busier" pattern.
These are pretty "loose" definitions, but I think if we were to better define the atributes of a each class...sequences would be both easier to create, and would be more consistent to their purpose.
Also, this (I believe) would be the type of guideline that the AMA would want to see to endorse an annex scenario...
My .02
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org">discussion-request@nsrca.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org">mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org</a>]On Behalf Of <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tony@radiosouthrc.com">tony@radiosouthrc.com</a>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 9:06 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results
Marty:
What has been done in the past is for the NSRCA officers to select several
groups of members to work together to write new sequences. Since we use
them as stepping stones, each group should write schedules for ALL CLASSES
(except of course FAI). This is so they can make sure the jump between
classes is not too easy and not too hard.
Once results are received from each group, each group can post them in the
K-Factor for a vote by the membership. If two or three groups do this, the
membership will have several choices.
Of course, any member can submit a new schedule to the AMA as well. So, if
you are not asked to serve on one, you can still participate by designing
them and sending them in.
I would also recommend that you get a couple of people to fly them once they
are designed to see how they flow...
Tony Stillman
Radio South
3702 N. Pace Blvd.
Pensacola, FL 32505
1-800-962-7802
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.radiosouthrc.com">www.radiosouthrc.com</a>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marty King" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mking46516@yahoo.com"><mking46516@yahoo.com></a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"><discussion@nsrca.org></a>
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Eric and all,
I for one welcome change after 2-3 years. This next
cycle will put those of us flying Intermediate at 5
years for the same pattern. I think one reason that
the lower three classes hasn't had anything done yet
is the lack of knowledge in how to go about designing
sequences and submitting a proposal. I for one would
do it if I had someone to coach me along. We need help
from someone like you Eric, Ron, Tony or the rest of
you Masters and FAI fliers to come up with or give
some suggestions on sequences that are progressive up
to Masters and explain how to go about presenting
these. I think with help I could come up with an
Intermediate schedule but to make these progressive
Intermediate needs to be built on Sportsman and
Advanced built on Intermediate with Masters as an end
point for now. I have said several times in this forum
that the jump between Intermediate and Advanced is to
big of step without preparing us for outside snaps by
allowing us to do inside ones first. The first snaps
we get are in Advanced and that just should not be in
this day and age. Even in Sportsman a climbing 45
degree inside snap is within the reach of the average
everyday sport flyer. I also think adopting snaps
earlier would help in judging the higher classes where
more complicated snap maneuvers are flown. It is
easier to judge a maneuver you can fly and be judged
on yourself.
So if anyone is willing to give me a hand or tell me
how to go about this I will step up to the plate and
do this.
Marty
NSRCA 2551 D-4
--- Grow Pattern <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pattern4u@comcast.net"><pattern4u@comcast.net></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ref: Ron wrote. " One particular thing I'm talking
about, is the wishes of those in the lower classes
to have more frequent schedule changes. Completely
disregarded by the powers in charge of such things,
those of us in that category felt, at least in the
case of several I have spoken with, a
disenfranchisement. Kind of a "why bother?
Nobody's really listening." The constant refrain of
those in charge of such things seems to be "well,
those classes are transitory in nature; why should
we bother with changes." "The flyer in Intermediate
this year, will be in Advanced next year". This
faulty thinking,...."
The data was gathered in the last NSRCA survey that
change was desired. The change could then be
proposed in this current cycle. Is anyone running
with this ball? or What has happened since then?
Just asking,
Eric.
Question-8
Should the Sportsman class be changed periodically
YES = 142____ NO = 39_____ RESULT =
PASS ____
Question-9
If "YES =", these classes should change, should they
70___ Change every rule cycle (3 years) - WINNER
43___ Change every other rule cycle (6 years)
26___ Other - Specify ____
Question-14
Should the Intermediate class be changed
periodically?
YES = 167____ NO = 13_____ RESULT =
PASS ____
Question-15
If "YES =", these classes should change, should
they
103___ Change every rule cycle (3 years) - WINNER
41___ Change every other rule cycle (6 years)
22___ Other - Specify ____
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">======================================================================
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> ----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Van Putte
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results
On Jan 3, 2005, at 11:12 AM, Bill Glaze wrote:
Opinion polls are a great idea, and are surely
indicative of the wishes of the membership, both
pro and con. Among many things, it gives the
membership the idea that they are valued, and they
are participating in the direction of pattern,
helping to get it to grow. That's to the good.
However--and this is obvious, but needs to be
pointed out again and again--if these wishes aren't
heeded, then there is a resentment built that will
be hard to make go away. One particular thing I'm
talking about, is the wishes of those in the lower
classes to have more frequent schedule changes.
Completely disregarded by the powers in charge of
such things, those of us in that category felt, at
least in the case of several I have spoken with, a
disenfranchisement. Kind of a "why bother?
Nobody's really listening." The constant refrain of
those in charge of such things seems to be "well,
those classes are transitory in nature; why should
we bother with changes." "The flyer in Intermediate
this year, will be in Advanced next year". This
faulty thinking, or "one size fits all" attitude is
harmful to those who are desperately interested in
Pattern, and want to see it grow. I feel that,
until it can be demonstrated that there is no
"double standard" those of us stuck in the lower
classes will continue to feel a degree of being left
out. And, it's so easy to remedy. Anyway, that's
the way I see it.
There are at least two ways to get rules changes
passed. First, we can rely on the NSRCA leaders to
put together surveys, establish committees to
develop maneuver schedules and submit proposed
schedules to AMA. OR, we can individually put
together rule changes and/or maneuver schedule
changes for submittal to AMA. Either way has a
presumably equal chance of getting passed by the
Contest Board, because NSRCA doesn't have an inside
track with the Contest Board. Sure, NSRCA can lobby
the Contest Board to pass their rule change
proposals, but the Board can also ignore the
lobbying, as it did in the last cycle. It often
takes several cycles to get proposed changes passed,
as it did with takeoff direction being the pilot's
option. It took three tries to get that one passed.
I mention all the above, because a lot of the
comments in this forum are about what someone else
should do to implement rule and/or maneuver schedule
changes to satisfy the writer. If a writer feels
strongly enough about making changes, it is
incumbent on him/her to take action in that
direction; they should write a rule change proposal
and submit it. It isn't rocket science.
BTW, I don't mean to include Bill in the 'inactive
whiner' group, but his note triggered my 'response
button' on this issue.
Ron Van Putte
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail">http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail</a>
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</a>
To be removed from this list, go to <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</a>
and follow the instructions.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</a>
To be removed from this list, go to <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</a>
and follow the instructions.
==============================================To access the email archives for this list, go to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</a>
To be removed from this list, go to <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</a>
and follow the instructions.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>