<!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 style="font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial;"
bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Mark:<br>
I've always liked the idea of unknowns; this one looks as if it's a
good one. Possibly if unknowns were included at more contests, the
concern about changing the usual sequences more often would become a
moot point. Thoughts?<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
<br>
Mark Hunt wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid000a01c4f395$81d393e0$8b92cb44@homebase1"
type="cite">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2523" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Sorry to go back a bit on the
discussion of changing sequences.....</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">When we held our little 402 grudge
match, we decided to spice up the last round by having an unknown. We
left the design of the sequence up to our good friend Mr. Don Ramsey
and of course, we were all very nervous (yet excited) about what he
might throw at us. I believe the sequence was posted some time ago,
but here it is again:</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Takeoff</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Stall Turn w/ 1/4 up and down, exit
upright (C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Immelman w/ 2/4, exit upright (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Reverse Triangle Loop, exit upright
(C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Bunt, no rolls, exit inverted (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Square loop w/ 1/2 roll on top, exit
upright (C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Humpty Bump, 1/4 up and down, exit
upright (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Top Hat w/ 1/2 rolls in verticals,
exit upright (C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Figure 9, 1/2 roll up, pull over
top, exit upright (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">2/4 point roll, exit inverted (C)<br>
Figure 9 (mid start), push over top, 1/2 roll down, exit inverted (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Double immelman, 12 roll on top, no
roll out, exit upright (C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Half square with 1/2 roll up, exit
upright (T)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">45 deg. downline, one positive snap,
exit upright (C)</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Landing</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">We all thought we were going to die
when looking at it on paper...inverted exits???? However, after seeing
it flown and actually flying it, it flowed quite nicely. By the time
that round was over, many of us chose to try flying it a second and
third time for fun....because....it was fun. The elements that need to
be learned in whatever class can be applied to any sequence
constuction, as long as the sequence itself is still in the abilities
of that class of flyer.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I would prefer to see sequence
changes occasionally, whether I ever make to FAI or not.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">-Mark</font></div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"
dir="ltr">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="billglaze@triad.rr.com"
href="mailto:billglaze@triad.rr.com">Bill Glaze</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><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-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Sent:</b>
Wednesday, January 05, 2005 7:10 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Subject:</b>
[SPAM] Re: Annex proposal - development</div>
<div><br>
</div>
gentlemen:<br>
I believe you are really on to something here; a complete organization
that can, by action proof, handle it's own affairs will require much
less "supervision" than if it is perceived as being inconsistent. I
don't feel that the organization has been ill-served by it's
leadership; quite the opposite, in fact. I believe we've been very
fortunate to have those folks whose names have been at the top of the
letterhead.<br>
But, I believe it's time to take a look at what's been mentioned here
in a new context; one of proving our ability to handle all things
"in-house" Good thinking.<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</a>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid20050105163325.IEFR16431.lakermmtao05.cox.net@smtp.east.cox.net"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I have to agree.... my thoughts have been along similar lines since the last Annex effort was made. My belief- based only on understanding organizations - is that the AMA leaders may be more easily persuaded if they can CLEARLY see that WE (the Pattern Community - NSRCA and NON-NSRCA alike) have a structured, consistent process to ferret out sequence changes, etc.
Consistent, repeatable processes are key to keeping everyone on the same page, also.
I REALLY believe a LOT could be done by us defining and organizing our processes a bit; providing known structure builds trust and confidence in the process.
Bob Pastorello
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">From: "Grow Pattern" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pattern4u@comcast.net"><pattern4u@comcast.net></a>
Date: 2005/01/05 Wed AM 11:16:06 EST
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"><discussion@nsrca.org></a>
Subject: Annex proposal - development
If we could ever get away from the lost cause of trying to wrest control
away from the AMA, we could perhaps get to the real need to have a schedule
development system with an annex of maneuvers, a hand picked team of
schedule designers, a test process, a review process and an NSRCA members
poll.
I hate re-inventing the wheel when a clearly defined NSRCA process would
show the AMA we can do the job as the pattern society. The emphasis is on a
clearly defined process, not "This is what we did last time" etc. if it is
clearly defined then the pattern community can join in.
Annex processes include items such as adding and subtracting maneuvers,
rating them - K-factors. Standards, or better still just guidelines, for the
mix of maneuvers in a schedule. Total K-factors are a good start but we are
primitive at best in the way we set about this stuff. Especially when it is
core to the sport!
Regards,
Eric.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Atwood, Mark" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:atwoodm@paragon-inc.com"><atwoodm@paragon-inc.com></a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"><discussion@nsrca.org></a>
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:14 AM
Subject: RE: Annex proposal
Ron,
I would argue that with all the deadlines imposed by the AMA's rule cycle,
that their 2 year cycle is effectively a 4 year one. It's almost to the
point that rules need to be submitted for the next cycle before this one's
even begun.
While I agree that changes more than once every two years is not really
needed...the annex would give us a lot more time and freedom to make changes
more rapidly. Also..it gives us much more certain control. As it sits
now...if a sequence is submitted...there is no gaurantee it will be
accepted...putting us out another 2 years before we can try again.
-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 Ron Van Putte
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:02 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
Subject: Re: Annex proposal
On Jan 5, 2005, at 8:37 AM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:randy10926@comcast.net">randy10926@comcast.net</a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">maybe it's time to dust it off and re-submit it. Maybe more contest
board members will attend and vote. It sounds like a good idea to try
and rework this before all the scedules are submitted.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">My original plan for the annex proposal was for NSRCA to have control
over an annex containing the maneuver descriptions and maneuver
schedules, so that we could change maneuver schedules when we wanted to
and not be limited by AMAs three-year rule change cycle. AMA refused
to even accept that proposal and, consequently, did not allow the
contest board to vote on it. The second proposal gave AMA veto power
over the maneuvers and maneuver schedules. It failed because a contest
board member, who would have voted YES, forgot to vote in time.
Then AMA announced they were going to a two-year rules cycle, obviating
one of the reasons for the annex proposal. Since it's unlikely that
we'd want to change maneuver schedules every year, AMA's rule change
cycle change gave us a lot of what we wanted with the annex system
except control over them. Since AMA is unlikely to relinquish control
over the maneuver schedules, submission of a new annex proposal
wouldn't give us much we don't already have.
Ron Van Putte
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-------------- Original message --------------
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Jan 5, 2005, at 6:45 AM, Joe Lachowski wrote:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> >
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It might have passed if it was written and ironed out before the
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > > proposal was submitted. It probably would have had a much better
> > chance. The competition board would have at least had something to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">work with in making their decision.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> >
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">That's not true. The only way AMA would have accepted an annex
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > proposal was if AMA had veto power over the maneuver schedules. The
> original proposal did not have that. The second proposal did give
AMA
> veto power, but didn't pass because one contest board member didn't
> vote.
>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ron Van Putte
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> >
</pre>
<pre wrap=""> > >> From: "Del Rykert"
> >> Reply-To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
> >> To:
> >> Subject: Re: Annex proposal
> >> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 06:07:35 -0500
> >>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It was tried to implement but shot down Terry.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > >>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">del
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > >>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Brox
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > >> To: <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
> >> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:44 PM
> >> Subject: Annex proposal
> >>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What is the real or perceived problem with the Annex system. I am
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > >> not an IMAC flier, but it looks like it works well for them.
> >> I don't want to start a war here, but I am not sure why one would
> >> have a problem with a system that could help alleviate the
problems
> >> associated with our current system. Lets hear both sides.
> >> Respectfully Terry Brox
> >
> >
> > =================================================
> > To access the email archives for this list, go to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > > To be removed from this list, go to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm">http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > > and follow the instructions.
> >
>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">=================================================
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > To access the email archives for this list, go to
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/">http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""> > 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.
=================================================
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=""><!---->
Bob Pastorello, El Reno, OK, USA
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</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>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>