<DIV>
<DIV>Terry,</DIV>
<DIV>I have flown both the 2007 Advanced patterns and prefer option A. but having no inverted sequences is a let down. IMHO neither is any where near as good/challenging as the current schedule. Troy has and his team have outlined the rational behind their selection: the new patterns are aimed at giving a smoother transition for Intermediate pilots moving up, rather than current Advanced pilots. So maybe we have to practice hard on the current schedule and then make the logical move to Masters in 2007. My concern is the huge distance that will now open up now between Advanced and Masters. Total KF of 48 versus 67. My $0.02 worth.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rodney T.<BR><BR><B><I>Terry Terrenoire <amad2terry@juno.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV>This IS published in advance, and all pilots know it, so there is no problem, at least there was not in the 7 years I was involved. We certainly do not need more rules!!!! Especially a national rule that pertains to just one, 4 day event a year!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>While on the subject of rules changes. A while ago I commented on the "dumbing down" of the Advance pattern, and had just one or two comments. How many of you Advance fliers think that it is prudent to go from 4 inverted maneuvers to NONE. How is that possibly going to prepare you for the difficulty of Masters??? Have any of you even looked at the proposal? How many of you have flown the 2 proposed schedules?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Sure would like to hear some comments from other Advance and Masters pilots, pro or con!!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Terry T.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:05:57 -0500 "Bob Pastorello" <<A href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A>> writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>As a "non Nats" guy at the present - a thought - since a Rules cycle submittal is pending, I think that ANY considerations about "penalties" for not judging had BETTER BE BUILT INTO AMA rules.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The AMA Sanctions a national event, and I would bet dollars to donuts that a subsequent protest for zeroed rounds would WIN - due to the fact that there is NO AMA provision in the rules to cover the situations you all are describing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm not taking sides, nor pointing fingers/blame.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Simply suggesting that NOW is the time to try and get a rule change to support the propositions of "enforcement". Could be important.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR><A href="http://www.rcaerobats.net/">www.rcaerobats.net</A><BR><A href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=vanputte@cox.net href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">Ron Van Putte</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 27, 2005 10:14 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Nats Judging Rebate-keep their best SCORE!</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>On Jul 27, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Gray E Fowler wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><?smaller>Money does not matter, scores do. In the past, was it not work or lose your best round? THAT keeps people on their toes.<?/smaller> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>That's done now.<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><?smaller>I also heard that some people coming to FAI and Masters did not submit TWO frequencies, creating matrix hassles. Same here- assign the matrix to make sense and if the person does not have his alternate frequency as was requested on the NATS entry form then he simply does not fly that round. The CD needs relief, and the contestants need the MOST fair matrix that can be had.<?/smaller><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>No argument here.<BR><BR>Ron Van Putte<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><B><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Ron Van Putte <vanputte@cox.net><?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></B><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller> <?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Sent by: discussion-request@nsrca.org<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>07/27/2005 09:33 AM<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Please respond to<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>discussion@nsrca.org<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>To<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>discussion@nsrca.org<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>cc<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Subject<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><?smaller><?x-tad-smaller>Nats Judging Rebate<?/x-tad-smaller><?/smaller></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>Last week at the Nats, I had a talk with Nats event director, Dave <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>Guerin about judging no-shows. On the very first morning, Dave had at<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>least three no-shows (F3A pilots who were supposed to judge the Master <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>class). You can imagine the frustration of trying to reschedule pilots <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>to cover for them, not to mention the delay in getting the events <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>started. This was not an isolated case. It happened over and over <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>during the week. Some just forgot when they were supposed to judge. <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>There were even some who were scheduled to judge on the third day, who
<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>decided to leave after two days and didn't tell anyone.<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>We discussed having a "$50 judging rebate". It would work like this: <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>In addition to the normal entry fees, $50 would be collected. If a <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>pilot showed up to perform his scheduled judging session, he'd get a <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>$50 rebate. If a pilot didn't show up to perform his scheduled judging <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>session, the replacement judge would get the $50. BTW, the normal <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>stipend for pilots who perform extra judging sessions is $30. <?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>Comments?<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>Ron Van
Putte<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>=================================================<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>To access the email archives for this list, go to<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>and follow the instructions.<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><BR><TT><?x-tad-smaller>List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.<?/x-tad-smaller></TT><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>