<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=content-type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>I could not agree more, Rodney. That is a monumental leap from Adv to
Masters. I have not looked at the KF diff from Int to Adv, but would be willing
to bet that it is not nearly a 19 point difference.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Terry T.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Rodney Tanner <<A
href="mailto:rodney19821982@yahoo.com">rodney19821982@yahoo.com</A>>
writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid">
<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>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>