|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
Brian,
I don't know about you but I am on this thread solely as an interested Advanced competitor and a beta tester for the new advanced schedule. All opinions I have expressed are my own. John |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
ORIGINAL: VerneK Unless I missed it, I haven't seen a single post in this thread expressing concern for an Intermediate pilot transitioning into Advanced. Let's see, in Intermediate, you learn how to keep a fairly basic set of maneuvers in the box. That's what Intermediate is, learning to fly in the box and at that level, it's a huge step. Now from there, we go to Advanced where you have to learn how to do a slow roll, 4-point roll, snap, and spin. Do you really think Advanced should be more difficult, or Masters for that matter? If we don't keep the steps reasonable for pilots on their way up, nothing else will matter. You won't have enough contestants at a local contest to fill a country bar on a Tuesday afternoon. That's what the sequence building guidelines are all about. You can't ever build a new schedule simply looking forward to the next higher step. You always have to have your eye in the rear view mirror. If you don't, the next look you get will be an empty mirror. Verne Koester Verne, I moved from intermediate to advanced and from advanced to masters not all that long ago. At the time, intermediate to advanced was easy, advanced to masters was extremely difficult for me. The advanced sequence at the time had been dumbed down so much (zero inverted entrances and exits) that it did not do a good job of preparing me for masters, and wasn't that much harder than intermediate. I went thru advanced in two years, went to masters because of peer pressure and pointing out. In hindsight I wish I had stayed there for another year or so to fly the current advanced pattern so I would have been better prepared for masters. In contrast, I've heard from some (by no means all) current intermediate pilots that the sequence is too easy, and they like the challenge of advanced. And the good news is that advanced is now challenging enough to keep them there a few years, so I think the sequence needs to change occasionally because of that. We also have to remember that advanced has some required manuevers by the sequence guide, like the 4 point and the slow roll, so the rest of the pattern is built around those manuevers. I had all of those, but the rest of the sequence was not challenging enough. The current 2012 advanced sequence is challenging, and I'm seeing it at the contests I've judged. Jon |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
Joe,
Just so there's no misunderstanding of what I said, I don't advocate adding spins, 4-points, slow rolls, or snaps to the Intermediate schedule. That level is all about learning to fly a fairly basic set of maneuvers without leaving the box and at that level, it's a significant challenge coming from the Sportsman level. While you might be comfortable doing a spin, snap, 4-point, or whatever, it's not appropriate to expect someone just coming out of Sportsman to do it in the confines of the box they're now required to stay in for the duration of the flight. My time in the judge's chair tells me Intermediate is plenty difficult enough. When it becomes boring and you're consistently flying it well, it's time to move up to the challenges of Advanced. This is always the problem faced by the Sequence Committee. Someone at or near the top of their game in their current class wants to make that class harder rather than moving up. You can't do that and make the transition from the lower class reasonable/logical. That's what I'm talking about when I say keeping an eye in the rear view mirror. From my judging time in the D4/D5 arena, I'm confident that the difficulty level at each step is currently right where it should be. The good turnouts we've been getting the last few years in all classes tells me we're not driving/scaring anyone away at any level. It wasn't very long ago that pattern was dying out from the bottom up. Verne Koester ORIGINAL: gaRCfield The intermediate sequence ending in a spin, rather than a stall turn, sounds like a pretty cool idea. I tried a spin for the first time the other day - it was fun :) I agree with Verne - learning a snap, a spin, 4pt roll, and a slow roll as all new maneuvers in one sequence sounds like a lot. |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
All these anecdotes are interesting, and getting feedback from those engaged in an activity is always desirable to keep an activity aligned with participants' interests; however, are the numbers of pilots participating in pattern contests so low that the anecdotes themselves tend to loom large and perhaps overshadow any set objective criteria for what each class should contain, or the sequence assigned to the class? A general question here for the group and not an observation of anyone's individual posts or discussions. It's all good, but as a newcomer to the sport, I wonder if local concerns can be inadvertently amplified simply due to the very small size of our pattern contestant community? Any thoughts? Dana
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
Hi Jon,
I agree that the difficulty level in Advanced as well as all the other levels is about as close to perfect as you can get it without adding another class. When you watch someone flying Masters from the Advanced perspective, I can't imagine that it looks all that bad because there are so many similar maneuvers/elements common to both classes. For sure, the reverse rolling stuff might look challenging and it still is for those of us that have been in Masters for years, but that's the single biggest maneuver-related challenge someone moving up from Advanced is going to face. It may appear daunting at first to add negative snaps and/or snap and half's to the mix, but those won't be nearly as challenging as the reverse rolling stuff. And no, reverse rolls and multiple snaps aren't appropriate for Advanced because the Intermediate pilot coming up already has more than enough on their plate. Reverse rolls, multiple snaps both positive and negative, and complex K5 maneuvers are the new challenges coming into Masters. For the occasional phenom like Brett, that isn't enough and skipping Masters altogether was the right choice. For the rest of us, it's plenty and continues to be year after year. Some go on to FAI for the added challenges there, many don't. What I'd guess probably isn't realized from the Advanced perspective is how critical it is to hold your line in Masters. Not that it's not important in Advanced and lower, but there's almost no wiggle room in Masters for errant lines because of the more complex maneuvers there. Subtle rudder corrections both upright and inverted are paramount. An Advanced pilot should be doing those but can probably get away with not doing it a lot of the time. In Masters, you have to do it all time and that may be the biggest challenge of all. Verne ORIGINAL: jonlowe ORIGINAL: VerneK Unless I missed it, I haven't seen a single post in this thread expressing concern for an Intermediate pilot transitioning into Advanced. Let's see, in Intermediate, you learn how to keep a fairly basic set of maneuvers in the box. That's what Intermediate is, learning to fly in the box and at that level, it's a huge step. Now from there, we go to Advanced where you have to learn how to do a slow roll, 4-point roll, snap, and spin. Do you really think Advanced should be more difficult, or Masters for that matter? If we don't keep the steps reasonable for pilots on their way up, nothing else will matter. You won't have enough contestants at a local contest to fill a country bar on a Tuesday afternoon. That's what the sequence building guidelines are all about. You can't ever build a new schedule simply looking forward to the next higher step. You always have to have your eye in the rear view mirror. If you don't, the next look you get will be an empty mirror. Verne Koester Verne, I moved from intermediate to advanced and from advanced to masters not all that long ago. At the time, intermediate to advanced was easy, advanced to masters was extremely difficult for me. The advanced sequence at the time had been dumbed down so much (zero inverted entrances and exits) that it did not do a good job of preparing me for masters, and wasn't that much harder than intermediate. I went thru advanced in two years, went to masters because of peer pressure and pointing out. In hindsight I wish I had stayed there for another year or so to fly the current advanced pattern so I would have been better prepared for masters. In contrast, I've heard from some (by no means all) current intermediate pilots that the sequence is too easy, and they like the challenge of advanced. And the good news is that advanced is now challenging enough to keep them there a few years, so I think the sequence needs to change occasionally because of that. We also have to remember that advanced has some required manuevers by the sequence guide, like the 4 point and the slow roll, so the rest of the pattern is built around those manuevers. I had all of those, but the rest of the sequence was not challenging enough. The current 2012 advanced sequence is challenging, and I'm seeing it at the contests I've judged. Jon |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
Verne, like you, I've flown Master's for several years and must say your last response was the best evaluation/comparison of the subtle differences in classes that I have read so far. I could not agree with you more! Thanks, Everette
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
The darn forum system keeps showing that there are unread messages for me in this thread because Everette was the last to post, and I can't see his posts. Can anyone else see his stuff showing up?
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
For your entertainment. Please comment good or bad.
Advance Schedule my first try. R= required N = new * same as current 1 Take off 2 N Stall turn 3 of 4 up and 3/4 down exit upright 3 N 45 up line with 2 of 4 push to level 4 N Reverse Top Hat 1/2 rolls 5 * Full roll to 1/2 outside loop exit inverted 6 * Triangle loop 2/4 on top 7 * Humpty with options 8 R Slow roll 9 R Stall turn 1/2 up/dn 10 * Avalanche 11 * 1/2 square 2 of 4 up 12 * 45 down 1 positive snap 13 N 1/2 square loop on corner exit inverted 14 N Cuban from the top 2/4 then 1/2 roll (Inside loops) 15 1/2 loop 16 R 4 point 17 * 1/2 square 1/2 roll up 18 * 3 turn spin 19 Landing |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
ORIGINAL: mjfrederick The darn forum system keeps showing that there are unread messages for me in this thread because Everette was the last to post, and I can't see his posts. Can anyone else see his stuff showing up? |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
1 Attachment(s)
ORIGINAL: mjfrederick The darn forum system keeps showing that there are unread messages for me in this thread because Everette was the last to post, and I can't see his posts. Can anyone else see his stuff showing up? His posts look fine to me . . . . |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
ORIGINAL: klhoard ORIGINAL: mjfrederick The darn forum system keeps showing that there are unread messages for me in this thread because Everette was the last to post, and I can't see his posts. Can anyone else see his stuff showing up? His posts look fine to me . . . . Yup... looks exactly the same way to me as well - just fine! :D |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
If it gets any better than this, I don't believe I'm going to be able to stand it! Pile on boys..........
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
The new NSRCA sequence committee members are posted here, as well as a revised Advanced proposed sequence for 2013/14.
http://nsrca.us/index.php/sequencecommittee Dale |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
I posted this on the NSRCA list as well, but it looks to me that if the 8-sided loop is an inside loop it will be a very tall figure. And outside loop from the top makes more sense. The loop way up high will be harder to fly well and harder to judge. Yes, I know you can fly tighter, but we all know that people will tend to fly a bigger loop. Of course an outside loop from the top is less likely to be flown overly large!!
EDIT TO ADD: Derek just posted a correction on the email list. It is in fact an outside 8-sided loop from the top. I am a bit dim-witted and unless it says outside loop I tend to think it is an inside loop [&:] Just call me Mr. Literal. This is why I like Aresti so much better. Hard to get confused there. |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
One question since there are no aresti diagrams for the new proposal: I assume that in the double-stall turn you are upright through the half loop between the stall turns, is that correct? I plan to fly the sequence this weekend.
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
correct, and the maneuver starts at center with a 1/4 inside loop, reverses and goes back to the other side of center, then proceeds up wind.
Dale |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
The Advanced pattern not only looks fun but should also be quite challenging...Great job Team!
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
1 Attachment(s)
Here are the arestis
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
The Aresti sequence is not the same as the last posted. First maneuver should be Double Stall Turn not a Square loop.
Regards Rene |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
ORIGINAL: rene69 The Aresti sequence is not the same as the last posted. First maneuver should be Double Stall Turn not a Square loop. Regards Rene Looks like they re-posted the Aresti for the previous proposed sequence again. Give it some time and I'll bet the latest version will show up. [8D] The half triangle loop with a half roll up (Fig 17). Does that basically look like a "7". Pull a 60 degree up line, ½ roll, push 120 degrees to upright and eit? |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
ORIGINAL: danamania All these anecdotes are interesting, and getting feedback from those engaged in an activity is always desirable to keep an activity aligned with participants' interests; however, are the numbers of pilots participating in pattern contests so low that the anecdotes themselves tend to loom large and perhaps overshadow any set objective criteria for what each class should contain, or the sequence assigned to the class? A general question here for the group and not an observation of anyone's individual posts or discussions. It's all good, but as a newcomer to the sport, I wonder if local concerns can be inadvertently amplified simply due to the very small size of our pattern contestant community? Any thoughts? Dana ;) Brian |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
Nice, a Monte Python fan no doubt.
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
LOL, that's good feedback! What took so long? Cheers, Dana
|
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
The sequence posted on the NSRCA website is the correct one. We will post the associated Aresti as soon as possible. Next time I will wait until I have both before posting.
Dale |
RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
My thoughts exactly...Shakespeare!
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:02 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.