![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
T8 -
As a newbie, I agree with some of the points you're trying to make; but your tone is a little abrasive. I think it is coming across that way out of annoyance at the blogger in this case, but some newbies might think you're aiming at them. I would put it this way: Its nice to hear from newbies and encourage them to participate, but if they've never been in a competition then their opinions on how contests are run or how classes are organized should be taken with a grain of salt. Its not that Newbies can't have good ideas - but people with experience who have seen the processes at- work are much more qualified to make good judgements and suggest realistic/meaningful changes and improvements. If someone wants to make change, they should get involved and do it from the inside of an organization - not try to impose change on others from the outside. The good news about today's information-age is that even if the newbies are excluded from the "official" SRA surveys and stuff, there are still a bunch of ways for our feedback and ideas to be seen and heard by competition pilots and organizers. I've thrown out a bunch of ideas and opinions here on RAS in the last week and not a single SRA person has told me to sit down or shut up - so I don't feel like I'm being EX-cluded. I just hope that any dumb statements that I make or stupid ideas that I propose are respectfully critiqued by those folks, so that I learn and understand more. :-) Take care, --Noel |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 29, 2:20*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
T8 - As a newbie, I agree with some of the points you're trying to make; but your tone is a little abrasive. *I think it is coming across that way out of annoyance at the blogger in this case, but some newbies might think you're aiming at them. I would put it this way: *Its nice to hear from newbies and encourage them to participate, but if they've never been in a competition then their opinions on how contests are run or how classes are organized should be taken with a grain of salt. *Its not that Newbies can't have good ideas - but people with experience who have seen the processes at- work are much more qualified to make good judgements and suggest realistic/meaningful changes and improvements. *If someone wants to make change, they should get involved and do it from the inside of an organization - not try to impose change on others from the outside. The good news about today's information-age is that even if the newbies are excluded from the "official" SRA surveys and stuff, there are still a bunch of ways for our feedback and ideas to be seen and heard by competition pilots and organizers. *I've thrown out a bunch of ideas and opinions here on RAS in the last week and not a single SRA person has told me to sit down or shut up - so I don't feel like I'm being EX-cluded. *I just hope that any dumb statements that I make or stupid ideas that I propose are respectfully critiqued by those folks, so that I learn and understand more. *:-) Take care, --Noel Hi Noel, The point, which you obviously get, is that on an individual basis the competition community is extremely helpful and welcoming to serious newcomers. Newcomers are, however, not welcome to start fixing things at random, most of which are not broken. We have a rules process. It works. I've been flying competition off and on since the days of pilotage and cameras. Every time I come back I feel like a newbie. Every time I've been welcomed. Never have I thought I needed to get involved with rules making. Indeed the sarcasm was directed to the OP, whom I hope takes it in stride and doesn't get unduly offended. The side issue here, of course, has to do with his advocacy for club class and the feeling of some that he wants on the Rules Committee for not entirely altruistic reasons. FWIW, I'd personally find a club class nats an interesting addition to the schedule -- I do own an ASW-20 after all -- but handicap classes are made or broken on the handicapping system. If I found, for instance, that the rules ended up being handicap by data-plate only and that mods were "anything goes", I wouldn't bother. Some dude shows up with the original Scheumann Libelle and blows us all into the weeds. I'm not familiar with the details of Sam's LS-1f, but I am given to understand that it's substantially modified, so you can see the obvious concern. Best regards, -T8 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 22:07 29 September 2008, PMSC Member wrote:
On Sep 29, 2:20=A0pm, "noel.wade" wrote: T8 - As a newbie, I agree with some of the points you're trying to make; but your tone is a little abrasive. =A0I think it is coming across that way out of annoyance at the blogger in this case, but some newbies might think you're aiming at them. I would put it this way: =A0Its nice to hear from newbies and encourage them to participate, but if they've never been in a competition then their opinions on how contests are run or how classes are organized should be taken with a grain of salt. =A0Its not that Newbies can't have good ideas - but people with experience who have seen the processes at- work are much more qualified to make good judgements and suggest realistic/meaningful changes and improvements. =A0If someone wants to make change, they should get involved and do it from the inside of an organization - not try to impose change on others from the outside. The good news about today's information-age is that even if the newbies are excluded from the "official" SRA surveys and stuff, there are still a bunch of ways for our feedback and ideas to be seen and heard by competition pilots and organizers. =A0I've thrown out a bunch of ideas and opinions here on RAS in the last week and not a single SRA person has told me to sit down or shut up - so I don't feel like I'm being EX-cluded. =A0I just hope that any dumb statements that I make or stupid ideas that I propose are respectfully critiqued by those folks, so that I learn and understand more. =A0:-) Take care, --Noel Hi Noel, The point, which you obviously get, is that on an individual basis the competition community is extremely helpful and welcoming to serious newcomers. Newcomers are, however, not welcome to start fixing things at random, most of which are not broken. We have a rules process. It works. I've been flying competition off and on since the days of pilotage and cameras. Every time I come back I feel like a newbie. Every time I've been welcomed. Never have I thought I needed to get involved with rules making. Indeed the sarcasm was directed to the OP, whom I hope takes it in stride and doesn't get unduly offended. The side issue here, of course, has to do with his advocacy for club class and the feeling of some that he wants on the Rules Committee for not entirely altruistic reasons. FWIW, I'd personally find a club class nats an interesting addition to the schedule -- I do own an ASW-20 after all -- but handicap classes are made or broken on the handicapping system. If I found, for instance, that the rules ended up being handicap by data-plate only and that mods were "anything goes", I wouldn't bother. Some dude shows up with the original Scheumann Libelle and blows us all into the weeds. I'm not familiar with the details of Sam's LS-1f, but I am given to understand that it's substantially modified, so you can see the obvious concern. Best regards, -T8 Just to set the record straight. My LS1-f has no modifications. Since the rules and handicaps changed last year there is 1. no bumpy tape 2. no wingroot fillets(which came from the LS factory) 3. no winglets(never had them) 4. no VGs This glider is "as it was" when it left the factory in 1975. It has been refinished and well maintained only. Your inspecton is welcome! So maybe, just maybe, your "obvious concern" is unfounded. Sam |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() One might reasonably contend that questionnaire participation qualification should be intent specific. In other words, it depends on the questions. It is obvious why the non-racing membership shouldn't have sway on the RC's evaluation of race procedures; but on the other hand, the question "Would the initiation of Club Class here in the US increase racing participation?", assuming the definition of Club Class is provided, could be given an educated answer by someone who hasn't competed in the last three years--especially if a "Yes" answer coming from such a person can be statistically culled as sign of increasing interest. Regardless, the answer to such a question is subjective personal opinion from whoever gives it. As an aside: The failsafe way to gauge whether or not Club Class might increase racing participation is to poll every owner of a Club Class glider (whether they be an active racer or not). Ray Cornay LS-4 RD |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 29, 8:39*pm, wrote:
One might reasonably contend that questionnaire participation qualification should be intent specific. In other words, it depends on the questions. It is obvious why the non-racing membership shouldn't have sway on the RC's evaluation of race procedures; but on the other hand, the question "Would the initiation of Club Class here in the US increase racing participation?", assuming the definition of Club Class is provided, could be given an educated answer by someone who hasn't competed in the last three years--especially if a "Yes" answer coming from such a person can be statistically culled as sign of increasing interest. Regardless, the answer to such a question is subjective personal opinion from whoever gives it. As an aside: *The failsafe way to gauge whether or not Club Class might increase racing participation is to poll every owner of a Club Class glider (whether they be an active racer or not). Ray Cornay LS-4 RD FWIW I asked in an earlier thread to indicate they would join contest flying if there were a Club Class. I suspect there may be some. As of yet, no response. What Ray suggests goes well beyond the resources of the RC. UH |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 29, 9:01*pm, wrote:
FWIW I asked in an earlier thread to indicate they would join contest flying if there were a Club Class. I suspect there may be some. As of yet, no response. What Ray suggests goes well beyond the resources of the RC. UH I would be unlikely to fly Club at Regional level -- I prefer flying 15m even with old ship -- but would be interested in Club Class Nats. Depends on rules. IMO, Club Class would have potential to yield (much) better racing at Nats level than Sports. As has been discussed elsewhere, Sports Class at regional level seems to scratch the itch of a lot of guys, for a lot of different reasons. -T8 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 29, 5:39*pm, wrote:
As an aside: *The failsafe way to gauge whether or not Club Class might increase racing participation is to poll every owner of a Club Class glider (whether they be an active racer or not). Ray - I think your proposed question only works if you also provide the definition of the Sports Class and explain the differences between the two and what the current attendance level is and what the breakdown is of how many of those attendees would be shifted to another class. Classing is not something a newbie necessarily understands, either - especially without context. Also, polling people who aren't even active racers doesn't make sense. If you don't race and don't intend to race, then why should you have any sway over how races are run? --Noel |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() As an aside: *The failsafe way to gauge whether or not Club Class might increase racing participation is to poll every owner of a Club Class glider (whether they be an active racer or not). No, we should poll every person in the country, to see how many would start flying gliders if we only put in a club class. No, poll everyone in the world, to see how many will move to the US if only we had a club class. Seriously, there is a much better method. Club class advocates should get off their butts and organize some "club class" contests, either under regional or, better, super-regional rules, by waiver. Demonstrate that there really is this group of potential competitors who are somehow too put off by sports to fly contests, but really will come out to fly club. That's a whole lot more failsafe than getting a bunch of guys to send some emails, and carries a lot more weight than this "you guys oughta" stuff. John Cochrane BB |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 01:26 30 September 2008, BB wrote:
As an aside: =A0The failsafe way to gauge whether or not Club Class might increase racing participation is to poll every owner of a Club Class glider (whether they be an active racer or not). No, we should poll every person in the country, to see how many would start flying gliders if we only put in a club class. No, poll everyone in the world, to see how many will move to the US if only we had a club class. Seriously, there is a much better method. Club class advocates should get off their butts and organize some "club class" contests, either under regional or, better, super-regional rules, by waiver. Demonstrate that there really is this group of potential competitors who are somehow too put off by sports to fly contests, but really will come out to fly club. That's a whole lot more failsafe than getting a bunch of guys to send some emails, and carries a lot more weight than this "you guys oughta" stuff. John Cochrane BB I agree with John! I don't fully understand the waiver but would be willling to help get it organized. Let's show the RC that the need for the Club Class is real. Anyone interested please contact me. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
End of Season Sunset Warning for SSA-OLC Participants | Doug Haluza | Soaring | 172 | September 29th 06 10:35 PM |
RAP Party Participants | john smith | Piloting | 5 | July 6th 06 05:29 AM |
MapleFlag 2004 Participants ? | TopFlightPhoto | Military Aviation | 0 | February 22nd 04 10:43 AM |
Survey participants wanted (App0721) | F.L. Whiteley | Soaring | 0 | July 24th 03 10:23 PM |
Seeking survey participants | Thomas J. Paladino Jr. | Piloting | 1 | July 24th 03 12:01 AM |