0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
If money is a significant issue for not attending, given the current economy, that may not be going away anytime soon. So to open up another line of thinking, would doing regional championships East/West.
...but I think we need to be reminded of the "original idea" of the U.S. Scale Masters. It was to recognize skills and talents in BUILDING as well as FLYING. Did not Harris Lee want this? I have to Agree." In Scale Masters, we only compete against ourselves and NOT against others.So your "normalized" value has no meaning outside of a particular contest. Just remember that as you fly YOUR model in front of judges, that your score is refective of how well you flew each maneuver as described during your judges-brief before you took off. That's why it's imparitive that you brief each set of judges as to how YOU will fly YOUR model. " YesJim
I hate to be the one to "poke the beast in the belly" ...but I think we need to be reminded of the "original idea" of the U.S. Scale Masters. It was to reccognize skills and talents in BUILDING as well as FLYING.
OK all you computer scoring smart guys. Tell my why the normalizing did not show the real winner? Yes I voted for this change but only because I flew IMAC and it was started and used. Did we apply it somewhat different? I don't think we can normalize the static. So work needs to be done on the program. May be we acted too quick on this, sorry Bob. I don't think the NASA org will addopt this. If we did it would take 3 years to implement because of the rule cycle. Maybe that's why we have that type of check on new rules. As far as TG don't know I will ask Frank when I see him.Mike Barbee
Started by Skymaster