The Nats is over and this is my last "Update". Why an "Update" after the event? Basically so I can review the Nats from my perspective and to recognize the people who worked on it.
I am generally pleased about the way the R/C Aerobatics Nats went. The AMA officials: Nats Manager Ron Morgan, R/C Category Director Al Williamson, Technical Director Steve Kaluf and all the maintenance people went out of their way to assist us. Our national flying site passed the test of whether an R/C Aerobatics Nats could be held there. We got the event completed in the time allotted, despite threatening weather for several days and actual bad weather on the last day of AMA competition. However, like most people, my hindsight perspective is better that my foresight. There are some things I would have done differently.
I would still mail out pilots' job assignments early, even though some had to change due to pilots withdrawing before the start. However, I would post all changes at a pre-announced location and make the Pilots' Meeting mandatory so that pilots could be informed if their job assignment and/or date had changed. I had to zero the first round of an FAI pilot because his job date had changed (moved up a day). He didn't look at the revised assignment list posted at Event Headquarters and missed the Pilots' Meeting, so he didn't show up for his scribe job on the first day.
I would post the tear sheets at Scoring only. Trying to get the tear sheets back to the original flying site, only to have the pilot move to another site before they arrived was frustrating for the pilots, Site Directors, Maureen, and me.
I would insist that AMA provide better quality frequency pins. The plain wooden clothes pins with the channel number written on it just didn't hack it with me.
We had contestant scribes for the judges of Advanced, Master and FAI pilots, but none for the judges of Sportsman pilots. Why? Not enough people. All of the pilots pulled jobs as either judges or scribes for one morning or afternoon session, depending on when they flew. Since the Sportsman maneuver schedule has four sets of "three maneuvers and out of the box", I thought the judges could manage without a scribe. Most did, but some complained that they couldn't remember three scores before being able to look down at the scoresheet and write them down. We should look into paying groups like the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, or Ball State University student service organizations to provide scribes for all the classes. (Editor's note: Amen, absolutely and let's NOT forget this; add $5 to the entry fee if needed for this.)
One procedure we tried worked well. Many of the Advanced, Master and FAI judges used pads of paper to write down scores. The scribes copied the scores from the pads of paper. This procedure enabled the judge to continuously look at the aircraft and it provided a written record if there was a problem in communication with the scribe. In future use of this procedure, I recommend the use of large clip boards and legal size pads by the judges to make it easier to legibly record the scores.
The Sportsman and Advanced pilots flew from one site. The Master and FAI pilots flew from the other two sites. Rather than have the Master and FAI pilots fly two flights at one site and move to the other site for two more flights, I would rotate them through the lines so they could observe 3/4 of their opposition rather than 1/2, without going to the other site to watch. Having them fly two flights at a site before moving caused it to feel like there were two contests going on, because the pilots on one site hardly ever saw flights by pilots on the other site. My original logic was that flying two flights at a site before moving would reduce the amount of tent setup and tear down by the pilots. That became a non-issue because few pilots put up tents at the Master and FAI sites.
For the first time that I can remember, pilots were allowed to practice at the Nats contest site. They practiced at the site from which they had flown earlier in the day. I would change that to have them to practice on the site they would be moving to the next day, so they could get used to the conditions at the site. It would cause more work for the event director because the frequency pins would have to be distributed twice a day rather than once, but I think it's worth it.
AMA classes completed flying six rounds in four days: two rounds a day for the first two days and one round a day for the next two days. Why? Hedging on the weather. Getting the first four rounds completed in two days allowed for flexibility later in the week in the event of bad weather. Weather permitting we could have finished the six rounds in three days. Do we want to shoot for that and have a fourth day as a "rain day"?
FAI was spread over five days, one flight a day during four days of qualifying and a day of finals. It was possible (weather permitting) to fly the four qualifying flights in two days, so FAI could have been finished in three days. Is this what we want? Or do we want to have FAI fly six rounds of qualifying in three days, have a one-day rain day and have the finals on the fifth day? Do we want to start FAI late, but finish the AMA classes before the FAI Finals start? Points to ponder.
For the first time, "ready box" tents were available adjacent to the flightline for pilots and callers to relax in before flying. Early in the week when it was cloudy and cooler, almost nobody used them, but as the sun came out and it warmed up later in the week, they got heavy use. They were particularly welcome during FAI Finals, when there was almost no relief from the sun. I recommend that we use them in future Nats.
It seems high, but 45 people actually judged at least two rounds at the Nats. There were 13 volunteer judges (who worked varying numbers of shifts) and 32 pilots who judged. In future Nats, the ratio of volunteer judges to pilot judges will probably become even lower as the NSRCA judge training program moves into high gear and we can count on quality judging from the contestants who show up. This year, combined personal knowledge (Tony Stillman, Cheryl Williamson, John Fuqua and me) was used to select the pilot judges.
The flight line volunteers included Site Directors (Charlie Robinson John Ferrell, Bobby Stout, Bud Green and Bob Angus); Line Chiefs (Greg Prater, Kenny Krempetz, Bruce Bradbury, Jeff Hill, Dave Guerin, Mike Dunphy, Karen Saunders, Bobby Stout and Bob Miller) and Transmitter Impound Officials (Dick Erratt, Joan Ferrell, Bud Green and Tom Vastine). I was VERY pleased with the way these people did their jobs. They all had a positive attitude, professional competence and a strong work ethic. Many of the favorable comments I heard were the result of their efforts. Well done.
Scoring was handled almost single handed by Maureen Dunphy. Cheryl Williamson assisted her when she wasn't doing her Chief Judge job or judging. We really need a couple of "gofers" to assist in scoring and make the scorer's job easier.
We tried for a long time to borrow or rent optical scanners to use in scoring, but until a last-minute successful effort by John Fuqua resulted in the acquisition of two Scantron 1300 optical scanners, Maureen was faced with having to hand enter all the scores! Previously, Mike Lauman had been the only one who had done scoring with an optical scanner and Maureen wasn't able to get the newly-purchased optical scanners to work with Mike's scoring program until the night before the contest started! One scanner worked flawlessly for the whole contest, but the other scanner was improperly calibrated at the factory and couldn't be used as a backup. It'll be re calibrated under warranty. The acquisition of the scanners was jointly funded by AMA and NSRCA for use at the Nats, FAI Team Selection Finals and N-PAC (if another is held).
We need to involve new people in the job of R/C Aerobatics Event Director. Only five people (Greg Frohreich, Tony Stillman, Mike Dunphy Paul Salverda and I) have held the job in the last eight years and only Tony, Mike and I are currently active in R/C aerobatics. There are qualified individuals out there who should consider taking the job. I heard quite a few "suggestions" from several individuals on how they thought the next Nats should be run. To each I offered the opportunity to volunteer as 1997 R/C Aerobatics Event Director. No taker yet. As I told the large group at the awards ceremony, I will be at future Nats, maybe even as event director, but next year I'll be flying.
Ron Van Putte, Nats R/C Aerobatics Event Director