RCP# 2019-09
From: Brian J Muzek
NAR# 86418
Email: bjguzek@gmail.com
Type of Proposal: Regular
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Increase multi-round maximum for parachute duration.
State Logic and Intent of Change: As the NRC maximum is the target for people to shoot for, it should be such that an NRC maximum is difficult, but not impossible. However, for the 2018-19 season, 13 (out of 38) C divisioners and 5 (out of 12) D division teams achieved an NRC max in 1/4A-PD. In order to see more differentiation between fliers, the Multi-round and NRC maximum durations should be increased to make achieving one more difficult.
Effect, if any, on current competition and NAR records: Increased differentiation throughout the NRC season. No effect on NARAM or records.
Exact wording for the rule revision as it should appear (include section#):
31.3 Classes This event is divided into classes based on the permissible total impulse of the motor(s). The following classes of Parachute Duration are established:
(Current times are in black, suggested revised times are in red)
| Motor Class | Multi-round max | NRC Max |
| 1/8A | 40 sec | |
| 1/4A | 60 sec 75 sec | 180 sec 225 sec |
| 1/2A | 120 sec 180 sec | 360 sec 540 sec |
| A | 180 sec 240 sec | 540 sec 720 sec |
| FAI A | 300 sec | |
| B | 240 sec | |
| C | 300 sec |
6 Comments on RCP# 2019-09
I’m opposed to the proposed change because I don’t think we have enough experience with the NRC format to yet determine if people are consistently “maxing out†in NRC events.
I also don’t think that having a lot of people max out using current scoring methods is a bad thing. It expands the potential contestant pool at NARAM and would make for more exciting competition there.
I understand the rationale behind this RCP. However, I think the current MR Max and RCP Max values are OK as-is. If we set the values too high, we start to favor locations that have huge fields or low winds.
I think I'll vote "no" on this RCP.
I think I'll vote "no" (see RCP# 2019-08).
This is STILL two separate RCP's. One for event max, and one for NRC max. I will not vote for it in it's current state. Separate out.... and adjust NRC max times.
I think this makes sense and expected the max levels to be adjusted over time to make them somewhat difficult to attain. This could be due to not getting the max right from the start or from the technology used for that event advancing to the point that attaining the max's becomes "too easy"
I am not in support of this change as I think the current rule equalizes the qualification for competitors in varied parts of the country, where conditions may be better or worse for achieving a max.
If you look at the 2018-2019 NRC year and NARAM 61, This change would have kicked two of the top 5 NARAM finishers out of contention for ESA who did finish in the top 10 in 2018-2019 using the current rule because they were in place 2-10 during NRC competition.Â
If the author was asking for the actual flight times of those who maxed to be published on the scoreboard along with their max designation, I would be in support of that, but not in support of increasing the max threshold. (I realize this would be a burden on Chris to have to change the way the scoreboard site is set up) The differentiation between flyers is what it is, competitors just can't see it on the scoreboard.
Disclosure: I have maxed in two of the last three seasons of NRC for parachute duration and still would have maxed out under this new proposal. This change would not have affected me, but would have affected others.