-
In this age of entitlement, how fitting that Tony has his article published in SA about how he is entitled to win Advanced in a mid-twentieth century technology airplane.
I have three recommendations for you Tony:
1. Train harder.
2. If you are not at your ideal weight for your height - push your lazy chair away from the table. You'll gain substantial aircraft performance if you've been carrying a load of fat with you in the box.
3. Make performance improvements to your airplane if you can't afford a better performing one.
You are not entitled to win any category, Tony. Ever. Work harder and give up trying to lower the bar. Your article guarantees you a whole audience of people who now view you with the disdain of a sore loser.
-
It would be best to keep this discussion about the issues rather than the personalities. If Tony's input provokes some reasoned discussion that engages a bunch of the IAC membership then the result can be constructive. I know of a couple of very reasonable proposals formulated on another forum that are likely to be submitted to IAC.
Reasonable people do not create progress. And I can make the general statement that aerobatic competitors are not reasonable people. The challenge is to pull the great ideas out of the internet noise.
Best of luck,
Wes
N78PS
-
I am glad to see the proposals being made for this problem. Science and engineering will prove that the 4 cylinder aircraft can't match the performance of the 6 cylinder machines. I do believe the pilot makes the difference. One only has to watch Tony fly his 1D to understand what I mean. Leveling the field by setting the Advanced Standard aircraft and allowing an optional break is a start.
Stan Burks
N105DR
-
I just found another thread about an alternate advanced, has there been any more discussion on that avenue?
SB
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules