Club Class

[5 ugly]

After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US.
There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Dec 17, 11:36*am, 5 ugly > wrote:
> After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
> powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
> from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
> Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
> glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US.
> There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
> combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U

As the "new kid on the RC" when this started I must vigorously
disagree that the "powers that be were not interested." I and others
on the RC would like nothing more that for every national contest to
be oversubscribed and there to be waiting lists at regionals. In a
situation like this creating a new class is a no-brainer. Alas, this
is not the case in our sport. Participation at the national level is
decreasing and overall is barely holding its own. Contest organizers
sturggle to break even.

The RC has the responsibility to avoid actions that further fragment
and possible disenfranchise current competitors (the non-clib sports
class participants).

So the question remains wrt club class interest: "Over the past few
years, how many pilots flew their first contest and flew a club class
glider?"

[5 ugly]

On Dec 17, 11:47*am, "John Godfrey (QT)" >
wrote:
> On Dec 17, 11:36*am, 5 ugly > wrote:
>
> > After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
> > powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
> > from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
> > Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
> > glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US.
> > There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
> > combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U
>
> As the "new kid on the RC" when this started I must vigorously
> disagree that the "powers that be were not interested." I and others
> on the RC would like nothing more that for every national contest to
> be oversubscribed and there to be waiting lists at regionals. In a
> situation like this creating a new class is a no-brainer. Alas, this
> is not the case in our sport. *Participation at the national level is
> decreasing and overall is barely holding its own. *Contest organizers
> sturggle to break even.
>
> The RC has the responsibility to avoid actions that further fragment
> and possible disenfranchise current competitors (the non-clib sports
> class participants).
>
> So the question remains wrt club class interest: "Over the past few
> years, how many pilots flew their first contest and flew a club class
> glider?"

Please know John that the time you guys put in for the SSA is much
appreciated. Thank goodness for you dedication and efforts. I am just
giving you the way I see it. Also know that I speak for no one else
but myself
That being said I must point out that the current powers to be have
been in charge for quite a while and according to you participation
continues to fall, contest organizers struggle to break evenl. Does it
not make since for the RC to try something different, a new direction,
a new way of thinking. I'm done! 5U

[Robert Fidler[_2_]]

On Dec 17, 12:45*pm, 5 ugly > wrote:
> On Dec 17, 11:47*am, "John Godfrey (QT)" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 17, 11:36*am, 5 ugly > wrote:
>
> > > After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
> > > powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
> > > from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
> > > Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
> > > glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US.
> > > There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
> > > combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U
>
> > As the "new kid on the RC" when this started I must vigorously
> > disagree that the "powers that be were not interested." I and others
> > on the RC would like nothing more that for every national contest to
> > be oversubscribed and there to be waiting lists at regionals. In a
> > situation like this creating a new class is a no-brainer. Alas, this
> > is not the case in our sport. *Participation at the national level is
> > decreasing and overall is barely holding its own. *Contest organizers
> > sturggle to break even.
>
> > The RC has the responsibility to avoid actions that further fragment
> > and possible disenfranchise current competitors (the non-clib sports
> > class participants).
>
> > So the question remains wrt club class interest: "Over the past few
> > years, how many pilots flew their first contest and flew a club class
> > glider?"
>
> Please know John that the time you guys put in for the SSA is much
> appreciated. Thank goodness for you dedication and efforts. I am just
> giving you the way I see it. Also know that *I speak for no one else
> but myself
> That being said I must point out that the current powers to be have
> been in charge for quite a while and according to you *participation
> continues to fall, contest organizers struggle to break evenl. Does it
> not make since for the RC to try something different, a new direction,
> a new way of thinking. *I'm done! 5U

It will never change under current control. Sport Class rules and
rating system is the SSA's way of controlling how we handicap gliders
at us contests not flying fai. It will never change considering those
who call the shots on changing the rules.

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Dec 18, 5:38*am, Robert Fidler > wrote:
> On Dec 17, 12:45*pm, 5 ugly > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 17, 11:47*am, "John Godfrey (QT)" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 17, 11:36*am, 5 ugly > wrote:
>
> > > > After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
> > > > powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
> > > > from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
> > > > Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
> > > > glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US..
> > > > There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
> > > > combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U
>
> > > As the "new kid on the RC" when this started I must vigorously
> > > disagree that the "powers that be were not interested." I and others
> > > on the RC would like nothing more that for every national contest to
> > > be oversubscribed and there to be waiting lists at regionals. In a
> > > situation like this creating a new class is a no-brainer. Alas, this
> > > is not the case in our sport. *Participation at the national level is
> > > decreasing and overall is barely holding its own. *Contest organizers
> > > sturggle to break even.
>
> > > The RC has the responsibility to avoid actions that further fragment
> > > and possible disenfranchise current competitors (the non-clib sports
> > > class participants).
>
> > > So the question remains wrt club class interest: "Over the past few
> > > years, how many pilots flew their first contest and flew a club class
> > > glider?"
>
> > Please know John that the time you guys put in for the SSA is much
> > appreciated. Thank goodness for you dedication and efforts. I am just
> > giving you the way I see it. Also know that *I speak for no one else
> > but myself
> > That being said I must point out that the current powers to be have
> > been in charge for quite a while and according to you *participation
> > continues to fall, contest organizers struggle to break evenl. Does it
> > not make since for the RC to try something different, a new direction,
> > a new way of thinking. *I'm done! 5U
>
> It will never change under current control. Sport Class rules and
> rating system is the SSA's way of controlling how we handicap gliders
> at us contests not flying fai. It will never change considering those
> who call the shots on changing the rules.

What are the issues you see with the current handicap system? Allowing
that no handicap system works for all situations, what would you
suggest that we change? The RC did not find a clear trend in the poll
results, so let's get the continuing discussion underway.

[S. Murry]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:47:39 -0600, John Godfrey (QT)
> wrote:

> On Dec 17, 11:36 am, 5 ugly > wrote:
>> After working very hard to promote the Club Class I found that the
>> powers to be were not interested. The RC waits for a sign of interest
>> from the masses while not encouraging the masses to be interested!
>> Partial blame must also rest with pilots who own and fly Club Class
>> glider. This group is the largest single group of gliders in the US.
>> There are more Club Class gliders in the US than all other classes
>> combined. You must want change in order to get change. 5U
>
> As the "new kid on the RC" when this started I must vigorously
> disagree that the "powers that be were not interested." I and others
> on the RC would like nothing more that for every national contest to
> be oversubscribed and there to be waiting lists at regionals. In a
> situation like this creating a new class is a no-brainer. Alas, this
> is not the case in our sport. Participation at the national level is
> decreasing and overall is barely holding its own. Contest organizers
> sturggle to break even.
>
> The RC has the responsibility to avoid actions that further fragment
> and possible disenfranchise current competitors (the non-clib sports
> class participants).
>
> So the question remains wrt club class interest: "Over the past few
> years, how many pilots flew their first contest and flew a club class
> glider?"

Not sure if this question is rhetorical, but if you're intending to start
a poll, I flew my first contest in 2010 in a club class glider (flying in
Sports Class). In fact, my situation is probably the archetype for "club
class" as I understand it. I flew and actual club-owned club-class
glider. I campaigned this same club glider in the 2011 season as well
(flying one contest :)). I subsequently have purchased a club-class
glider which I plan to fly (hopefully more successfully than last year) in
the 2012 season. I am not anticipating an invitation to the US Team
anytime soon, so this isn't really an enticement for me.

That being said, at this point in my racing career, I don't really care
what class I fly in as I'm still learning and have a ways to go before my
position on the leaderboard has anything to do with specific vagaries of
handicapping, etc. I was even approached to fly in Open Class (in the
club's Grob 102) this year in an attempt to create a viable class for the
Region 10 contest. I would have done it, especially considering there
would have been only three gliders (if we could have found the third), and
I would have been guaranteed a trophy :). Hopefully the CD would have had
some gigantic turn areas or it would have been a long contest...

Personally, I think having a separate score sheet for club class is a
pretty good compromise, considering the probable further fragmentation
that would occur were club class separated completely. I would love it,
though, if we could somehow get enough participation in both classes to
warrant the separation of sports and club. I am sure I am not alone in
this sentiment.


--
Stefan Murry

[Cliff Hilty[_2_]]

Ok lets start with transparency, where is it? Can anyone tell me the
formula for handicapping gliders?

CH Ventus B (Just outside the club class range)

PS I do believe the club class world team should be formed by people that
actually fly club class gliders year round. Want to fly in club class buy
one!



>What are the issues you see with the current handicap system? Allowing
>that no handicap system works for all situations, what would you
>suggest that we change? The RC did not find a clear trend in the poll
>results, so let's get the continuing discussion underway.
>

[Tony[_5_]]

> *I was even approached to fly in Open Class (in the
> club's Grob 102) this year in an attempt to create a viable class for the
> Region 10 contest. *I would have done it, especially considering there
> would have been only three gliders (if we could have found the third), and
> I would have been guaranteed a trophy :). *Hopefully the CD would have had
> some gigantic turn areas or it would have been a long contest...
>
> Stefan Murry

no one asked me! :D

Looking forward to hearing about your adventures in the new bird
Stefan and seeing you at future contests.

[Tony[_5_]]

On Dec 19, 1:07*pm, Cliff Hilty
> wrote:
> Ok lets start with transparency, where is it? Can anyone tell me the
> formula for handicapping gliders?
>
> CH Ventus B (Just outside the club class range)
>
> PS I do believe the club class world team should be formed by people that
> actually fly club class gliders year round. Want to fly in club class buy
> one!

its a contest to determine the best pilot not determine glider
ownership

[Mike[_37_]]

On Dec 19, 12:20*pm, Tony > wrote:
> On Dec 19, 1:07*pm, Cliff Hilty
>
> > wrote:
> > Ok lets start with transparency, where is it? Can anyone tell me the
> > formula for handicapping gliders?
>
> > CH Ventus B (Just outside the club class range)
>
> > PS I do believe the club class world team should be formed by people that
> > actually fly club class gliders year round. Want to fly in club class buy
> > one!
>
> its a contest to determine the best pilot not determine glider
> ownership

Yes, it should make no difference what a pilot has flown during the
soaring season, but the pilot should fly a club class sailplane,
during a scored club class contest, for inclusion.

[kirk.stant]

This whole Sports Class vs Club Class argument is absurd.

There are FUNDAMENTAL differences between the intent of the two
classes:

Sports is meant to be a "beginners" class. Thus the shorter, simpler
(?) tasking, and letting any glider that shows up compete. OK in
theory, except when you end up with a Blanik racing a Nimbus 4DM...but
if both pilots are beginners to racing, then it kinda works.

Club class is meant to be a serious racing class for pilots who don't
have the latest FAI gliders, but still wand serious competition with
challenging tasks.

There is a need for both; the Arizona Soaring Association addresses
this with 3 level of tasks when necessary, so that the task difficulty
better matches the glider performance and pilot skill of the
competitors.

I personally will not compete in a Sports Class contest unless it is
held in my back yard. I will travel to a Club/Modern contest
(planning on attending Moriarty again this June - CH are you in?). I
will also go to 15M regionals or even the Nationals if possible, even
if my LS6 is not quite as competitive as the latest V2s and 29s,
because I enjoy a challenging race.

My suggestion? Combine Club/Modern with Std/15 regionals, with
slightly shorter tasks for the Club/Modern. Bigger field, bigger
contests, more fun. Ditto Sports/Club; same venue and contest
management, different tasks/scoresheets.

Kirk
66

[Cliff Hilty[_2_]]

I agree, there is a need for both and the sports class should be for "new"
pilots to racing or/and very low performance handicapped gliders. While
club class should be flown in Club class gliders Which is by far the
largest segment of gliders out there just very few of them fly in contests
because of getting beat badly in FAI classes with no handicap or getting
beat in soports by a 1.54 handicapped 1-26 flying a 2.5 hour TAT and only
going 70 miles while club class has to go twice as far. Trying to combine
such diverse handicaps is just to dependant on weather.

And to answer your question about Moriarty I may not considering the SSA's
last minute decision to change the Insurance requirements without
notification for SSA sanctioned contests-----but that should be another
thread entirely!

CH Ventus B

At 13:12 20 December 2011, kirk.stant wrote:
>This whole Sports Class vs Club Class argument is absurd.
>
>There are FUNDAMENTAL differences between the intent of the two
>classes:
>
>Sports is meant to be a "beginners" class. Thus the shorter, simpler
>(?) tasking, and letting any glider that shows up compete. OK in
>theory, except when you end up with a Blanik racing a Nimbus 4DM...but
>if both pilots are beginners to racing, then it kinda works.
>
>Club class is meant to be a serious racing class for pilots who don't
>have the latest FAI gliders, but still wand serious competition with
>challenging tasks.
>
>There is a need for both; the Arizona Soaring Association addresses
>this with 3 level of tasks when necessary, so that the task difficulty
>better matches the glider performance and pilot skill of the
>competitors.
>
>I personally will not compete in a Sports Class contest unless it is
>held in my back yard. I will travel to a Club/Modern contest
>(planning on attending Moriarty again this June - CH are you in?). I
>will also go to 15M regionals or even the Nationals if possible, even
>if my LS6 is not quite as competitive as the latest V2s and 29s,
>because I enjoy a challenging race.
>
>My suggestion? Combine Club/Modern with Std/15 regionals, with
>slightly shorter tasks for the Club/Modern. Bigger field, bigger
>contests, more fun. Ditto Sports/Club; same venue and contest
>management, different tasks/scoresheets.
>
>Kirk
>66
>

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Dec 20, 7:00*am, Cliff Hilty
> wrote:
> I agree, there is a need for both and the sports class should be for "new"
> pilots to racing or/and very low performance handicapped gliders. While
> club class should be flown in Club class gliders Which is by far the
> largest segment of gliders out there just very few of them fly in contests
> because of getting beat badly in FAI classes with no handicap or getting
> beat in soports by a 1.54 handicapped 1-26 flying a 2.5 hour TAT and only
> going 70 miles while club class has to go twice as far. Trying to combine
> such diverse handicaps is just to dependant on weather.
>
> And to answer your question about Moriarty I may not considering the SSA's
> last minute decision to change the Insurance requirements without
> notification for SSA sanctioned contests-----but that should be another
> thread entirely!
>
> CH Ventus B
>
> At 13:12 20 December 2011, kirk.stant wrote:
>
>
>
> >This whole Sports Class vs Club Class argument is absurd.
>
> >There are FUNDAMENTAL differences between the intent of the two
> >classes:
>
> >Sports is meant to be a "beginners" class. *Thus the shorter, simpler
> >(?) tasking, and letting any glider that shows up compete. *OK in
> >theory, except when you end up with a Blanik racing a Nimbus 4DM...but
> >if both pilots are beginners to racing, then it kinda works.
>
> >Club class is meant to be a serious racing class for pilots who don't
> >have the latest FAI gliders, but still wand serious competition with
> >challenging tasks.
>
> >There is a need for both; the Arizona Soaring Association addresses
> >this with 3 level of tasks when necessary, so that the task difficulty
> >better matches the glider performance and pilot skill of the
> >competitors.
>
> >I personally will not compete in a Sports Class contest unless it is
> >held in my back yard. *I will travel to a Club/Modern contest
> >(planning on attending Moriarty again this June - CH are you in?). *I
> >will also go to 15M regionals or even the Nationals if possible, even
> >if my LS6 is not quite as competitive as the latest V2s and 29s,
> >because I enjoy a challenging race.
>
> >My suggestion? Combine Club/Modern with Std/15 regionals, with
> >slightly shorter tasks for the Club/Modern. *Bigger field, bigger
> >contests, more fun. *Ditto Sports/Club; same venue and contest
> >management, different tasks/scoresheets.
>
> >Kirk
> >66- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Dick Johnson often said that Sports Class is the "entry & exit class",
so don't forget about us old duffers that still like to race, but no
longer get excited about flying in the rat-pack classes. Where can I
find a list of Club Class ships?
JJ

[Frank Whiteley]

On Dec 20, 8:00*am, Cliff Hilty
> wrote:
> I agree, there is a need for both and the sports class should be for "new"
> pilots to racing or/and very low performance handicapped gliders. While
> club class should be flown in Club class gliders Which is by far the
> largest segment of gliders out there just very few of them fly in contests
> because of getting beat badly in FAI classes with no handicap or getting
> beat in soports by a 1.54 handicapped 1-26 flying a 2.5 hour TAT and only
> going 70 miles while club class has to go twice as far. Trying to combine
> such diverse handicaps is just to dependant on weather.
>
> And to answer your question about Moriarty I may not considering the SSA's
> last minute decision to change the Insurance requirements without
> notification for SSA sanctioned contests-----but that should be another
> thread entirely!
>
The SSA did not change the requirements, they remain as before. It
was determined that at least one underwriter's policies, as written,
did not meet the coverage requirements for SSA sanctioned contests,
thus a clarifying document was presented. The SSA was planning to
reach out to one said underwriter to consider a modification in the
language and limits of their coverage. I don't know if this has been
done yet, but it was felt it was important to communicate this to
pilots as soon as possible. A straw poll of a few pilots determined
they were unaware of their policy limitations.

Frank Whiteley

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

>
> Dick Johnson often said that Sports Class is the "entry & exit class",
> so don't forget about us old duffers that still like to race, but no
> longer get excited about flying in the rat-pack classes. Where can I
> find a list of Club Class ships?
> JJ

What defnes a "club" class ship is one of those great mysteries in
life. The blessed list of gliders for US team selection is here

http://www.ussoaringteam.org/ustc%20pdf/ClubClassList2008.pdf

But... that was based on the 2008 IGC definition of club class, and
the IGC adds and deletes gliders every year. Presumably the team will
update that list at some point, or perhaps rethink the rule limiting
team selection to pilots who fly gliders on a specific but ever-
changing list.

US "club" class contests are for now free to define club anyway they
want to, so long as they can persuade the contest committee chair that
what they're doing is sensible. The Moriarty contest website

http://moriarty2011.susanmcallister.com/

defines club as:
Club Class (.935-1.05 handicap plus Ventus (15m), ASW 20 (15m), and
LS-6 (15m)

Your Genesis is pretty safe in club class!

John Cochrane

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Dec 20, 5:12*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> This whole Sports Class vs Club Class argument is absurd.
>
> There are FUNDAMENTAL differences between the intent of the two
> classes:
>
> Sports is meant to be a "beginners" class. *Thus the shorter, simpler
> (?) tasking, and letting any glider that shows up compete. *OK in
> theory, except when you end up with a Blanik racing a Nimbus 4DM...but
> if both pilots are beginners to racing, then it kinda works.
>
> Club class is meant to be a serious racing class for pilots who don't
> have the latest FAI gliders, but still wand serious competition with
> challenging tasks.
>
> There is a need for both; the Arizona Soaring Association addresses
> this with 3 level of tasks when necessary, so that the task difficulty
> better matches the glider performance and pilot skill of the
> competitors.
>
> I personally will not compete in a Sports Class contest unless it is
> held in my back yard. *I will travel to a Club/Modern contest
> (planning on attending Moriarty again this June - CH are you in?). *I
> will also go to 15M regionals or even the Nationals if possible, even
> if my LS6 is not quite as competitive as the latest V2s and 29s,
> because I enjoy a challenging race.
>
> My suggestion? Combine Club/Modern with Std/15 regionals, with
> slightly shorter tasks for the Club/Modern. *Bigger field, bigger
> contests, more fun. *Ditto Sports/Club; same venue and contest
> management, different tasks/scoresheets.
>
> Kirk
> 66

A quick phone call to AVEMCO revealed "they have been getting quite a
few calls this morning concernong the 100,000.00 limit. I was told the
1,000,000.00 limit would increase my liability only coverage from
$252.00 to $450.00.
What is Costello charging for liability only?
JJ

[Tony[_5_]]

my understanding is that insurance requirements haven't changed. The
SSA has notified us though that some insurance policies are available
that don't meet the requirements so buyer beware.

Sorry for flying my low performance glider at the regionals but its
what I have and is what I will fly. After beating Frank Paynter on
Day 3 at Region 10 by 14 points I offered to trade him the Cherokee
for his Ventus for the remainder of the contest. He declined. If
there was that great of an advantage to flying a high handicap glider,
more people would show up with 1-26's instead of ASW-27's. However if
you still believe that having a high handicap is a great advantage I
can probably figure out a way to get you plans for the Cherokee II.

Fear of getting beat (by anyone) seems like a lousy reason to not go
to a glider contest. If that was the case only about 4 people would
show up to most contests.

It was my impression that the tasking at the regional i went to was
satisfactory to everyone involved. The circles were large thanks to
gliders ranging from my Cherokee to Dave Coggins' Nimbus. If a pilot
felt we weren't flying far enough each day it was his own fault, IMO.
The weather was very consistent throughout the entire region which
definitely helped. My experience is a very small slice of the contest
world though, so I'm rather pollyanna-ish about the subject.

I am looking forward to the day I can get a club class glider though.
In the meantime I will have a lot of fun flying sports class in my
Cherokee.

[Cliff Hilty[_2_]]

Frank, It sure smack's of a monopoly ploy but on either account to change
the requirement without a diligent time frame (ie a policy period) since I
have already paid for mine in good faith, is unfair and will preclude me
from joining any contests until I decide if this is worth it to me.

Second to that is that there are more than two dogs in this fight and there
opinions differ. I have talked to both Costello and Avemco and made a
choice based on there approach to this question. We have had a similar
issue with land owners requirements in Prescott and its easier to just
pass on the libility and cost to the end user, us the glider pilots, when
whats at stake, in my opinion, is personal liability not the SSA's or the
land owners.

Give the lawyers a deep pocket and they will stick there hands into it!

CH Ventus B

At 16:14 20 December 2011, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>On Dec 20, 8:00=A0am, Cliff Hilty
> wrote:
>> I agree, there is a need for both and the sports class should be for
>"new=
>"
>> pilots to racing or/and very low performance handicapped gliders. While
>> club class should be flown in Club class gliders Which is by far the
>> largest segment of gliders out there just very few of them fly in
>contest=
>s
>> because of getting beat badly in FAI classes with no handicap or
getting
>> beat in soports by a 1.54 handicapped 1-26 flying a 2.5 hour TAT and
only
>> going 70 miles while club class has to go twice as far. Trying to
combine
>> such diverse handicaps is just to dependant on weather.
>>
>> And to answer your question about Moriarty I may not considering the
>SSA'=
>s
>> last minute decision to change the Insurance requirements without
>> notification for SSA sanctioned contests-----but that should be another
>> thread entirely!
>>
>The SSA did not change the requirements, they remain as before. It
>was determined that at least one underwriter's policies, as written,
>did not meet the coverage requirements for SSA sanctioned contests,
>thus a clarifying document was presented. The SSA was planning to
>reach out to one said underwriter to consider a modification in the
>language and limits of their coverage. I don't know if this has been
>done yet, but it was felt it was important to communicate this to
>pilots as soon as possible. A straw poll of a few pilots determined
>they were unaware of their policy limitations.
>
>Frank Whiteley
>
>

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Dec 20, 8:23*am, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
> On Dec 20, 5:12*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > This whole Sports Class vs Club Class argument is absurd.
>
> > There are FUNDAMENTAL differences between the intent of the two
> > classes:
>
> > Sports is meant to be a "beginners" class. *Thus the shorter, simpler
> > (?) tasking, and letting any glider that shows up compete. *OK in
> > theory, except when you end up with a Blanik racing a Nimbus 4DM...but
> > if both pilots are beginners to racing, then it kinda works.
>
> > Club class is meant to be a serious racing class for pilots who don't
> > have the latest FAI gliders, but still wand serious competition with
> > challenging tasks.
>
> > There is a need for both; the Arizona Soaring Association addresses
> > this with 3 level of tasks when necessary, so that the task difficulty
> > better matches the glider performance and pilot skill of the
> > competitors.
>
> > I personally will not compete in a Sports Class contest unless it is
> > held in my back yard. *I will travel to a Club/Modern contest
> > (planning on attending Moriarty again this June - CH are you in?). *I
> > will also go to 15M regionals or even the Nationals if possible, even
> > if my LS6 is not quite as competitive as the latest V2s and 29s,
> > because I enjoy a challenging race.
>
> > My suggestion? Combine Club/Modern with Std/15 regionals, with
> > slightly shorter tasks for the Club/Modern. *Bigger field, bigger
> > contests, more fun. *Ditto Sports/Club; same venue and contest
> > management, different tasks/scoresheets.
>
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> A quick phone call to AVEMCO revealed "they have been getting quite a
> few calls this morning concernong the 100,000.00 limit. I was told the
> 1,000,000.00 limit would increase my liability only coverage from
> $252.00 to $450.00.
> What is Costello charging for liability only?
> JJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I didn't see any motor-gliders on the Club Class list. If so, you guys
just got my attention.
JJ

[kirk.stant]

On Dec 20, 10:25*am, Tony > wrote:

> It was my impression that the tasking at the regional i went to was
> satisfactory to everyone involved. *The circles were large thanks to
> gliders ranging from my Cherokee to Dave Coggins' Nimbus. *If a pilot
> felt we weren't flying far enough each day it was his own fault, IMO.
> The weather was very consistent throughout the entire region which
> definitely helped. My experience is a very small slice of the contest
> world though, so I'm rather pollyanna-ish about the subject.

Tony, it is fundamentally impossible to create a fair, challenging
race (not organized timed XC) task when the range of gliders is
Cherokee to Nimbus. Sure, you can throw out a short AAT with huge
turn areas and send them out - but that isn't racing!

I've got nothing agains the lower performance gliders - but I've CD'd
enough ASA contests to appreciate how hard it is to make challenging
tasks without stooping to the "fits-all" AAT.

The point is - get as many gliders as possible together at the same
time, sort them into similar performance groups, then task
accordingly. What is so hard about that? It's already done with FAI
classes! Then we can see the return of the speed task, and put AATs
back where they belong - as weather option tasks!

> I am looking forward to the day I can get a club class glider though.
> In the meantime I will have a lot of fun flying sports class in my
> Cherokee.

Looking forward to racing with you!

Cheers,

Kirk
66

[Tony[_5_]]

On Dec 20, 1:14*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Dec 20, 10:25*am, Tony > wrote:
>
> > It was my impression that the tasking at the regional i went to was
> > satisfactory to everyone involved. *The circles were large thanks to
> > gliders ranging from my Cherokee to Dave Coggins' Nimbus. *If a pilot
> > felt we weren't flying far enough each day it was his own fault, IMO.
> > The weather was very consistent throughout the entire region which
> > definitely helped. My experience is a very small slice of the contest
> > world though, so I'm rather pollyanna-ish about the subject.
>
> Tony, it is fundamentally impossible to create a fair, challenging
> race (not organized timed XC) task when the range of gliders is
> Cherokee to Nimbus. *Sure, you can throw out a short AAT with huge
> turn areas and send them out - but that isn't racing!
>
> I've got nothing agains the lower performance gliders - but I've CD'd
> enough ASA contests to appreciate how hard it is to make challenging
> tasks without stooping to the "fits-all" AAT.
>
> The point is - get as many gliders as possible together at the same
> time, sort them into similar performance groups, then task
> accordingly. *What is so hard about that? *It's already done with FAI
> classes! *Then we can see the return of the speed task, and put AATs
> back where they belong - as weather option *tasks!
>
> > I am looking forward to the day I can get a club class glider though.
> > In the meantime I will have a lot of fun flying sports class in my
> > Cherokee.
>
> Looking forward to racing with you!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kirk
> 66

Kirk,

now I understand better. I didn't realize you were focused on
assigned tasks instead of TAT's. Agree that with a wide range of
handicaps the assigned task is impossible to task fairly, which I
suppose is why it isn't used in the sports class.

I do like the idea of separating gliders by handicap range instead of
wingspan as has become an option in the last few years. If Moriarty
would run a low/medium/high performance contest instead of just medium/
high i would probably go. only problem is i might be the only one
there.

[rlovinggood]

Who is responsible for the USA "Club Class" list that BB linked?

The max weight they show for the LS1-B/C/F is incorrect.

The weight of 772 lbs is most likely for the "F" model.

My glider was built as a "C" then granted to become a "D" via a letter
from LS back in the good ol' days. The max weight was increased,
again only by letter and not by any physical change in the glider, to
752 lbs to allow for water ballast. The B and C probably have lower
max weights.

And why is the "D" model not listed?

Thanks,
Ray Lovinggood

[Mike[_37_]]

On Dec 20, 12:30*pm, Tony > wrote:
> On Dec 20, 1:14*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 10:25*am, Tony > wrote:
>
> > > It was my impression that the tasking at the regional i went to was
> > > satisfactory to everyone involved. *The circles were large thanks to
> > > gliders ranging from my Cherokee to Dave Coggins' Nimbus. *If a pilot
> > > felt we weren't flying far enough each day it was his own fault, IMO.
> > > The weather was very consistent throughout the entire region which
> > > definitely helped. My experience is a very small slice of the contest
> > > world though, so I'm rather pollyanna-ish about the subject.
>
> > Tony, it is fundamentally impossible to create a fair, challenging
> > race (not organized timed XC) task when the range of gliders is
> > Cherokee to Nimbus. *Sure, you can throw out a short AAT with huge
> > turn areas and send them out - but that isn't racing!
>
> > I've got nothing agains the lower performance gliders - but I've CD'd
> > enough ASA contests to appreciate how hard it is to make challenging
> > tasks without stooping to the "fits-all" AAT.
>
> > The point is - get as many gliders as possible together at the same
> > time, sort them into similar performance groups, then task
> > accordingly. *What is so hard about that? *It's already done with FAI
> > classes! *Then we can see the return of the speed task, and put AATs
> > back where they belong - as weather option *tasks!
>
> > > I am looking forward to the day I can get a club class glider though.
> > > In the meantime I will have a lot of fun flying sports class in my
> > > Cherokee.
>
> > Looking forward to racing with you!
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > Kirk


"I do like the idea of separating gliders by handicap range instead of
wingspan as has become an option in the last few years."

The above is really descriptive of where we are at now, in regards to
handicap racing in the USA.

There is another option for handicap racing in the US.

The existing four main FAI classes flown in the USA are really classes
formed by handicaps already, handicaps defined by performance,
dictated by flaps and wingspan, categorized into their perspective
class. It would not be a large conceptual leap to form classes
dictated by performance, regardless of flaps, age and wingspan.
Instead of Std., 15 meter, 18 meter and Open, divide the encompassing
fleet into three classes. This would allow more pilots to compete.
This is really a logical step, considering the fairly low number of
sailplanes and pilots, racing now. I think both the Std and Open Class
Nationals, last year, had 16 pilots each, including guests. There were
14 pilots in the 18 meter class. Allowing older sailplanes to compete
in these existing classes, with handicaps, would probably improve
attendance.

We have gradually grown into a "caste" system of sailplane racing and
the resulting effort to keep the classes pure (handicap wise), has
brought us to the lower numbers racing in FAI and the emergence of
Sports and Club Class.

If the resistance to adding another class is really because of the
ever dwindling number of racing pilots and sailplanes in the existing
classes, maybe handicapping the existing classes, that were
initially formed due to their handicaps, will vitalize class racing
again.

Just a thought.

Mike









> > 66
>
> Kirk,
>
> now I understand better. *I didn't realize you were focused on
> assigned tasks instead of TAT's. *Agree that with a wide range of
> handicaps the assigned task is impossible to task fairly, which I
> suppose is why it isn't used in the sports class.
>
> I do like the idea of separating gliders by handicap range instead of
> wingspan as has become an option in the last few years. *If Moriarty
> would run a low/medium/high performance contest instead of just medium/
> high i would probably go. only problem is i might be the only one
> there.

[Tony[_5_]]

On Dec 20, 7:13*pm, "Peter von Tresckow" > wrote:
> Like Tony I am a lowly vintage sailplane owner (Ka-6Cr), but am interested
> in racing. I have participated in the Chicago soaring club's Memorial Day
> contest, and had a blast. After hearing about Tony's Cherokee adventures I
> am looking to find a sports contest to go to this summer.
>
> I personally like the concept of having "tiered" handicapping and tasking,
> putting similar performing gliders in the same group. To me being able to
> rce against similar performing ships would be an incentive to participate in
> racing. On the other had I find it discouraging going up against a nimbus in
> sports with my Ka-6 even with the handicap.
>
> Racing is/should be fun. Once people see that participation ought to go up.
>
> Peter

yea pete but even if you do have to fly against Nimbii, you'll still
have fun :)

[Tim[_2_]]

On Dec 20, 10:15*am, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> > Dick Johnson often said that Sports Class is the "entry & exit class",
> > so don't forget about us old duffers that still like to race, but no
> > longer get excited about flying in the rat-pack classes. Where can I
> > find a list of Club Class ships?
> > JJ
>
> What defnes a "club" class ship is one of those great mysteries in
> life. The blessed list of gliders for US team selection is here
>
> http://www.ussoaringteam.org/ustc%20pdf/ClubClassList2008.pdf
>
> But... that was based on the 2008 IGC definition of club class, and
> the IGC adds and deletes gliders every year. Presumably the team will
> update that list at some point, or perhaps rethink the rule limiting
> team selection to pilots who fly gliders on a specific but ever-
> changing list.
>
> US "club" class contests are for now free to define club anyway they
> want to, so long as they can persuade the contest committee chair that
> what they're doing is sensible. The Moriarty contest website
>
> http://moriarty2011.susanmcallister.com/
>
> defines club as:
> Club Class (.935-1.05 handicap plus Ventus (15m), ASW 20 (15m), and
> LS-6 (15m)
>
> Your Genesis is pretty safe in club class!
>
> John Cochrane

Everybody:

The only reason we, the organizers of last year's Moriarty contest,
defined club as .935-1.05 handicap range PLUS the other three is that
the SSA Club Class Eligible Glider List allows for these other three
15m configuration ships and it was felt that this first stab at a
western US Cub Class contest should include those ships for
participation's sake.

In keeping with the general idea that a US Club Class should adhere as
closely as possible to the ever changing, as BB correctly states, IGC
Club Class List, the idea should be to keep to the .935-1.05 range
intact with basically no additions or subtractions. Why this range? It
basically encompasses the the IGC Club Class Glider List, PLUS some
ships that had been on the list but are not now (i.e. Hph 304cz+c) and
the HP's. This range truly captures the essence of Cub Class as it is
practiced everywhere but here in the USA.

There is pretty strong support among US Club Class proponents that we
would like a US Club Class that VERY closely tracks the IGC List. That
means no motorgliders, a defined list of gliders,and 15m or less only.
That said, given the distances involved in US Competitive soaring, the
inclusion of all ships within the defined handicap range should
probably be considered so as to promote growth in participation.

Thanks for the ongoing interest in the US Club Class movement.

EY & EY Ground