On Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 8:26:32 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I agree with the ideas from Tim Taylor and Phil Chidekel. The US is one of the few countries that has a national for every FAI class and our own Sports Class.

What we see as a result is smaller and smaller national attendance due to the decline in numbers of pilots due to other causes but also because we keep spreading the remaining numbers between more classes. Many countries with successful teams on the World level have combined similar performing gliders into a single handicap class. An example would be 15 Meter, Standard Class and 20 Meter. They are all within a reasonable performance range and with a small handicap adjustment can fly together with Discus 2, Ventus 3 and Arcus flip flopping at the top of the scoresheeet. There are many advantages to this arrangement including flying against 50 gliders instead of 15, less trouble finding three different contest venues, increased returns for the host, etc.

The US Club Class I do like how it is set up with a performance range that essentially matches the FAI handicaps. The FAI is from a Libelle 201 to an ASW-20A and the US extended that to an LS-6 which is only a few years older and not competitive in pure 15 Meter. That did lump in many that are not on the FAI list including the HP series and then at the higher end the more modern Discus 2/ASW-28 but these perform basically identical to a flapped ASW-20 which is on the list and the current World Champ in Club Class.

I do agree with Phil that I don't see why a Kestrel, Open Cirrus or similar glider with 16, 17, 18 Meter of span should be allowed because they are in the performance range. The FAI handicap list does include a 16 meter Cirrus B, so I would view it the same as winglets or other performance modifications that are allowed.

It is my understanding from the rules and a discussion that motors are allowed in US Club Class Nationals (Pik-20E for example) but possibly would not be eligible for Club Class selection.

Overall, I'd rather see more of a combined class approach and have 3-4 big nationals instead of 8 small nationals.

I agree we should have fewer but larger contests, however, I don't see a problem with hosting concurrent National Championships at one contest site. In other words, why not host the Club Class along with Std. Class, or say 15M with Std. Class or 20M, or 18M with Open, or any combination thereof. I would also look closely at making sure we accommodate pilots owning 20M ships to make sure we don't overlap 20M with those other FAI Classes. For purposes of pilot development and US Team selection I've got to think we want highly competitive nationals and don't want to see 20M overlap those other FAI Classes, except for maybe 15M, but to the extent 20M overlapping can be avoided it should. I also wouldn't hold 15M with 18M as a lot of 18M pilots fly 15M Nationals too.

As for Sports Class, it seems to me that the Seniors, Perry, and Nephi have turned into defacto Sports Class Championships of sorts. Keep in mind teams are not presently selected from Sports Class events. For this reason, dropping Sports Class Nationals and marketing the Seniors, Perry, and other Sports Class contests as special contests for those looking to compete at a National level but who aren't interested in being considered for the US Team makes a lot of sense to me.

Embrace these contests, call them "Sports Class Championships" by adding the phrase to the contests names, and by all means continue to make the social aspects of the contest desirable for people traveling from all over the country - but think of them as 2nd tier National-level contests similar to the Players Championship in golf or the Miami Open in tennis. In other words, they are not "Majors" like the US Open, Wimbledon, or the Masters, etc. I have a hard time thinking attendance at these events would change simply because Sports Class Nationals was dropped from the nomenclature. I just don't see that happening.

Just my 2 cents.

- Chris Schrader