Time to revamp traffic patterns at non-towered airports?

"BTIZ" wrote in message:
There are aircraft currently flying that qualify as a "light sport"..that
fit just fine in the standard traffic pattern..

Agreed, but there will also be sport aircraft with approach speeds as
low as 25 knots. At some point, the speed differential between
aircraft in the pattern should become a concern. I see the potential
for doubling the speed differential between aircraft at the extreme
ends of the spectrum and I think this should be a concern. But I'm
open to anyone that can show how an increase in speed differential
won't increase the risk.

I don't like the idea of a "lower altitude pattern" for a LiteSportAircraft,
that may have a high wing, and the "regular" low wing ASEL aircraft above
him. We have enough problems with Cessna's and Pipers mixing it up on final
as is.. at least one or two a year.. and they "fly the same pattern"
supposedly.

I've never liked the idea of putting different aircraft with different
performance at different pattern altitudes either (e.g. singles at
1,000 AGL and twins at 1,500 AGL). I can see how it would prevent
faster aircraft from overrunning slower aircraft, but, from what I've
read, mid-airs in the pattern are more typically the result of
climbing/descending into blind spots. Perhaps different pattern
altitudes based on aircraft wing position would work better, i.e.,
high wings fly a 1,500-foot pattern and low wings fly a 1,000-foot
pattern. That still leaves other problems (where do biplanes fit in,
for instance), but it might be better than the current situation.