FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:06:53 AM UTC-8, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 6:51:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:

On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:21:26 PM UTC-8, John Cochrane wrote:



Sports class "as is" with club class means a huge hole out of the



middle, and the sparrowhawk competing with no other gliders between it



and an ASW27. That just doesn't work.







It will continue to work as it has in the past. Holes in the middle, low end or high end are irrelevant to an all inclusive Sports Class. If rules and tasking are unchanged then you will get the SAME result, regardless of sailplane mix. It has worked in the past. It will continue to work the same way in the future.







We haven't had 50 pilots at sports



nationals in club gliders ever. First you show up and race, then we



talk about how to tweak the rules.







Too many Club Class pilots feel like we have been there and done that. We were told build and fly a super regional. We did. We were told do it again. We did. Where does it end? Current RC "Club Class" resembles NOTHING of want was built and flown in the super regionals.







The Mifflin experiment gives about 95% of what you wanted -- limited



handicap range allowing more gaggle flying and assigned tasks / long



MATs.







Stating "95% of want you wanted" is completely inaccurate. Cutting the handicap list down the middle isn't limited handicap range. It certainly doesn't make it Club Class. AT can't happen if just ONE low performance glider shows up. MAT's were EXCLUDED from the super regional. MAT's are no substitute for AT. Besides the RC label "Club Class", which obviously has no resemblance to a real Club Class, I don't think we have anything.







If that works, attracts 25+ gliders. If



you and the 50 signatories stay home, the game is up.







I predict the 50 signatories will either stay home or participate at the same level IF the current RC proposal goes into effect. It's insane to expect a different result unless you change. Do you really think those who want a genuine Club Class will market and recruit for a US rules based mass handicap contest labeled "Club Class"? Come on, let's get real.







F2 took Region 6 from 10 pilots to 40 through his marketing efforts. He was excited and motivated. Do you really think he will do the same for the RC's "Club Class"? What about others including me? What about those already staying home?











If full-on FAI rules are in fact so immensely attractive, and people



really are staying home from Mifflin because they can't stand the



thought of a beat up 20B or sparrowhawk sharing the grid with them,



and they're dying to reprogram their instruments to kilometers to



practice for the worlds...



John Cochrane











No one is suggesting leaving out the ASW20B or mandating kilometers. We should keep in mind Guy's post "The trick is to preserve the spirit and the simplicity of the FAI rules, but at the same time make them a bit more palatable to US pilots."







Sean Franke (HA)



You're basically making the case that "Sports Class Sucks" due to the impossibly wide handicap spread. I don't disagree (but I don't make policy). FWIW, I've always thought that Sports at the Nats level was a waste of time for just this reason and I never go. I've flown a couple of narrow handicap range regional contests that included (at most) LS-4s to 18 m ships. That worked pretty well imo and I'd do it again.



Cutting the middle out of Sports makes the problem more glaring, but I do concede the point that it doesn't fundamentally change anything. I've known all along that 27s and better are not meaningfully competing in any way with 1-34s and Ka anythings and I have always thought it silly to put them on the same scoresheet at the *Nationals* level. Regionals are a different story. I fully support an entry level / less intimidating sports class at the regional level.



One 20B guy's take (i.e. mine): If I go to Mifflin I'll fly modern. I'll do that because I think I'll like the tasking better and I learn more chasing faster gliders.



Btw: no one likes the MAT. I've seen it called creatively and well once or twice, but more often it creates a huge luck factor (choose your own turnpoints) or turns a beautiful soaring day into an annoying rat maze of 20 and 30 miles legs (long MAT).



From what I can see of the numbers, we would need to include Venti (a/b/c), LS-6s and 20B/C in order to make an "FAI" club class viable in the Eastern US, and probably Western as well. I am merely curious: is this a deal breaker for you? What about winglets? At the beginning of the thread, the objective very clearly conveyed was "FAI rules without exception", now we appear to be having an actual exchange of ideas. I suggest we leave Mifflin 2013 out of the discussion for the moment. Looking for more common ground here.



Evan Ludeman / T8

I think Guy Byars statement carries wisdom and direction. "The trick is to preserve the spirit and the simplicity of the FAI rules, but at the same time make them a bit more palatable to US pilots."

ASW 20 B and C are excluded at the current WGC. B and C's have not been excluded in the past. There certainly is no reason to exclude ANY 15 meter ASW 20 from the US Club Class.

Winglets are already allowed in FAI Club Class with a handicap penalty.

There has been discussion on Ventus 1 and LS 6. I see the argument both ways. I don't believe including those gliders will make the Club Class necessarily more successful. We already have momentum to make the FAI US Club Class the most popular racing class. Keep in mind we have people ready to market and grow the class. F2 grew Region 6N from 10 pilots to 40. It's reasonable to expect significant FAI US Club Class growth. We are not just pulling gliders from the Sports Class roster.

We are proposing starting a new class, not excluding them (V1 and LS6)from an existing contest. So here is the question: Should V1's and LS6 stay in Sports Class under US Rules or be allowed in the new FAI US Club Class? I'd like to hear comments.

Sean Franke (HA)

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 1:40:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:
We already have momentum to make the FAI US Club Class the most popular racing class.

Your evidence for this assertion?

T8

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:41:46 AM UTC-8, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Thursday, December 13, 2012 1:40:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:

We already have momentum to make the FAI US Club Class the most popular racing class.



Your evidence for this assertion?



T8

Based on petition support:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/262/8...out-exception/

Also, committed marketing talent and discussions with like minded pilots ready to take this to the next level.

Sean Franke (HA)

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 3:03:13 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:41:46 AM UTC-8, Evan Ludeman wrote:

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 1:40:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:



We already have momentum to make the FAI US Club Class the most popular racing class.







Your evidence for this assertion?







T8



Based on petition support:



http://www.thepetitionsite.com/262/8...out-exception/



Also, committed marketing talent and discussions with like minded pilots ready to take this to the next level.



Sean Franke (HA)

lol.

I was hoping for a more reality based discussion.

T8

I received an email with good questions about the petition and FAI US Club Class. Here are my answers:

Q. I feel bad for those that own nice ships that would be excluded from the fun?
A. I agree FAI rules are fun compared to US Rules. Guys with nice ASG29’s and V2’s really need to talk to the rules committee if they want FAI rules for their class. I don’t think anyone in Club Class would object to high performance (or low performance) gliders as a “G” guest in the Club Class. Currently “G” guests get scored but not ranked. Keep in mind tasking would ONLY be based on pure Club Class gliders.

Q. What about a poor guy that spent his retirement money on a LS 6 or a ASW 20c?
A. ASW 20 b and c have been allowed in past WGC and should be INCLUDED in the FAI US Club Class. I think Guy Byars statement carries wisdom and direction. "The trick is to preserve the spirit and the simplicity of the FAI rules, but at the same time make them a bit more palatable to US pilots."

Q. By the official FAI definition aren’t Ventus 1s also excluded?
A. Yes. However, there is discussion about LS6 and V1’s either staying in US Rules Sports Class or being allowed in FAI US Club Class.

Q. What happens to the Sports Class when this all goes down?
A. Nothing changes in Sports Class. Club Class eligible gliders have the choice of staying in Sports Class or fly US FAI Club Class. All other gliders stay in the Sports Class

Q. Will there be less participation overall?
A. No, in fact the opposite. We will grow participation. FAI US Club Class advocates are ready to market and grow the class. We are not just pulling from the Sports Class roster. One Club Class advocate alone grew Region 6 participation from 8 gliders to 45.

Q. Aren’t we a shrinking, dying sport as it is? Do we really want to put up more barriers?
A. Exactly, putting up barriers to growth won’t help our shrinking sport. We want to give pilots a contest choice. We want pilots given the option to say YES not told NO. Let’s attract those who stay at home disenchanted with US Rules. Let’s channel enthusiasm in a positive growth direction. There is little chance enthusiastic FAI Club Class advocates will take time to market participation for another US Rules based class.

Sean Franke (HA)

If you are in agreement join us on the petition: http://www.thepetitionsite..com/262/...out-exception/

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 4:30:37 PM UTC-5, wrote:
I received an email with good questions about the petition and FAI US Club Class. Here are my answers:



Q. I feel bad for those that own nice ships that would be excluded from the fun?

A. I agree FAI rules are fun compared to US Rules. Guys with nice ASG29’s and V2’s really need to talk to the rules committee if they want FAI rules for their class. I don’t think anyone in Club Class would object to high performance (or low performance) gliders as a “G” guest in the Club Class. Currently “G” guests get scored but not ranked. Keep in mind tasking would ONLY be based on pure Club Class gliders.



Q. What about a poor guy that spent his retirement money on a LS 6 or a ASW 20c?

A. ASW 20 b and c have been allowed in past WGC and should be INCLUDED in the FAI US Club Class. I think Guy Byars statement carries wisdom and direction. "The trick is to preserve the spirit and the simplicity of the FAI rules, but at the same time make them a bit more palatable to US pilots."



Q. By the official FAI definition aren’t Ventus 1s also excluded?

A. Yes. However, there is discussion about LS6 and V1’s either staying in US Rules Sports Class or being allowed in FAI US Club Class.



Q. What happens to the Sports Class when this all goes down?

A. Nothing changes in Sports Class. Club Class eligible gliders have the choice of staying in Sports Class or fly US FAI Club Class. All other gliders stay in the Sports Class



Q. Will there be less participation overall?

A. No, in fact the opposite. We will grow participation. FAI US Club Class advocates are ready to market and grow the class. We are not just pulling from the Sports Class roster. One Club Class advocate alone grew Region 6 participation from 8 gliders to 45.



Q. Aren’t we a shrinking, dying sport as it is? Do we really want to put up more barriers?

A. Exactly, putting up barriers to growth won’t help our shrinking sport. We want to give pilots a contest choice. We want pilots given the option to say YES not told NO. Let’s attract those who stay at home disenchanted with US Rules. Let’s channel enthusiasm in a positive growth direction. There is little chance enthusiastic FAI Club Class advocates will take time to market participation for another US Rules based class.



Sean Franke (HA)



If you are in agreement join us on the petition: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/262/8...out-exception/

This petition is totally meaningless and useless due to the fact that it is a one answer railroad job. If the creators were looking for useful information they would have also asked how many pilots are satisfied with the action of the rules committee, and/or didn't want any changes made to the sports class at all.

My prediction is that if said options were offered to the pilots who have/will fly sports class this petition would be overwhelmingly rejected.

KS

On Thursday, December 13, 2012 2:15:03 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Thursday, December 13, 2012 4:30:37 PM UTC-5, wrote:

I received an email with good questions about the petition and FAI US Club Class. Here are my answers:







Q. I feel bad for those that own nice ships that would be excluded from the fun?



A. I agree FAI rules are fun compared to US Rules. Guys with nice ASG29’s and V2’s really need to talk to the rules committee if they want FAI rules for their class. I don’t think anyone in Club Class would object to high performance (or low performance) gliders as a “G” guest in the Club Class. Currently “G” guests get scored but not ranked. Keep in mind tasking would ONLY be based on pure Club Class gliders.







Q. What about a poor guy that spent his retirement money on a LS 6 or a ASW 20c?



A. ASW 20 b and c have been allowed in past WGC and should be INCLUDED in the FAI US Club Class. I think Guy Byars statement carries wisdom and direction. "The trick is to preserve the spirit and the simplicity of the FAI rules, but at the same time make them a bit more palatable to US pilots."







Q. By the official FAI definition aren’t Ventus 1s also excluded?



A. Yes. However, there is discussion about LS6 and V1’s either staying in US Rules Sports Class or being allowed in FAI US Club Class.







Q. What happens to the Sports Class when this all goes down?



A. Nothing changes in Sports Class. Club Class eligible gliders have the choice of staying in Sports Class or fly US FAI Club Class. All other gliders stay in the Sports Class







Q. Will there be less participation overall?



A. No, in fact the opposite. We will grow participation. FAI US Club Class advocates are ready to market and grow the class. We are not just pulling from the Sports Class roster. One Club Class advocate alone grew Region 6 participation from 8 gliders to 45.







Q. Aren’t we a shrinking, dying sport as it is? Do we really want to put up more barriers?



A. Exactly, putting up barriers to growth won’t help our shrinking sport. We want to give pilots a contest choice. We want pilots given the option to say YES not told NO. Let’s attract those who stay at home disenchanted with US Rules. Let’s channel enthusiasm in a positive growth direction. There is little chance enthusiastic FAI Club Class advocates will take time to market participation for another US Rules based class.







Sean Franke (HA)







If you are in agreement join us on the petition: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/262/8...out-exception/



This petition is totally meaningless and useless due to the fact that it is a one answer railroad job. If the creators were looking for useful information they would have also asked how many pilots are satisfied with the action of the rules committee, and/or didn't want any changes made to the sports class at all.



My prediction is that if said options were offered to the pilots who have/will fly sports class this petition would be overwhelmingly rejected.



KS

Yes, Sports Class pilots should be offered the option of flying in FAI US Club Class at Mifflin. There is no reason to change the Sports Class, leave it as-is. Give pilots a choice. This petition is about developing a new class proven in several super-regionals. It's now time to take it to the next level.

Sean Franke (HA)

On Tuesday, November 20, 2012 9:42:32 AM UTC-5, wrote:


Please sign the petition IF YOU are interested in supporting or flying US Club Class under FAI (IGC) rules / tasking philosophy.


Been "enjoying" the witty banter back and forth on this one but staying out of the fray...until now.

It strikes me that this whole debate is taking us in a direction that, quite frankly, is pretty much irrelevant. Those of us who truly love sailplane racing and are committed to the sport should have one and only one primary objective, and that is growing the number of participants. Do we really believe that the specific rule set we fly under is a major factor in whether people do or don't show up for races? I sure don't.

While opinions are nice, some hard data is better. This past summer, I went to the effort to create a formal survey that tried to get to the bottom of participation in contests. The survey was aimed at the pilots in eastern Region II and Region I (those who fly in the Governor's Cup area that I've been watching over for the last 15 years) who own or co-own a glider (there are a few folks who might be able to wrangle a club ship for a competition, but selected group is easier to isolate). I managed to track down the owners of about 80% of the sailplanes registered in this area and got those owners to participate in the survey - no mean feat! With 65 responses, it covered about 75% of the available fleet in our area, ie. a very significant majority.

The numbers that matter:

- 68% (44) of the respondents routinely fly more than 50KM from home base (i.e. cross country)
- 51% (32) of the respondents routinely post flights to either the OLC or the Governor's Cup (our local version of the OLC with team and individual points)
- 52% (33) of the respondents have participated in one or more SSA Regional or National competitions in the last three years.

Take a minute to absorb this. Basically, a fairly significant number already compete in some form of SSA contest. There are a decent number (11 or 12) who fly XC but don't compete in anything. This is obviously the most attractive group to target.

I then asked those who hadn't competed in a regionals or nationals to rank the reasons for non-participation from 8 defined reasons plus a 9th "other" reason. The three LEAST important inhibitors we

- Panel and instruments not competitive (i.e. flight computer and other geewhiz gadgetry)
- Glider not competitive
- Rules complexity

So, the issues we are fighting over (rules and glider competitiveness) are among the two least important issues to the people we really need to reach , in particular those who fly XC but don't race. It's prety clear that if we switched to an FAI Rules set and a constrained list of ships, we wouldn't suddenly find 10 or 15 LS4s or Discus B's that would come out of the woodwork to join our nationals or super-regional Club Class contests. All we would be doing is to re-shuffle the existing participation and maybe lose a few folks in the process.

In case you were wondering, the top 3 reasons cited for not attending a regionals or nationals we

- Time
- Skills (not comfortable going XC in a racing format)
- Other (more when I get to it)

We'd all be much better served by focusing on how we could build excitement and interest in sailplane racing through a progressive training program, more local contests, and other efforts of that sort rather than bludgeoning the Rules Committe with a petition that is entirely one sided by definition..

I think I'll go sand wings or something...

Erik Mann P3
LS8-18 (formerly club class LS4)

Originally this was a reply to the Club Class Nationals thread but I'm
starting a new topic as I ended up going off on a tangent. Please keep
in mind that opinions are like butt-holes and everyone has one, I'm
only throwing in my $.05 to provide the US RC with another data-point...

The current Sports class format isn't for everyone and is driving (some)
people away. I really hated Sports class, apart from my first US
contest I always chose a different class if available. In fact, the
Sports class format was one of the reasons I sold my SZD-55 and moved
onto the ASW-27. Those without a competitive ship in 15m or Std. class
need an alternative to Sports class. There are a few ways of doing this
- introducing limited handicapping to the other classes is one of them,
adding a "new" narrow range class (Club) achieves the same thing leaving
the other classes “pure”.

Additionally to the wide handicap range, however, I feel that the
tasking across all the classes plays a major role in the current
downward trend in contest attendance. I think that pilots are
frustrated by driving many miles, spending a lot of money, and burning
their vacation time just to fly a 2-3 hr task. The turn areas in AAT’s
are too big while the distances between the areas are too short. There
are definitely not enough Assigned Tasks being called. The long MAT is
fine, but not a substitute for AST, furthermore, it is not usually
called instead we are given 1 or 2 tp’s… More of the flyable day needs
to be utilized instead of worrying about making it home in time for dinner.

I realize that writing rules is always a compromise, and you will never
make everyone (or is it anyone?) happy, furthermore, there are many
factors other than rules that play a big role in the types of task that
are being called at contests. Even though I don’t agree with some of
the rules, I would like to congratulate the US RC on their methodical
and thoughtful approach to writing them. At the same time I urge you to
listen to the opinion of pilots who are not satisfied with the current
format.

Respectfully
Luke Szczepaniak

On Dec 14, 9:42*am, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:
Originally this was a reply to the Club Class Nationals thread but I'm
starting a new topic as I ended up going off on a tangent. *Please keep
in mind that opinions are like butt-holes and everyone has one, *I'm
only throwing in my $.05 to provide the US RC with another data-point...

The current Sports class format isn't for everyone and is driving (some)
people away. *I really hated Sports class, apart from my first US
contest I always chose a different class if available. *In fact, the
Sports class format was one of the reasons I sold my SZD-55 and moved
onto the ASW-27. *Those without a competitive ship in 15m or Std. class
need an alternative to Sports class. *There are a few ways of doing this
- introducing limited handicapping to the other classes is one of them,
adding a "new" narrow range class (Club) achieves the same thing leaving
the other classes “pure”.

Additionally to the wide handicap range, however, I feel that the
tasking across all the classes plays a major role in the current
downward trend in contest attendance. *I think that pilots are
frustrated by driving many miles, spending a lot of money, and burning
their vacation time just to fly a 2-3 hr task. *The turn areas in AAT’s
are too big while the distances between the areas are too short. *There
are definitely not enough Assigned Tasks being called. *The long MAT is
fine, but not a substitute for AST, furthermore, it is not usually
called instead we are given 1 or 2 tp’s… *More of the flyable day needs
to be utilized instead of worrying about making it home in time for dinner.