On Sunday, December 2, 2012 10:32:03 AM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
On Dec 1, 7:36*pm, Andrzej Kobus wrote:

On Dec 1, 7:47*pm, "Sean F (F2)" wrote:



F2



If I remember correctly pilots called for Club Class in 2007 and in

2008. The rules committee told the pilots to organize a regional

contest and if all goes well and there is solid participation the

project will be taken to the next level. Well in 2009 the first Club

Class contest took place in Cordele. There were 17 pilots flying Club

Class tasks (including assigned tasks). Since the contest run along

side of the 15 m Nationals and some members of the rules committee

were on site there was a discussion about the future of Club Class.

Despite good pilot participation and calls for Club Class Nationals

the Rules Committee found many arguments against it effectively

killing the enthusiasm. In the past there were polls on this subject

in favor of creation of the Club Class but somehow arguments against

the class always won. Some pilots sold their club class gliders and

moved on since they had no hope of ever getting there.



So when I hear another call to create a regional Club Class contest I

say I heard that before, but no thx.



Overall the rules committee is doing a good job but in regards to Club

Class issue I think the RC failed to lead. How many years will this

issue be debated? As Sam Giltner said if you want a class you need

stability. Pilots need to know what gliders to buy. No one can plan

anything if the list of gliders constantly is being changed. It is not

true that the IGC list changes often.



Anyway since I am no longer having a Club Class glider I don't have a

personal interest in this topic (at least for now) but it pains me to

see how this problem is being approached. Please, look around at most

contests there are no young faces any longer. The young faces are

flying Club Class gliders and they are staying home. Another 10 years

and the competition scene will be dead. The economy is terrible there

is no upward mobility, gas is expensive, very few pilots will be able

to afford new gliders. It is time for new ideas. The contest

participation is collapsing at every contest you see mostly the same

group of pilots.



The creation of a club class at sports class nationals in 2013 is

exactly the culmination of the process you mention. Yes, we listened.

We said create club regionals. You did. It was a success. A modest

success -- we didn't see 30 coming out -- but it did prove the

concept has legs.



Club class regionals are now a permanent, non-waiver class that

organizers can choose anytime they want to, and pilots can ask

organizers to do. We kept our end of the deal. Why have they not

happened? They're in the rules, we did all we could. Now it's up to

you guys to keep going past the first burst of enthusiasm. We write

the rules, we don't run contests and we don't call pilots and persuade

them to show up.



In any case, now we have created a club nationals too, just as we said

we would. Given the dwindling enthusiasm shown for club regionals, the

still low participation of club gliders at sports nationals, and the

vexing problem of what to do with gliders like the sparrowhawk, which

do not fit IGC club class, we included the lower performance gliders.



One step at a time. We MUST ensure that the new class succeeds. If we

create a class at nationals and 7 pilots show up and everybody gets

sent home, that is the END of the class. If 17 pilots show up in the

first burst of enthusiasm and then 7 show up the next year, this is

the END of the class. We MUST make decisions based on data, not on

theories (if you use IGC rules 50 pilots will come out of the woodwork

and fly -- even though they're not on the seeding list) We will not

repeat the world class fiasco. Are you listening? We're on your side

here. This is our best attempt to create what you want, in a way that

will be durable and successful.



The use of SSA rules, and the US team upper limit for club class

(ventus 1) has been in these US club class experiments all along.



So, you guys got 95% of what you had been asking for: A separate class

at nationals, following on the same model that was tried and

demonstrated at regionals. All you had to do was suffer the indignity

of letting a sparrowhawk or 1-34 tag along (there are usually 1-2

such gliders at sports nationals).



We figured we'd be getting bouquets of flowers and boxes of

chocolates. But no: Suddenly you demand that we use IGC rules and a

different glider list, and send the sparrowhawhk home. Leaving aside

the start, finish, scoring formulas, metric units, tiny turn radii,

these rules impose completely different procedures. Quick, what are

the IGC weight limits? Rules on modifications? Rules on use of fixed

and disposable ballast? How many of your pilots know how to fly these

rules? Doing this at a nationals without trying it at regionals would

be insane.



So, yes. If you want to completely change the concept of the class --

which IGC rules really is! -- that needs to be worked out at a

regionals, not at a nationals, that is already sanctioned. The

sanctioning process includes a check of things pilots expect like, is

there a scorer and a CD who knows the rules they race is going to fly

under! Sean has a theory that it's a 5 minute job with see you to use

a different set of rules. He needs to talk to John Good and Ken

Sorenson and find out about the months -- months -- it took to get

rules and procedures worked out for Uvalde.



I'm sorry for the irritated tone. But when we give you 95% of what you

wanted, in the form that we had all been working on steadily for 5

years, and then suddenly the demands change radically at the last

moment, ignoring all the previous work, ignoring all the

practicalities of what it takes to run a contest, well, you can

imagine it's a little irritating.



John Cochrane





















ditto