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

Sean and John,

Yes, fixed ballast is allowed in US sports class rules. My concern is the Erik Nelson, Sarah Arnold, superfit lightweight pilots that will be at a disadvantage in the proposed CC unless they lead ballast up to MTOW. You can't add 100# under your seat without adding tail ballast. Most spar shelves are limited to 5kg. Few have an A&P do a proper installation. I know of weights slipping into control mechanisms. I remember Robbie Robertson. Weight behind your head is stupid.

I have flown an ASW24 at MTOW against a very light LS8 at the Sports nats. Our handicap weight adjustments work very well, both up and down. We flew with identical handicaps. They adjust the FAI CC rules for overweight, so it would not be any more work to adjust for underweight. No added complexity.
Rick Walters

On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 4:53:45 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Rick,

I appreciate your concern. Safety should ALWAYS be discussed openly.

I don't believe lead weight is inherently dangerous. When I was younger, shorter and a lot lighter, I used lead weight ballast responsibly. Nobody thought is was controversial. I'm not saying use of lead weight can't be applied irresponsibly. That same pilot can also be unsafe in any number of other areas as well, not just lead weight.

At the last Club Class WGC there were likely pilot(s) adding lead weight. However, it was a non-issue. I'm not aware of a pilot adding lead weight because it apparently wasn't controversial enough to make conversation.


I KNOW OF a US pilot adding lead weight flying Sports Class here in the US. Apparently the advantage of flying at max weight is more advantageous than handicap adjustment.

Unless the RC outlaws lead weight in US contests I suspect it will continue to happen just like it will in FAI rules.

Sean Franke (HA)
Lead ballast is legal under US rules

6.8.3.2 Fixed ballast is permitted, but not more than an amount that brings the sailplane to its maximum handicap weight, as defined in the SSA Sailplane Handicap List.

However, the handicap adjustment goes in both directions -- light pilots get a better handicap. This was done to remove the incentive to pile up those bags of lead shot bouncing around many cockpits.

11.6.1.2.2 â€* If Competition Weight (Rule 6.12.3) is different from the specified Handicap Weight, the Handicap Factor shall be multiplied by the following:

1.0 - ((Competition Weight) - (Handicap Weight)) * 0.0002

This is one of those "complexities" in US rules that everyone complains about until we ask people for specific rules that should be dropped.
John Cochrane

On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 10:53:11 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Sean and John,



Yes, fixed ballast is allowed in US sports class rules. My concern is the Erik Nelson, Sarah Arnold, superfit lightweight pilots that will be at a disadvantage in the proposed CC unless they lead ballast up to MTOW. You can't add 100# under your seat without adding tail ballast. Most spar shelves are limited to 5kg. Few have an A&P do a proper installation. I know of weights slipping into control mechanisms. I remember Robbie Robertson. Weight behind your head is stupid.



I have flown an ASW24 at MTOW against a very light LS8 at the Sports nats.. Our handicap weight adjustments work very well, both up and down. We flew with identical handicaps. They adjust the FAI CC rules for overweight, so it would not be any more work to adjust for underweight. No added complexity.

Rick Walters


Rick: I agree, and wasn't clear. The point of the US rule that changes handicap in both directions is precisely so pilots will not feel the need to use extra weight.

We talked about banning extra weight this year but decided not too much change at once. I completely agree that extra weights are a bad idea. We just need one crash with the bags of lead involved and you can imagine the fallout.

Adjusting the handicap for light weight is one little example where I humbly think US rules are a bit ahead of IGC rules, and an example why I still think it's wise for US contests to use US rules. Some of the "complexity" is beneficial.

John Cochrane