Death of the 13.5m class?

Geb (john), the point most of us are making is NOT against technology, its against what defines "soaring" flight. I dont care how a guy gets in the air, towplane, bungee, onboard engine, falling off a cliff. I DO care that someone "assist" their "soaring" flight using an engine while on course. You start the engine on course, your soaring flight just ended.

If you want to start another "class" of racing thats fine, and who knows it might catch on, but don't call it or equate it with what we have now.

As for your lack of tow pilots, we could lend you some of ours. We have a club of 50 members and have 8 tow pilots with more wanting to do it than we have flights for. Maybe you think you don't have any tailwheel fliers up there. You need to recruit from the ranks of crop dusters and wantabe crop dusters. They are all tailwheel guys, and the youngsters wanting to get into dusters are always looking for a place to get more free tailwheel time. If you don't want to do that, sell your pawnee and replace it with a c-182. There's always guys wanting to build time.
Dan

How ironic. This whole “engine run� issue has been fought over in all the FAI classes of radio control soaring for 10 years now. Some of the classes involve scale birds (JS-1s, Arcii, ASG-29s, etc) with spans up to 30 feet. It’s as contentious as ever and makes a Chinese fire drill look like a Marine parade. Good luck.
Remember when men where men (post above) and gliders didn’t have engines?? Old fashioned? Proudly! Snobbish? To the max!