If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#211
|
|||
|
|||
FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition
So Club Class advocates have 2 years to prove the rules committee Club Class concept out? That is a a pretty short leash on development, isn't it? Especially given the World Class Experiment of many, many years. I'll continue to work to prove the concept, but my commitment to the "process" is considerably dimmed by what has happened.
And on the incessant demand that proponents of Club Class, or IGC rules, or whatever, "get off their asses" and "seek out waivers" to prove out concepts, etc., it sure seems like even if we do all that, if it conflicts with the longstanding and closely held beliefs of member(s) of the RC, then it will just about go nowhere in the long-term. That's just how it appears. And appearances speak volumes... Thanks for the continued chance to prove out Club Class, but I am disappointed in how it has been presented to the advocates of Club Class here in the US. Sincerely, Tim McAllister EY |
#212
|
|||
|
|||
FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition
On Monday, February 25, 2013 7:58:37 AM UTC-6, wrote:
So Club Class advocates have 2 years to prove the rules committee Club Class concept out? That is a a pretty short leash on development, isn't it? Especially given the World Class Experiment of many, many years. I'll continue to work to prove the concept, but my commitment to the "process" is considerably dimmed by what has happened. And on the incessant demand that proponents of Club Class, or IGC rules, or whatever, "get off their asses" and "seek out waivers" to prove out concepts, etc., it sure seems like even if we do all that, if it conflicts with the longstanding and closely held beliefs of member(s) of the RC, then it will just about go nowhere in the long-term. That's just how it appears. And appearances speak volumes... Thanks for the continued chance to prove out Club Class, but I am disappointed in how it has been presented to the advocates of Club Class here in the US. Sincerely, Tim McAllister EY Tim: My suggestion for waivers was only about IGC rules, not about club class. I hope you agree that dropping some as-yet unwritten mixture of US and IGC rules on a nationals two months from now is not a good idea, and this proposal for a whole new rule book (in any class) really does need to be tried once at a regionals. Club did indeed prove itself with moderate success at regionals (10-15 pilots, not 20-30), and that's why there is a club section of sports nationals. It has everything club advocates asked for, except one thing: if a guy shows up to the sports nationals with a sparrowhawk, we are not going to make him go home, nor will we make him fly the same task in a class that has nothing less than an ASW27 in it. When we crafted this compromise, we did not realize what a terrible burden it would be to ask clubbies to share the sky with one or two such gliders. If we can get decent turnout at Mifflin, and organizers willing to put on such a contest, I do not think a separate club class nationals, with US rules and US team list, will take that long. The only thing holding it back is concern that not enough gliders will show up. On this end, it seems like a moving goal post, and a constant stream of demands for instant action. "Nationals now" it started. No, we have to try it at regionals first, like everything else. We crafted a nationals, that rather cleverly (I thought) addressed the longstanding problem, i.e if we create club, we write all the lower performance gliders out of US competition. The response? "We must have IGC club class list, and IGC rules! We must have it now, without trying it at regionals!" Nobody said anything about that -- dissatisfaction with the US team list or the need for IGC rules -- the first time around, and nobody said a word about it on the fall opinion poll. If we have a separate US club class with US rules and US team list, will this stop? Or will the goal posts move again? John Cochrane |
#213
|
|||
|
|||
FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition
On Monday, February 25, 2013 9:20:12 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, February 25, 2013 7:58:37 AM UTC-6, wrote: So Club Class advocates have 2 years to prove the rules committee Club Class concept out? That is a a pretty short leash on development, isn't it? Especially given the World Class Experiment of many, many years. I'll continue to work to prove the concept, but my commitment to the "process" is considerably dimmed by what has happened. And on the incessant demand that proponents of Club Class, or IGC rules, or whatever, "get off their asses" and "seek out waivers" to prove out concepts, etc., it sure seems like even if we do all that, if it conflicts with the longstanding and closely held beliefs of member(s) of the RC, then it will just about go nowhere in the long-term. That's just how it appears. And appearances speak volumes... Thanks for the continued chance to prove out Club Class, but I am disappointed in how it has been presented to the advocates of Club Class here in the US. Sincerely, Tim McAllister EY Tim: My suggestion for waivers was only about IGC rules, not about club class. I hope you agree that dropping some as-yet unwritten mixture of US and IGC rules on a nationals two months from now is not a good idea, and this proposal for a whole new rule book (in any class) really does need to be tried once at a regionals. Club did indeed prove itself with moderate success at regionals (10-15 pilots, not 20-30), and that's why there is a club section of sports nationals. It has everything club advocates asked for, except one thing: if a guy shows up to the sports nationals with a sparrowhawk, we are not going to make him go home, nor will we make him fly the same task in a class that has nothing less than an ASW27 in it. When we crafted this compromise, we did not realize what a terrible burden it would be to ask clubbies to share the sky with one or two such gliders.. If we can get decent turnout at Mifflin, and organizers willing to put on such a contest, I do not think a separate club class nationals, with US rules and US team list, will take that long. The only thing holding it back is concern that not enough gliders will show up. On this end, it seems like a moving goal post, and a constant stream of demands for instant action. "Nationals now" it started. No, we have to try it at regionals first, like everything else. We crafted a nationals, that rather cleverly (I thought) addressed the longstanding problem, i.e if we create club, we write all the lower performance gliders out of US competition. The response? "We must have IGC club class list, and IGC rules! We must have it now, without trying it at regionals!" Nobody said anything about that -- dissatisfaction with the US team list or the need for IGC rules -- the first time around, and nobody said a word about it on the fall opinion poll. If we have a separate US club class with US rules and US team list, will this stop? Or will the goal posts move again? John Cochrane It definitely seems a moving goal post. The Club Class advocates do not speak with one voice or consistent agenda. Perhaps if the club class advocates could form a coherent (individuals identified) group and speak with one voice this could move things forward more effectively. QT |
#214
|
|||
|
|||
FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition
OK...Ill stop bitching. I am excited about what is coming in 2014. Time to stop shaking the trees and start flying. I have the glider packed up and ready for Florida!
:-) Sean |
#215
|
|||
|
|||
FAI (IGC) rules for US Club Class Nationals - Petition
On Sunday, February 24, 2013 12:19:19 AM UTC-5, Richard Walters wrote:
At 00:38 24 February 2013, Sean F F2 wrote: Good idea. I'll see if we can put something together. =20 In general, the USRC openly considers FAI rules to be dangerous and irrespo= nsible and their US rules alternative (dictated to the US soaring community= ) as the solution to FAIs dangerous irresponsibility. In addition, the USR= C believes that their rules are not only safer but superior in generating = flourishing contest attendance (especially with new or casual contest pilot= s). In other words, US pilots would not fly FAI rule events as they are to= o "hard core.". US rules on the other hand, with there increased safety an= d "decreased likelihood" of land outs greatly improves attendance. No need= for crews, less difficult tasks, etc. We (probably 100 US and Candian pilots, almost 60 have signed) see FAI rule= s as real/true glider racing (Assigned tasks and Assigned Area tasks only).= The rest of the world soaring community (VIRTUALLY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY ON= THE PLANET BASICALLY) happily uses FAI rules for every contest and has sin= ce the sport began. Statistically safety is approximately equal between th= e World standard FAI rules and the essentially obscure US rules. The US is= in isolation from the rest of the world as we are almost a different sport= (checkers vs. chess). The US rules are 2-3x longer than FAI rules for exa= mple. I personally would like to see, for now, that US regionals retain the US ru= les and national championships should immediately adopt FAI rules as they q= ualify US pilots for the World Championship. I want there to be a choice i= n the USA. I wish to disarm the USRC of the ability to act as dictators to= all US pilots (and contests) on what rules are best to use. I think there= is significant misinformation about the FAI rules in the USA because of a = bit if a publicity campaign against them for a reason I do not fully unders= tand. I think there is clearly (sixty signatures from jr pilots to top US = world level pilots) strong demand for FAI rules events within the US dispit= e this negative publicity campaign by the USRC. I feel the USRC is on a bi= t of a crusade to somehow pressure change the FAIs rules and uses the US co= ntests as a test lab. I'll work on the table and post it to a webpage. Sean Sean, Since I am apparently part of this negative publicity campaign, please answer how 80 pounds of lead in the cockpit is not an issue with you? You have never responded to my comments on the pitfalls of IGC CC rules. A skinny pilot in a Discus A has to load up to MTOW that matches a heavy guy in a Discus B, otherwise he is giving up a lot of performance. A heavy guy in an ASW20 can not enter Club Class because he falls outside the handicap range. Our US sports class rules modify the handicap up and down to allow for weight differences. Progressive, smart and safe. What a concept. For the record I have flown 8 IGC contests. Former dictator, Richard Walters 3R Rick, I dont see any problem even with 200lb ballast as long you have it secured and within the weight and ballast limits. Max weight for club class glider comes from manufacturer manual(not invented by IGC).It is total max, less wings water(tail water ok) If your heavy pilot 'falls outside the handicap range"in IGC contest he can not legally fly anywhere.(US or rest of the world) Ryszard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club Class Nationals | 5 ugly | Soaring | 37 | September 24th 10 03:27 AM |
US 15 Meters Nationals and Region V South Club Class | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | March 12th 09 03:59 PM |
Establishing Club Class/Too Many Nationals/Not Enough Competitors | Tim[_2_] | Soaring | 14 | October 2nd 08 03:34 PM |
AUS Club Class Nationals Overall Results | Mal | Soaring | 0 | January 27th 06 09:55 AM |
UK Open Class and Club Class Nationals - Lasham | Steve Dutton | Soaring | 0 | August 6th 03 10:07 PM |