Pete what you say is very true, very true indeed. The point is though and in my opinion always has been that innovation typically costs money. Some of us have it and some of us don't. I believe that we are limiting our potential by making this a "pay to play" sport. I don't think it has to be like that. Do you think we should have stuck with solely ARSA and TRSA designations instead of adopting the current classification of airspace? What was the purpose? The purpose was because the older classifications could not handle the amount of air traffic and congestion without further parameters and for a standardization that everyone else did back in 1990 vs. 1993 when the US went to a slightly modified version. The rule was changed due to new technology and the need to adapt to changing demands.

I don't believe in the "I did it so you can too" mentality. Not everyone has the money, skills or time that it takes to keep up with innovative resources that allow electric planes to be "easily" under 5000g. I don't think we should look at it within those terms. I think we need to consider everyone and especially those that don't participate for whatever the reason. Just because we made weight doesn't mean that Joe Blow has the money to do it as well. I think that if we go with this mindset, we will indeed wind up hurting the popularity and certainly the attendance of pattern competition be it on a local or national level. I think that we will be limiting ourselves and our facet then becomes a country club of the rich.

Almost every other country has adopted a 5500g weight rule for every class except FAI including Austaila, Europe and some of Asia. The UKhas even gone as far as a 7000g limit. I am not saying that we absolutely must follow the rest of the world but Iwould like to point out that the majority of the world has made this change for a reason. Are we just not willing to look at the potential good things this does and could provide because we are American and we do our own thing? I hope not.