"Personally I do not think we need to follow FAI on anything."
I would agree with that regarding several of their decisions! I don't have a problem with the size & weight restrictions. Bigger will just cost more. I think they should have capped the displacement at 20 or 25cc (and e-power equivalent), kept the weight restriction and never gone to the 2 meter rule, but that's just wishful thinking. How many pattern contests are held that actually adhere to the F3A competition regulations where 'P', 'F' and 'U' schedules are flown? Just the Nationals. I don't think there are that many that even fly 'P' and 'F'. Of course there probably aren't that many contests where there are more than 3 or 4 F3A competitors.
I think to really 'sell' the idea of allowing gyros in pattern airplanes, especially in the lower (or lowest only) classes there will have to be some hard data to support the claims that it will attract and keep more competitors. I do not believe that gyros would be approved simply to make it easier to fly a competitive model as it is heretical to the basic principle of man & machine versus nature (models or full size). Perhaps the NSRCA can encourage CDs to allow gyros in the sportsman class provisionally for a contest season either nationally or in a 'test' district. Then results can be tracked comparing gyro to non-gyro equipped models as well as numbers of entrants and repeat entrants (to be compared to previous years). I would suggest that district 7 be the 'guinea pig' since the idea originated there and they have a long contest season to provide a better sampling of data.
Ironically, I am not sure there is a specific mandate to determine if a competitor is actually using gyros. It is certainly in the rule book, but will CDs now have to check every airplane to ensure a level playing field? Gyros can have a much bigger impact on contest results than flying an overweight or oversized airplane.
More food for thought....