I think it's still an interesting issue. I believe IMAC would like to have classes won by winning pilots not by winning planes. The rules allude to not being biased by airplane size, presentation, etc. The simple fact however, is that big airplanes are easier to fly well than small ones. Nobody can convince me otherwise. Now that "big" means 40% and beyond, there is more difference than ever between people who can buy their way up and those who can't (or don't want to).

Another thought I had, and some have already expressed in this thread, is that an airplane limit that reflects the class being flown seems to make some sense. For example, Basic class will be flown with basic airplanes while Unlimited class will be flown with unlimited airplanes. Breakthrough concept huh? The definition of basic and unlimited airplanes can be defined much like the sequence itself. That is, by a committee of intelligent people that know the current state and trends of the hobby. We don't have to have five different classifications of airplanes either. Maybe there is only two. Basic/Sportsman, and Intermediate/Advanced/Unlimited.

Just a thought.

Meanwhile, I read the flying and judging guide cover-to-cover (33 pages) and I'm working out with the simulator. Last weekend at the field went very well. Still learning how to use the rudder for course corrections.