The new and the changed rules will be published by the rules sub-committee in due time before the October 1, 1996, the date on which they become effective. The following decisions were taken, the votes being shown in the form "yes/no/abstentions". New or changed rules are indicated in bold face.
In a comprehensive paper handed out at the meeting Dave Ellis of Cambridge Aero Instruments had criticised the Sporting Code. His criticism was directed against unnecessary procedures on the one hand and necessary but missing safeguards against electronic cheating with FRs on the other hand.
Tor Johannessen stated that the "unnecessary" procedures will be kept until they have been proved to be really unnecessary, at which time they will be removed. This missing safeguard will be taken care of by GFAC, requiring foolproof procedures to be used with each type of equipment. If necessary, these procedures will then be incorporated into the Sporting Code as soon as possible.
Dave Ellis agreed to develop proper safeguards for his equipment, despite the fact that it has already has been approved. This offer was welcomed by the delegates with applause.
Finally, the delegate reiterated unanimously the basic policy of the IGC with regard to rules changes: Only those proposals distributed in writing with the agenda may be voted upon, and new rules or changes come into effect on October 1 of the same year.
From July 24 to August 4 the 1996 German Championships in this class will take place at Mühldorf/Inn, approximately 70 km East of Munich. It is estimated that about 80% of the competitors will fly motorised gliders. International participation is welcome, but only one entry from Switzerland has been presented so far. If these championships give an encouraging answer to the integration concept, they will probably be repeated in 1998 as Internationals. This could happen under the condition that IGC officially recognises the 18 m class as an integrated class, where motor gliders and plain gliders compete together.
The following 18 m motor gliders are presently developed and produced in Germany:
The following information was received from Walter Eisele:
a) There is probably no chance for both Standard and 15 m Classes to remain alive in future
motor glider competitions.
b) Starting from 1998 the German Nationals will be held on three different airfields:
The weight of the batteries is presently the main problem but rapid progress may be expected in this area due to the developments for motor cars.
The development of solar powered motor gliders will probably be much slower because the price of the solar cells is expected to remain at the present high level in the near future. Furthermore, the solar powered motor glider requires a larger wing area and a low weight. So the wing loading must be very low and - therefore - the gliding performance rather poor.
Creating a class of world records for solar powered motor gliders would incite new designs. These records should be different from those of current motor gliders to emphasise the possibility of powered flights with solar energy.
If IGC decides to keep the solar powered motor gliders within their competence, appropriate activities should be started.
Electrically powered motor gliders are closely related to the actual ones, only the means of propulsion is of a different type.
For this reason he, together with the representatives of the FFVV and the Slovenian organisers
of the 9th European Club Class Championships, 1996, agreed on an index of 102 for the
Pegase. The following index list is valid for the gliders which are allowed to compete in Slovenj
Gradec.
102: ASW 19, Pegase A & B;
100: ASW 19 Club (fixed wheel), Cirrus 75, DG 100/101, Standard Jantar II and III,.
LS 1f, Hornet, Standard Astir;
98: ASW 15, Cobra 15 m, DG 100 Club (fixed wheel), LS 1 0, c, d, Std Cirrus,
Std. Libelle, VS-0-10
96: Astir CS + CS 77, Club Libelle, Elfe S3/S4, LS 1-0 (fixed wheel), Mistral C,
Salto 15,5 m, SZD Junior, VS-0-10 (fixed wheel)
This regulation was approved unanimously by the plenum.
b) At the last Club Class Championship in the Slovak Republic, 1994, it became apparent that some pilots filled sand in the wings of their club class gliders to increase the wing loading at good soaring conditions. After discussion the plenum decided by large majority that - following the rules - all gliders must be flown within the limits of their C of A and that therefore sand ballast in the wings is forbidden. The organisers were asked to take appropriate measures that nobody will infringe this rule.
c) The delegate of the Czech Republic, Jaroslav Vach, announced a bid of his Aero Club for organising the 10th European Club Class Championship 1998. He referred to the fact that two out of eight European Club Class champions have been Czech pilots hitherto (1979 and 1986). There is a choice of three well-tried airfields, Vrchlabi in the Northwest, Jihlava in the middle and Ceske Budejovice in the Southwest of Bohemia. A sufficient number of experienced staff is available, the meteorological conditions are good, and the living costs are low.
Glider pilots are invited to visit the Czech Nationals at Jihlava airfield from 27th July to 10th August, 1996. About 50 pilots will compete in the Club Class. Interested persons should contact Jaroslav Vach (for address, phone and fax numbers see the enclosed List of Personal Addresses).
The decision was postponed to the autumn meeting when a proper bid of the Czech NAC will be available.
d) The chairman Helmut Kiffmeyer announced his wish to resign from his occupation in the IGC, after the developments started by him have been completed - e.g. the integration of new gliders into the Club Class -, which would probably be the end of 1997. The President thanked him for the ten years good job he had done and asked the delegates who of them would be prepared to co-operate with Helmut for familiarising with the work and for later succession. Tadeus Wala was proposed by the plenum. After a few initial doubts he gave his consent.
a) Glider pilot's licence: The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA, Hoofddorp, NL) have decided that the European gliding licences will not be "harmonised", so following the wish of the EGU because of the enormous lot of work this would bring without necessity, as proven every year during international competition where all nationalities show excellent proficiency. Thus, the glider pilot's licence will remain under national rules, with mutual recognition between States.
The JAA also decided that touring motor gliders (TMGs) may be flown via the PPL (A) as well as via the (national) glider pilot's licence. The EGU is happy with these decisions, and grateful to Max Bishop, General Secretary of the FAI, for his assistance in this affair.
There is one problem, however. The European Union has stated not to be ready to accept the dual solution for flying the TMGs as described above or via any non-harmonised rule for that matter. In fact the authority of JAA, although admired for its expertise, is challenged in this. Discussions on the procedures for European aviation rule making are now going on. Immediately affected are JAR-1 (Definitions) and the JAA Convention.
The EGU has contacted the JAA to prevent that the ICAO definition for "aeroplane" (which is envisaged for JAR-1) would encompass all motor gliders, meaning that the PPL (A) would be required to fly them. In the light of what was said above obviously that is not wanted by anyone.
b) Radio: Most - if not all - of our VHF sets, covering the 118 - 137 MHz aviation band, seem not to be affected by high power FM broadcasting in the VHF FM broadcast band (87,5 - 108 MHz. To be sure the national authorities should be consulted.
A DFS "Kundenworkshop" (workshop for clients) in Langen, Germany, has informed sports aviation that in Germany 8.33 kHz channel separation will, for the time being, be introduced for upper airspace purposes only, leaving VFR flight below FL 245 unaffected.
The EGU has found out that digital voice-coding and data links (for instance for differential GPS approach and landing systems) will soon require 25 kHz-type channels. This is another good reason to leave a part of the band in the 25 kHz standard. The EGU is working to have all this confirmed, and to keep the gliding channels in the 25 kHz standard.
c)Airspace: Visits to the seminar "The Flexible Use of Airspace" in Luxembourg in 1995 and to "ATC '96" (ATC technology exhibition with civil-military ATC co-operation forum in Maastricht) clearly have shown that expansion of ATC capacity is a first order task for the authorities now, probably requiring changes in airspace structure and classification.
The EGU has taken the opportunity to comment on the last edition of the report of the EUROCONTROL ACLAS committee, which tries to harmonise the implementation of the ICAO airspace classification in Europe. Here again VFR flight and the principle of see-and-be- seen are - in the opinion of the EGU - not done justice.
Also a proposal has been launched to supplement ICAO Document 7030 with a section 7.5.2 which stipulates Mode S transponders for VFR flights in the EUR area in class B and C airspace, and in congested parts of class D, E, F, and G airspace. Exemptions are possible. Target date: 1st January, 1999.
Clearly sports aviation has to reckon with new reductions in airspace available for VFR flight without unnecessary equipment. Unnecessary, because VFR flight by definition relies on "see- and-be-seen", and nothing else.
The EGU, especially during its Congress meeting in Paris on 17.03.1996, will again encourage its members to enter into discussion with their authorities (airspace implementation is a national affair) to defend the right of the gliding community to a fair share of the airspace. In the end it is a question of sports versus commercial (business and holiday) flying.
The report of the EGU President was received with applause. The proposal was made to lodge an appeal against reduction of the rights in the airspace. Tom Zealley, who in this connection announced his retirement from IGC work, proposed to leave all activities on this field to the EGU and to co-operate closely with this organisation.
Bernald Smith mentioned the organisations RTCA and CGSIC, of which the FAI is a member and which co-operate world-wide. He asked the plenum to delegate their right to the Bureau to appoint co-operators in CGSIC, if and when necessary. The attendants agreed to this proposal unanimously.
Bernald Smith reported on his work with RTCA, EUROCARE and EUROCONTROL in world-wide planning for GNSS systems. GNSS can play a role in the future to provide access to the airspace, utilising ADS-B, which is "automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast", to emit signals to other aircraft and the ground about the location of the aircraft equipped with such devices.
Continuing price reductions in equipment was noted with the expectation that would continue as the market matures. The chairman explained he had conducted an FAI-airsport briefing for the other airsports in Amsterdam last December and that there was great interest in what IGC had done.
The rumour about SA (Selective Availability - a purposeful dithering of the GPS clock to degrade accuracy from 10 - 30 m to about 100 m) being turned off permanently in a few months was said to be unfounded. The real information - the reporter stated - was that the US Congress had passed an appropriation bill which required to turn off SA before the end of the century, but only after taking into account necessary requirements and developments to protect the military's security needs. Presently SA poses no problems for the accuracy needed by the gliding community.
Finally he praised the GFAC work, introducing their chairman Ian Strachan for the GFAC report, after he had proposed re-appointment of the entire GFAC group, Ian Strachan (UK), Angel Casado (Spain), Kilian Grefen (Germany), Arnie Hartley (Australia), and Mike Strang (USA). The plenary followed unanimously this proposal.
8.5.2 On behalf of the GFAC the Chairman Ian Strachan reported (please, find the report enclosed as Annex C to these minutes).
On the basis of this sub-committee's work the IGC meeting 1995 had decided to encourage competing bids for organising Gliding World Championships. Obviously this decision was a successful one because three bids are at hand for the World Championships 2001.
The working group discussed the following problems, and introduced them to the plenum to be
referred by each delegate to their NACs for recommendations to the 1997 IGC meeting:
Do we want smaller World Gliding Championships (less than 120 gliders as at present)?
If so, can this be achieved by:
a) limiting the number of pilots to 2 per class and country?
b) dividing the championships in two events?
e.g. Standard and 18 m class, motor gliders integrated?
or Open and 15 m class, motor gliders integrated?
- giving less launching costs due to motor glider self launching?
- more pilots able to compete if contests accept 60/70/80 entries?
- smaller countries able to hold the event?
OR, any variations of the above?
The ensuing discussion dealt with the question if IGC should let go things on as they are or if the 18 m class should be introduced immediately, with the result, that it would be allowed to compete in four years time (6.5 SC3).
It was pointed out that already the three classes Standard, 15 m and Open are World Championship classes, and in addition the World Class. Together with the 18 m Class the UL Glider Class is waiting to be classified for World Championships. The Club Class is an approved Class for Continental Championships. The classes competing in motor gliding championships are decided by the organisers and must be approved by the IGC (6.3.1.2 SC3). It was stated that the decision of the 1995 IGC meeting had in first line protected the existing three traditional World Championships' classes, and that the development had overtaken the 1985 motion of the sub-committee.
The President urged a decision, and the sub-committee presented the following motion formulated by Roger Woods:
In view of the decision of the 1996 working group chaired by Åke Pettersson to recommend a review of the future of World Gliding Championships to be undertaken by all NACs over the next 12 months, the delayed motions on page 15, items 15 A, 1), 2), and 3), of the minutes of the 1995 IGC meeting be withdrawn. Motion 15 A 4) be put to the IGC plenary meeting for resolution
By a vote of 13 yes, 11 no, and 3 abstentions it was decided to publish this motion and to effect no changes at this 1996 meeting.
The responsible sub-committee was meeting preceding the IGC plenary session. The report of this meeting is enclosed as Annex D to these minutes.
The chairman explained the results of the meeting, which stated requirements of broadening the competition philosophy, finding familiar-looking new tasks, and looking further ahead into the future. The problem is how to market the new ideas. Then he developed a modern market strategy. He compared the five acknowledged competition classes to shops that, so far, offer only one product on the market, namely races. But to set something in motion, a wide selection of products must be offered.
The plenum followed the speaker and showed considerable interest in these new ideas. However, warnings were also expressed, e.g. not to move too far from away what glider pilots still understand, and to keep the necessities of airspace and safety in sight.
Further, the speaker developed the idea of giving speed points to outlanders also in contests, which can easily be done with the modern GNSS equipment. This would influence the competition behaviour of glider pilots in a very positive and welcome way.
The President thanked Bruno Gantenbrink for the good work in his sub-committee, which is very important for the further progressive development of gliding into an intact future, and asked him to continue with it. The delegates were requested to discuss the new ideas at home. There was agreement that is was not advisable to vote on the proposals of the sub-committee at this moment.