Re: 2010 Proposed US Sports Class Handicaps

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 3, 6:25*pm, Brian > wrote:
> On Jan 3, 5:12*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
> > On Jan 3, 12:17*pm, Deltasierra > wrote:
>
> > > The proposed Sports Class Handicaps are now available for viewing on
> > > the SSA Website: *http://www.ssa.org/myhome.asp?mbr=6242029070.
> > > Please submit comments prior to February 1, directed to me at
> > > (please include a telephone #).
>
> > > David Stevenson
>
> > Can someone please explain how the sailplane specific handicap weight
> > is derived?
>
> > thanks
>
> > Andy
>
> Simple answer, take the published empty weight and add 280 lbs. (250
> for pilot and 30 for instruments) There may be some other factors
> depending on the sailplane.
>
> Brian

I received a private reply from David in which he indicates that "To
come up with a handicap, 250lb not 280lb
is added to the empty weight".

Since 2 different people have 2 different answers can anyone point me
to the SSA rule or policy that is used to derive the handicap weight?

Andy

[Brian[_1_]]

On Jan 4, 9:59*am, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 3, 6:25*pm, Brian > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 5:12*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 3, 12:17*pm, Deltasierra > wrote:
>
> > > > The proposed Sports Class Handicaps are now available for viewing on
> > > > the SSA Website: *http://www.ssa.org/myhome.asp?mbr=6242029070.
> > > > Please submit comments prior to February 1, directed to me at
> > > > (please include a telephone #).
>
> > > > David Stevenson
>
> > > Can someone please explain how the sailplane specific handicap weight
> > > is derived?
>
> > > thanks
>
> > > Andy
>
> > Simple answer, take the published empty weight and add 280 lbs. (250
> > for pilot and 30 for instruments) There may be some other factors
> > depending on the sailplane.
>
> > Brian
>
> I received a private reply from David in which he indicates that "To
> come up with a handicap, 250lb not 280lb
> is added to the empty weight".
>
> Since 2 different people have 2 different answers can anyone point me
> to the SSA rule or policy that is used to derive the handicap weight?
>
> Andy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

My answer came from David as well, talking specifically about HP
gliders. I wasn't sure if all other gliders were done the same way.
Thus the disclaimer in my answer. My understanding was 250 lbs for
pilot parachute, water etc and 30lbs for instruments.
It seems to work for the published empty weight of the HP gliders.

Brian

[JJ Sinclair]

I helped Carl Herold a bit when he was developing his handicap system,
specifically the weight was manufactures listed (brochure) weight +
250 pounds. Military says a man with parachute = 200 + 50 pounds of
instruments, battery, O2, etc. I think todays allowed weights are much
more liberal.
I also think the handicap system we have works well and I for one am
quite happy with it.
JJ

[sisu1a]

> I helped Carl Herold a bit when he was developing his handicap system,
> specifically the weight was manufactures listed (brochure) weight +
> 250 pounds. Military says a man with parachute = 200 + 50 pounds of
> instruments, battery, O2, etc. I think todays allowed weights are much
> more liberal.
> I also think the handicap system we have works well and I for one am
> quite happy with it.
> JJ

Seems fairly sensible (but then again so does using IGC handicpaps for
any ships they are already issued for...) but I still wonder what the
deal is with the SZD-59 though.

The SSA list has a 62lb difference between the 13.2 and 15m versions.
The wingtips that get removed only knock like 10lbs off the the weight
and other than the tips it's the same ship. I'm within both weight
limits, but am still curious.

PZL Bielsko SZD-59 Acro SC 13.2 820 1.075
PZL Bielsko SZD-59 Standard SC 15 882 0.99

-Paul

[mattm[_2_]]

On Jan 6, 11:25*am, sisu1a > wrote:
> > I helped Carl Herold a bit when he was developing his handicap system,
> > specifically the weight was manufactures listed (brochure) weight +
> > 250 pounds. Military says a man with parachute = 200 + 50 pounds of
> > instruments, battery, O2, etc. I think todays allowed weights are much
> > more liberal.
> > I also think the handicap system we have works well and I for one am
> > quite happy with it.
> > JJ
>
> Seems fairly sensible (but then again so does using IGC handicpaps for
> any ships they are already issued for...) but I still wonder what the
> deal is with the SZD-59 though.
>
> The SSA list has a 62lb difference between the 13.2 and 15m versions.
> The wingtips that get removed only knock like 10lbs off the the weight
> and other than the tips it's the same ship. I'm within both weight
> limits, but am still curious.
>
> PZL Bielsko * * SZD-59 Acro * * SC * * *13.2 * *820 * * 1.075
> PZL Bielsko * * SZD-59 Standard * * * * SC * * *15 * * *882 * * 0.99
>
> -Paul

Beware that these are not "limits" but the baseline weight for the
published
handicap. Your actual contest handicap is determined by the weight
conversion
rule 11.6.1.2.2: If Competition Weight (Rule 6.12.3) is different from
the specified
Handicap Weight, theHandicap Factor shall be multiplied by the
following:
1.0 - ((Competition Weight) - (Handicap Weight)) * 0.0002

So, e.g. if your weight is 820 without the wing tips and 830 with
them, then your
handicap will be 1.075 without and 0.99 * (1 - ((830-882) * 0.0002) =
1.0104 with them.
There used to be a 50lb deadband around the handicap weight but that's
gone away.

-- Matt

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 6, 10:38Â*am, mattm > wrote:

>
> Beware that these are not "limits" but the baseline weight for the
> published handicap. Â*

While that is true for sports class is is most certainly not true for
FAI classes flying under no ballast rules. No handicap is used in FAI
classes but the handicap weight is applied under the following rule:

6.8.3 ‡ â€* No-ballast rules No-ballast rules shall apply on a day when
the CD has announced this prior to the first launch.
6.8.3.1 Disposable ballast is prohibited with the exception of
disposable tail ballast.
6.8.3.2 Fixed ballast is permitted, but not more than an amount that
brings the sailplane to its maximum handicap weight, as defined in the
SSA Sailplane Handicap List.

Bottom line - if you are well over handicap weight then you fly with
no penalty. If you are under handicap weight you can add fixed
ballast but only increase weight to the handicap weight. The handicap
weight is therefore a wing loading limitation that is applied to some
pilots but not to others in the same contest class.

Andy

[mattm[_2_]]

On Jan 6, 1:49Â*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 6, 10:38Â*am, mattm > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Beware that these are not "limits" but the baseline weight for the
> > published Â*handicap. Â*
>
> While that is true for sports class is is most certainly not true for
> FAI classes flying under no ballast rules. Â*No handicap is used in FAI
> classes but the handicap weight is applied under the following rule:
>
> 6.8.3 ‡ â€* No-ballast rules No-ballast rules shall apply on a day when
> the CD has announced this prior to the first launch.
> 6.8.3.1 Disposable ballast is prohibited with the exception of
> disposable tail ballast.
> 6.8.3.2 Fixed ballast is permitted, but not more than an amount that
> brings the sailplane to its maximum handicap weight, as defined in the
> SSA Sailplane Handicap List.
>
> Bottom line - if you are well over handicap weight then you fly with
> no penalty. Â*If you are under handicap weight you can add fixed
> ballast but only increase weight to the handicap weight. Â*The handicap
> weight is therefore a wing loading limitation that is applied to some
> pilots but not to others in the same contest class.
>
> Andy

Interesting. The same wording is present in sports class for fixed
ballast as well.
So, the only "limit" involved is that you can only add fixed ballast
up to that point.
On the other hand I've don't know of pilots adding fixed ballast in
sports class,
but I wouldn't be surprised if they did in a national contest if
conditions were strong.

-- Matt

[Rick Culbertson]

> Interesting. *The same wording is present in sports class for fixed
> ballast as well.
> So, the only "limit" involved is that you can only add fixed ballast
> up to that point.
> On the other hand I've don't know of pilots adding fixed ballast in
> sports class,
> but I wouldn't be surprised if they did in a national contest if
> conditions were strong.
>
> -- Matt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Gents,

Just for fun, and I'm not knocking the SSA HC author as I'm sure it's
another example of a thankless job but, can someone tell me how or why
the 15m 27s SSA HC is disadvantaged vs the 15m V2s & 29s per the
numbers below? I know it's only a slight disadvantage, but really?
with the exception of the ax the SSAs HC allowable weights are all
higher than the 27s so what gives? besides the obvious ;-)

Schempp-Hirth Ventus 2ax W 15 780 0.883

Schempp-Hirth Ventus 2bx W 15 805 0.884

Schempp-Hirth Ventus 2cx W 15 859 0.885

Schleicher ASG-29 W 15 821 0.884

Schleicher ASW-27 W 15 788 0.880


To comment on Matt’s question above about pilots adding fixed ballast;
I know if I attend the Sport Nationals at Parowan, the only US contest
site I know of that has had un-ballasted task speeds break the 100 mph
barrier, I'll be sure to be at the full allowed HC weight, fixed of
course after plenty of drinking water and tail ballast. I'm certain I
wouldn’t be alone in this obvious goal!
21

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 6, 3:05*pm, Rick Culbertson > wrote:

> I know if I attend the Sport Nationals at Parowan, the only US contest
> site I know of that has had un-ballasted task speeds break the 100 mph
> barrier, I'll be sure to be at the full allowed HC weight, fixed of
> course after plenty of drinking water and tail ballast. I'm certain I
> wouldn’t be alone in this obvious goal!


Why would you bother? If you are less than the handicap weight for a
sports class contest your handicap is adjusted in your favor. Better
that than be injured (or worse) by poorly fitted fixed ballast in an
bad off airport landing.

The inequitable handicap weight is only an issue in FAI classes flying
under no ballast rules. Here there is no handicap adjustment.

Andy