LS1c-d performance

[csonka istvan]

The IGC HC of LS1c-d is 3 points lower than the LS1f (0.98-1.01). Why
is this differnece? The wings are the same, as I know. Does somebody
has any experiences with LS1c-d performance, compared to LS1f, Std.
Cirrus or ASW15? (Assuming more or less the same wingload).

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, June 10, 2012 1:39:10 PM UTC-4, csonka istvan wrote:
> The IGC HC of LS1c-d is 3 points lower than the LS1f (0.98-1.01). Why
> is this differnece? The wings are the same, as I know. Does somebody
> has any experiences with LS1c-d performance, compared to LS1f, Std.
> Cirrus or ASW15? (Assuming more or less the same wingload).

Idaflieg data, as availble in the Thomas book on glider design, supports the difference. This was the subject of review by the US handicap subcommittee a couple of years ago. US handicap difference is 2.4% which reflects maybe a liyyle difference in the analysis. The difference in "opinions" is worth 6 pt/day.
FWIW
UH

[csonka istvan]

Thanks, yes, this is the "theory", but I would be nice to get real-
life experiences.

[Tim Mara]

LS1, LS1A-, LS1D are totally different gliders from LS1F, different
fueslage, different tail, cockpit even different wing construction, these
can hardly be even considered to be all the same
tim

> wrote in message
...
On Sunday, June 10, 2012 1:39:10 PM UTC-4, csonka istvan wrote:
> The IGC HC of LS1c-d is 3 points lower than the LS1f (0.98-1.01). Why
> is this differnece? The wings are the same, as I know. Does somebody
> has any experiences with LS1c-d performance, compared to LS1f, Std.
> Cirrus or ASW15? (Assuming more or less the same wingload).

Idaflieg data, as availble in the Thomas book on glider design, supports the
difference. This was the subject of review by the US handicap subcommittee a
couple of years ago. US handicap difference is 2.4% which reflects maybe a
liyyle difference in the analysis. The difference in "opinions" is worth 6
pt/day.
FWIW
UH

[csonka istvan]

On Jun 11, 5:30*pm, "Tim Mara" > wrote:
> LS1, LS1A-, LS1D are totally different gliders from LS1F, different
> fueslage, different tail, cockpit even different wing construction, these
> can hardly be even considered to be all the same
> tim

Thanks Tim,
I know, that the fuselage is different, but I believe that the wings
are the same. But the question is the real performance comparism
between Ls1c-d and Ls1f, ASW15, Std. Cirrus.

[Tim Mara]

IMHO the LS1f should be consideribly better performer than ASW15 or Cirrus
and certainly handles far better than either of these and is more refined
than earlier LS1 as well, Ealry LS1 would be more similar to these in both
performance and construction to Cirrus and ASW15, ASW15B would be again a
better glider than earlier ASW15, larger cockpit than earlier ASW15 also.
tim
"csonka istvan" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 11, 5:30 pm, "Tim Mara" > wrote:
> LS1, LS1A-, LS1D are totally different gliders from LS1F, different
> fueslage, different tail, cockpit even different wing construction, these
> can hardly be even considered to be all the same
> tim

Thanks Tim,
I know, that the fuselage is different, but I believe that the wings
are the same. But the question is the real performance comparism
between Ls1c-d and Ls1f, ASW15, Std. Cirrus.