PW-5, 1-26, Alisport Silent and Cherokee drivers - read here

[Scott Alexander[_2_]]

Here is some information from my good friend Wes Lineberry that I am
relaying at his request.


Wes is acting as Contest Manager for the 13.5 Meter Regional at
Seminole Lake Gliderport.
This contest is a handicapped race where sports class rules apply.
Handicapping was selected to level the playing field between the older
13.5 meter ships and the newer 13.5 meter ships. To qualify, your
wingspan must be 13.5 meters or less. Which means if you have a PW-5,
1-26, Alisport Silent or Cherokee type sailplane, your ship qualifies
for this event.

The race will be held at Seminole Lake who is hosting virtually an
entire month long of racing in March. With a large staff, including
multiple towpilots and towplanes that are open for business all week
and weekend, they have no difficultly hosting a small group even if
the minimum number of contestants which is only 5 (per SSA rules). So
don't worry about the low sign up rate as of now, the game is on! In
fact, it's on like Donkey Kong :-)

The expected turnout is a minimum of atleast 10 total participants,
but may end up being much more than this. It may honestly end up
being slightly bigger than a GTA contest, just with more days to fly.

If you would like more information call Wes Lineberry on his cell
(352) 394-5076 or email him at

Visit the below website to register for the contest:
http://ssa.org/members/contestreports/ContestResultsDetail.asp?id=2213

Visit the below website for potential updates directly related to the
contest:
http://soarfl.com/13.html



The race is ON! See ya there!

Scott Alexander
"SA"

[Tony[_5_]]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:04:12 AM UTC-6, Scott Alexander wrote:
> Here is some information from my good friend Wes Lineberry that I am
>
> relaying at his request.
>
>
>
>
>
> Wes is acting as Contest Manager for the 13.5 Meter Regional at
>
> Seminole Lake Gliderport.
>
> This contest is a handicapped race where sports class rules apply.
>
> Handicapping was selected to level the playing field between the older
>
> 13.5 meter ships and the newer 13.5 meter ships. To qualify, your
>
> wingspan must be 13.5 meters or less. Which means if you have a PW-5,
>
> 1-26, Alisport Silent or Cherokee type sailplane, your ship qualifies
>
> for this event.
>
>
>
> The race will be held at Seminole Lake who is hosting virtually an
>
> entire month long of racing in March. With a large staff, including
>
> multiple towpilots and towplanes that are open for business all week
>
> and weekend, they have no difficultly hosting a small group even if
>
> the minimum number of contestants which is only 5 (per SSA rules). So
>
> don't worry about the low sign up rate as of now, the game is on! In
>
> fact, it's on like Donkey Kong :-)
>
>
>
> The expected turnout is a minimum of atleast 10 total participants,
>
> but may end up being much more than this. It may honestly end up
>
> being slightly bigger than a GTA contest, just with more days to fly.
>
>
>
> If you would like more information call Wes Lineberry on his cell
>
> (352) 394-5076 or email him at
>
>
>
> Visit the below website to register for the contest:
>
> http://ssa.org/members/contestreports/ContestResultsDetail.asp?id=2213
>
>
>
> Visit the below website for potential updates directly related to the
>
> contest:
>
> http://soarfl.com/13.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The race is ON! See ya there!
>
>
>
> Scott Alexander
>
> "SA"

wish I could make it...hope you guys have a good turnout!

2013 could prove to be a breakthrough year in the "short wing" racing scene. Two 13.5 meter super regionals and the Region 10 Low Performance regional.

[son_of_flubber]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:04:12 AM UTC-5, Scott Alexander wrote:
> To qualify, your wingspan must be 13.5 meters or less.

Being new to racing and owning a 15 meter moderate performance glider I'd like to understand the reasoning behind the 13.5 m limit.

I entirely understand the appeal of a race limited to low/moderate performance gliders, but why not use the handicap number to limit entries?

For example, a glider that had a similar handicap to the PW-5 but longer wings would be included. For an extreme example, this would include the ASK-21. Similar handicap, but much longer wings.

I always figured that performance, and not size, was what mattered ;)

[[email protected]]

Another suggestion to expand the wingspan limit.

The pressure for "club class" is strong, with a lower handicap limit. This leaves every glider below the SZD junior and wings more than 13.5 meters in a bit of a quandary. Gliders in this range include the sparrowhawk, ka6, LET 33, and a range of two seaters like the ask21 which have been very useful for bringing new pilots along to racing.

Span really isn't that interesting a cutoff. Why define a new class around the happenstance that the PW5 had a 13.5 meter span?

Why not instead define a "low performance" class for every glider that is below the lowest "club class" handicap?

The Kansas "low performance" regional is going to go this route, in part to accommodate a SH1, in part because it makes sense.

John Cochrane

[Tony[_5_]]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:58:04 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> Another suggestion to expand the wingspan limit. The pressure for "club class" is strong, with a lower handicap limit. This leaves every glider below the SZD junior and wings more than 13.5 meters in a bit of a quandary. Gliders in this range include the sparrowhawk, ka6, LET 33, and a range of two seaters like the ask21 which have been very useful for bringing new pilots along to racing. Span really isn't that interesting a cutoff. Why define a new class around the happenstance that the PW5 had a 13.5 meter span? Why not instead define a "low performance" class for every glider that is below the lowest "club class" handicap? The Kansas "low performance" regional is going to go this route, in part to accommodate a SH1, in part because it makes sense. John Cochrane

The 13.5 meter span was chosen by IGC. **** flows downhill right? My best guess is that former World Class and current 13.5 meter owners who might be interested in being on a future 13.5 meter US Team were told by the Rules committee to show that there was interest by organizing Super Regionals and if so they would make it a National class. Naturally they weren't going to automatically make it a national class after seeing the low turnout for recent World Class Nationals. This is, after all, the steady, reasonable approach that the RC uses to implement rule changes.

As the Contest Manager for the Region 10 Low Performance contest I can say absolutely that a span limit was never considered for our contest. I wanted to make sure that our local Ka-6's could participate as well as the SH1. I've also read plenty of posts and articles by John Cochrane here and agree with him that the span limit is pretty silly (even though I flew last years 13.5 meter super regionals).

[[email protected]]

Man o Man, I sure would like to take our ASK 13 out to Kansas and have a whooping good time chasing some Cherokee II's around the corn fields. Pretty planes, ample crew, frequent land outs, beer galore. Sounds like a pilot's spring break fantasy.

Lane
XF

[Tony[_5_]]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:18:07 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> Man o Man, I sure would like to take our ASK 13 out to Kansas and have a whooping good time chasing some Cherokee II's around the corn fields. Pretty planes, ample crew, frequent land outs, beer galore. Sounds like a pilot's spring break fantasy. Lane XF

come on out Lane, we'd love to have you. Right now I have 12 signed up, max is 20. Be advised its a 4 day regional over the July 4th holiday. July 3 practice day, contest July 4-7. we will have 9 million acres of harvested wheat fields in Kansas available for your land-out pleasure. Not quite corn country down here like it is up in Iowa.

And don't be so sure that you'll land out frequently. Last year the first week of July I did a 300km FAI triangle in the Cherokee in 4:30! Seriously considered turning downwind after the finish and attempting to get 500km before sunset.

[Craig Funston[_2_]]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:21:02 AM UTC-8, Tony wrote:
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:58:04 AM UTC-6, wrote:
>
> > Another suggestion to expand the wingspan limit. The pressure for "club class" is strong, with a lower handicap limit. This leaves every glider below the SZD junior and wings more than 13.5 meters in a bit of a quandary. Gliders in this range include the sparrowhawk, ka6, LET 33, and a range of two seaters like the ask21 which have been very useful for bringing new pilots along to racing. Span really isn't that interesting a cutoff. Why define a new class around the happenstance that the PW5 had a 13.5 meter span? Why not instead define a "low performance" class for every glider that is below the lowest "club class" handicap? The Kansas "low performance" regional is going to go this route, in part to accommodate a SH1, in part because it makes sense. John Cochrane
>
>
>
> The 13.5 meter span was chosen by IGC. **** flows downhill right? My best guess is that former World Class and current 13.5 meter owners who might be interested in being on a future 13.5 meter US Team were told by the Rules committee to show that there was interest by organizing Super Regionals and if so they would make it a National class. Naturally they weren't going to automatically make it a national class after seeing the low turnout for recent World Class Nationals. This is, after all, the steady, reasonable approach that the RC uses to implement rule changes.
>
>
>
> As the Contest Manager for the Region 10 Low Performance contest I can say absolutely that a span limit was never considered for our contest. I wanted to make sure that our local Ka-6's could participate as well as the SH1. I've also read plenty of posts and articles by John Cochrane here and agree with him that the span limit is pretty silly (even though I flew last years 13.5 meter super regionals).

Beautiful deadpan style points Tony. I couldn't stop chuckling.

The R10 Low Performance contest sounds like a blast. Have fun,

Craig

[Tony[_5_]]

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:39:24 AM UTC-6, Craig Funston wrote:
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:21:02 AM UTC-8, Tony wrote: > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:58:04 AM UTC-6, wrote: > > > Another suggestion to expand the wingspan limit. The pressure for "club class" is strong, with a lower handicap limit. This leaves every glider below the SZD junior and wings more than 13.5 meters in a bit of a quandary. Gliders in this range include the sparrowhawk, ka6, LET 33, and a range of two seaters like the ask21 which have been very useful for bringing new pilots along to racing. Span really isn't that interesting a cutoff. Why define a new class around the happenstance that the PW5 had a 13.5 meter span? Why not instead define a "low performance" class for every glider that is below the lowest "club class" handicap? The Kansas "low performance" regional is going to go this route, in part to accommodate a SH1, in part because it makes sense. John Cochrane > > > > The 13.5 meter span was chosen by IGC. **** flows downhill right? My best guess is that former World Class and current 13.5 meter owners who might be interested in being on a future 13.5 meter US Team were told by the Rules committee to show that there was interest by organizing Super Regionals and if so they would make it a National class. Naturally they weren't going to automatically make it a national class after seeing the low turnout for recent World Class Nationals. This is, after all, the steady, reasonable approach that the RC uses to implement rule changes. > > > > As the Contest Manager for the Region 10 Low Performance contest I can say absolutely that a span limit was never considered for our contest. I wanted to make sure that our local Ka-6's could participate as well as the SH1. I've also read plenty of posts and articles by John Cochrane here and agree with him that the span limit is pretty silly (even though I flew last years 13.5 meter super regionals). Beautiful deadpan style points Tony. I couldn't stop chuckling. The R10 Low Performance contest sounds like a blast. Have fun, Craig

Always happy to entertain but I was generally being serious with my post.

We also have a Salto (13.6 m) signed up for our contest, and a 1-34. I've heard that a local IS-28B2 Lark is considering signing up too and maybe a Grob 103 Acro if we expand the handicap range to 1.11.

[[email protected]]

> And don't be so sure that you'll land out frequently. Last year the first week > of July I did a 300km FAI triangle in the Cherokee in 4:30! Seriously considered turning downwind after the finish and attempting to get 500km before sunset.

Sounds great. But don't call it "low performance." Call it "high handicap!" Performance is in the hands of the pilot, and great performance can be extracted from these machines.

John Cochrane

[Tony[_5_]]

On Friday, January 11, 2013 3:54:45 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> > And don't be so sure that you'll land out frequently. Last year the first week > of July I did a 300km FAI triangle in the Cherokee in 4:30! Seriously considered turning downwind after the finish and attempting to get 500km before sunset.
>
>
>
> Sounds great. But don't call it "low performance." Call it "high handicap!" Performance is in the hands of the pilot, and great performance can be extracted from these machines.
>
>
>
> John Cochrane

as the 1-26 Association says "XC Soaring for the High Performance Pilot!"

Was thinking the other day that maybe next year we should have a high class and a low class. day winners in high class get bottles of wine. low class winners, a case of PBR.

:D

[Peter von Tresckow]

Tony > wrote:
> On Friday, January 11, 2013 3:54:45 PM UTC-6, wrote:
>>> And don't be so sure that you'll land out frequently. Last year the
>>> first week > of July I did a 300km FAI triangle in the Cherokee in
>>> 4:30! Seriously considered turning downwind after the finish and
>>> attempting to get 500km before sunset.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds great. But don't call it "low performance." Call it "high
>> handicap!" Performance is in the hands of the pilot, and great
>> performance can be extracted from these machines.
>>
>>
>>
>> John Cochrane
>
> as the 1-26 Association says "XC Soaring for the High Performance Pilot!"
>
> Was thinking the other day that maybe next year we should have a high
> class and a low class. day winners in high class get bottles of wine. low
> class winners, a case of PBR.
>
> :D

What no Michelob Golden Draft???

Pete

[Tony[_5_]]

On Friday, January 11, 2013 7:49:05 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
> Tony > wrote:
>
> > On Friday, January 11, 2013 3:54:45 PM UTC-6, wrote:
>
> >>> And don't be so sure that you'll land out frequently. Last year the
>
> >>> first week > of July I did a 300km FAI triangle in the Cherokee in
>
> >>> 4:30! Seriously considered turning downwind after the finish and
>
> >>> attempting to get 500km before sunset.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Sounds great. But don't call it "low performance." Call it "high
>
> >> handicap!" Performance is in the hands of the pilot, and great
>
> >> performance can be extracted from these machines.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> John Cochrane
>
> >
>
> > as the 1-26 Association says "XC Soaring for the High Performance Pilot!"
>
> >
>
> > Was thinking the other day that maybe next year we should have a high
>
> > class and a low class. day winners in high class get bottles of wine. low
>
> > class winners, a case of PBR.
>
> >
>
> > :D
>
>
>
> What no Michelob Golden Draft???
>
>
>
> Pete

That's Golden Light Pete.