Hilton Cup Handicap questions

[ttaylor at cc.usu.edu]

Ok, I have laid out the 1000K FAI traingle, working on the water to
load on board (thanks everyone for the comments) to try to get around
then I look up the handicaps to see how the Ventus B stacks up when I
find this:

Ventus B .885
Ventus 2A .895
Ventus 2B .900
LS6 A/B/C .900
ASW27B .907


What am I missing here? Anyone want to trade a V2 or ASW27B for my
Ventus B? The handicap says my 23 year old Ventus is better than your
new ones.

Tim

[Bob Johnson]

ttaylor at cc.usu.edu wrote:
> Ok, I have laid out the 1000K FAI traingle, working on the water to
> load on board (thanks everyone for the comments) to try to get around
> then I look up the handicaps to see how the Ventus B stacks up when I
> find this:
>
> Ventus B .885
> Ventus 2A .895
> Ventus 2B .900
> LS6 A/B/C .900
> ASW27B .907
>
>
> What am I missing here? Anyone want to trade a V2 or ASW27B for my
> Ventus B? The handicap says my 23 year old Ventus is better than your
> new ones.
>
> Tim
>


With Dick Johnson's wing root fairings, it's better still!

Bob

[[email protected]]

The 2005 SSA handicaps say:
Ventus B .899
Ventus 2A .883
Ventus 2B .884
ASW 27 .880

Anyhow it amounts to a couple of bug's worth difference between them.

[ttaylor at cc.usu.edu]

Oh sorry forgot to include my numbers came from:

http://barronhiltoncup.com/

The SSA numbers would make much more sense.

[[email protected]]

The hilton cup numbers look like they are based on how easy the glider
is to fly - at least for the Ventus B vs LS6 (from personal
experience)!

Kirk
66

[Eric Greenwell]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> "ttaylor at cc.usu.edu" > wrote:
>
>
>>I look up the handicaps to see how the Ventus B stacks up when I
>>find this:
>>
>>Ventus B .885
>>Ventus 2A .895
>>Ventus 2B .900
>>LS6 A/B/C .900
>>ASW27B .907
>>
>>
>>What am I missing here?
>
>
> I'm not sure where you got your handicaps, but I found a
> similar oddity. My Ventus C with a B fuselage (large) has a
> worse handicap (CH2003) than with the A fuselage (small).
> The best answer I could come up with was that the B fuselage
> weighs more than the A, giving it a higher wing loading.
> Presumably the handicap was supposed to be adjusted for
> actual weight relative to the listed weight. Your handicaps
> still look odd.

The list Tim used is bizarre: An ASW 20 has a handicap of .900; an ASW
27 is .907! And try to get the DG 400 pilots around here to believe
this: DG 400(17) = .869; ASH 26 E = .875! If these handicaps were used
in the OLC, I'd be doing a lot better.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA