year-limits for the Sports class

[[email protected]]

I have been reading the threads about the Sports Class with interest. I
note that currently the Sports Class tries to adjust for performance
differences between older and newer gliders. I suspect this is always
going to be hard since the performance difference between any two
gliders is not constant; it varies with conditions. Some gliders do
well in light conditions, others in heavy conditions, and so on.

But if we step back a bit, and check the big picture, the real point of
the Sports Class is to give pilots who cannot afford to keep up with
the arms race in the principal classes a chance to compete
meaningfully. The thing to note is that the pilots in such classes
don't generally fly any old crap--they fly older designs that were
competitive once, but which have been surpassed by later designs.

With this in mind, I think it might be better to limit the Sports class
by ship age rather than trying to juggle relative performance. It might
be plausible to have a twenty-year time gap. That would mean that you
can fly any ship in the Sports class that was commercially available in
or before 1986. None of those gliders would be competitive any more in
the 15-m or Open classes, but they could still fly in the Sports Class.

Johan Larson

[Jack[_1_]]

True performance numbers should be easy enough to derive.

L/D within flap/no flap categories seems adequate to this neophyte.

Why do we have classes based on anything else?



Jack

[Clint]

Jack wrote:
> True performance numbers should be easy enough to derive.
>
> L/D within flap/no flap categories seems adequate to this neophyte.
>
> Why do we have classes based on anything else?
>
>
>
> Jack

Different gliders are more/less competitive under different conditions.
My LAK 12 (L/D 48) will not beat an ASW-20 (L/D 43) on a strong South
African summer day. Thus the 106% handicap that the DAeC would apply to
my glider (based on German conditions) is unfair. However on a weak day
- my glider will certainly fly away from an ASW-20. This is due to 15m
racing gliders polars being more effective at higher speeds than to 20m
polars applicable to ASW-17's, Nimbus 2's and LAK 12's.

In South Africa - the Soaring Society has done a lot of work into
handicapping because there is a limited amount of new gliders that
complete regularly against older gliders. All classes are handicapped -
not just the club class. The system currently being used has the
ASW-20a as the base glider. There are three sets of handicaps and the
one applied on a particular day is based on the winning speeds (i.e. a
strong, intermediate or weak day). The strong and intermediate
handicaps assume ballasted gliders whilst the weak day assumes
un-ballasted gliders. This is changed for the club class where all
gliders are assumed to be un-ballasted because the rules do not allow
water.

My LAK 12 on a weak day carries a 108% handicap over the ASW-20 on a
weak day, but gets the benefit of a 98% handicap on a strong day.
During the last regional championships - a 35-year-old ASW-15 and
40-year-old Libelle in the Club class beat my LAK 12 into third place.
The pilots flew better than me!

Handicapping will always be a contentious issue and assuming a straight
L/D flapped/unflapped system is short-sighted. The South African
Soaring Society (www.sssa.org.za) is trying to be proactive and fair to
all participants.

Clinton
LAK-12

[Jack[_1_]]

Clint wrote:

> Handicapping will always be a contentious issue and assuming a straight
> L/D flapped/unflapped system is short-sighted. The South African
> Soaring Society (www.sssa.org.za) is trying to be proactive and fair to
> all participants.

I wish them luck. The WCSA PW5 is making more sense all the time.


Jack

[Jack[_4_]]

While the world class PW-5 is making sence to you. it doesn't seem to
making much of a splash anyhwere else. A national competition with 9
competitors is a poor showing. I could have bought a PW-5 but went with
more performance for less money. I have 10 hours in PW-5s and 6 hours
in the Russia. They're fun for a few times, but something about
reflexing the flaps and running from thermal to thermal at 120 kts. is
missing. I don't think they're ugly, quite the contrary. I just think
they will quickly leave their owners wanting for more performance. Then
again, to each his own. I'm giving Sports Class another look. I'll fly
at least one contest next year. I've made that commitment to myself.

Jack Womack
PIK-20B N77MA (TE)


Jack wrote:
> Clint wrote:
>
> > Handicapping will always be a contentious issue and assuming a straight
> > L/D flapped/unflapped system is short-sighted. The South African
> > Soaring Society (www.sssa.org.za) is trying to be proactive and fair to
> > all participants.
>
> I wish them luck. The WCSA PW5 is making more sense all the time.
>
>
> Jack

[Eric Greenwell[_1_]]

Jack wrote:
> They're fun for a few times, but something about
> reflexing the flaps and running from thermal to thermal at 120 kts. is
> missing.

Wow! That's missing from my ASH 26 E, too! Were do you fly that 120
knots is an appropriate interthermal speed?

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

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

[Jack[_4_]]

In West Texas when the thermals peg my varios with regularity, and stay
that way all the way around. It's nice having an overbuilt sailplane
that has a 130 kt. rough-air redline. Though 120 kts. may never be a
really appropriate interthermal speed, it's fun when the altitude and
lift strength is there. And, as I said, you can't do that in a
PeeWee..... It can sure make the miles click away under you. Though I
don't really do it often, I was flying 90 to 100 kts. between thermals
Sunday for about 3 hours. Move back to Houston... I hope not!

If you want to come this way, I can arrange a tow for you, but then
with a motorglider, you wouldn't need that anyway.

Have fun...

Jack Womack
PIK-20B N77MA (TE)

Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Jack wrote:
> > They're fun for a few times, but something about
> > reflexing the flaps and running from thermal to thermal at 120 kts. is
> > missing.
>
> Wow! That's missing from my ASH 26 E, too! Were do you fly that 120
> knots is an appropriate interthermal speed?
>
> --
> Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
>
> www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
> Operation"

[Eric Greenwell[_1_]]

Jack wrote:
> In West Texas when the thermals peg my varios with regularity, and stay
> that way all the way around. It's nice having an overbuilt sailplane
> that has a 130 kt. rough-air redline. Though 120 kts. may never be a
> really appropriate interthermal speed, it's fun when the altitude and
> lift strength is there. And, as I said, you can't do that in a
> PeeWee

I don't think I can do it in my ASH 26 E, either, with a rough air limit
of 99 knots. Or the Ka-6e, H301 Libelle, and ASW 20 that I had previously.

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

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, wrote:

> ...I think it might be better to limit the Sports class
> by ship age rather than trying to juggle relative performance...

That would eliminate a lot of new, inexpensive, and fun ships like the
Russia, Apis, Silent, Sparrowhawk, etc.

Personally, I think that the Sports class would be much more fun if
limited to ships built by the pilot. But that's just me...

Thanks, Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24
http://www.hpaircraft.com/glidair

[Jack[_4_]]

I might yet be included in that number if you'd hurry up and get the
HP-24 kits rolling out the door. Is here going to be a flaps-only
version? I'm kind of partial to landing while standing on the rudder
pedals... By the way... it's looking really NICE!

Jack Womack

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> Earlier, wrote:
>
> > ...I think it might be better to limit the Sports class
> > by ship age rather than trying to juggle relative performance...
>
> That would eliminate a lot of new, inexpensive, and fun ships like the
> Russia, Apis, Silent, Sparrowhawk, etc.
>
> Personally, I think that the Sports class would be much more fun if
> limited to ships built by the pilot. But that's just me...
>
> Thanks, Bob K.
> http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24
> http://www.hpaircraft.com/glidair