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