On Aug 20, 1:09*pm, Gary Osoba wrote:
With all the drama in the 2012 WGC Open Class, here's how the various
designs compared by total average points, followed by the total number
of ships flown through the end of the contest (for calculating
statistical variance):

11427 * JS-1C (4)
11316 * Concordia (1)
11240 * EB-29 (2)
11089 * Quintus (7)
11069 * Antares 23 (1)
10339 * Nimbus 4 (2)
* 9977 * EB-28 (4)
* 8962 * ASH-25 (1) Another damaged and withdrew
* 7631 * ASW-22BL

I did not include powered models as separate designs since the ships
were all in high ballast most of the contest. Obviously, designs with
only 1 or 2 gliders in the contest can vary statistically much more,
i.e. it might not be a good idea to bet against 4 or 5 Concordia's.
The Antares 23 and Quintus share the same wing, and should be very
similar in performance. Pilots in the top two designs above were
essentially learning to fly them during the contest, and that may be
true for several of the other pilot/ship combinations. I did not have
the opportunity to speak with many of the pilots.

The numbers are for this contest only, and its conditions, flown by
the respective pilots, etc., etc. Further disclaimer- I do not have an
affiliation with any of the makers, nor have I owned a glider produced
by any of them. Just the numbers.

An interesting design revolution is going on here. Feel free to
correct if I got anything wrong.

Best Regards,

Gary Osoba

That 21-23 meter highly ballasted gliders do well in open class under
strong conditions is very interesting.

However, the big -- shocking really -- news I see in reading the WGC
results is pilot technique not hot gliders. Here we're not talking
about 1-2%, we're talking huge margins. The US Uvalde gurus in 15 and
18 ended up quite low on the scoresheet. These guys are just
unbeatatable in US national contests. I speak with authority here!
When I go to Uvalde, I fly my butt off and they always beat me by 2-3
mph when I'm doing well, and much more when, inevitably, I get to the
hill country at 2000'. Sure, there were some clear bad luck days, but
where were the stellar days? The Europeans blew in to town, and flew
the pants off us. So much for the mysterious ways of Uvalde weather.
What are they doing differently? I can't see anything on the traces
except a magic ability to drive at 110 knots, achieve LDs in the 70
and 80 range while doing so, then roll right in to 5-8 knot thermals
without getting low. (Actually, some big names from Europe seemed to
have similar very disappointing performances. So maybe there is a more
general set of lessons learned)

What's the story? There is a 5 - 10 mph discrepancy in pilot
technique, gaggling strategy / start gate technique, bumping strategy
or something. I hope the US team will share some "lessons learned" at
some point. Or maybe those of you who were there have opinions.

John Cochrane