On Monday, 20 August 2012 23:37:12 UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Monday, August 20, 2012 10:05:29 PM UTC-7, Ron Gleason wrote:

On Monday, 20 August 2012 16:40:44 UTC-6, Brad Alston wrote:



Dave Nadler;821793 Wrote:







On Monday, August 20, 2012 2:09:57 PM UTC-4, 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-























Were all the JS-1 flown in open class the new "C"







stretch model, or were some of them "B" 18-meter ?







Score-sheet shows some B models IIRC ?















See ya, Dave















Sorry, this is a bit off topic of design...















I am not a competition pilot so my question are out of total







ignorance...please forgive. I enjoyed following the 2012 WGC online very







much.















The one thing I notice as the days progressed was that it seemed, and







totally anecdotal of course, was that pilots from the same country







finished very close to each other. Could it be that team flying







techniques are more refined outside the U.S.?...thus giving the







advantage of having at least two ships, instead of one,







finding/utilizing the best lift lines to the benefit of the team. Is







that sort of thing common practice in these sorts of contests? Do the







U.S. pilots get a chance to develop their team flying skills?















Brad.







































--







Brad Alston







The glider models designations for the JS-1's are accurate on the score sheets. Exact gliders models were listed after Leo submitted to scoring the correct designation. For open they are listed JS1-C and 18 meter are JS-1B.







Ron Gleason



Just to be clear, a JS-1C does not mean 21m, they can fly with 18m wings as well. The C is basically the stronger wing to allow the 21m option. It would be nice to use nomeclature that make the span perfectly clear, like JS-1C-18m, JS-1C-21m etc.



Darryl

look the open class score sheets, it states JS-1C 21. I entered the data myself when Leo requested the change.