Roger that - already starting to work on it.

Please remember that LS8 and D2 ARE on the US club class list already - per my response to Tim. (worse performance than an ASW20a)

2T

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 9:24:54 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:56:21 PM UTC-7, wrote:

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 2:10:24 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:



SNIPModern standard will be part of club. SNIP



John:







Why, exactly, WILL (my emphasis) Modern Standard be part of Club Class?





Your statement seems to make this a non-negotiable point.



If the point if making handicapped racing better racing by reducing the spread of handicaps, why must Club get stuck with the biggest, and arguably semi-unworkable, handicap range, while the folding into 15m of Modern Standard and Last Generation 15m is not on the table.



The handicap range between current 15m gliders and Modern Standard (plus the last generation of 15m) is surely much more tight than the handicap range between modern standard (and last generation 15m) and the Libelle - let alone the upper limit of, say, a 1-26, as written into the US Club Class definition today



If we go to handicapped racing as the main experience in sailplane racing, we need to make it work so that everyone has or feels like they are getting the best racing experience possible. This si done by narrowing, not broadening the handicap ranges.



Tim EY



I was looking and the handicaps by glider model and have started looking at the FAA registration database to see where the fleet size is.



First cut, it seems like a Club Class focused on 1.02 (Std Libelle) to 0.91 (the last production generation of standard) would capture a lot of the very large and popular racing capable fleet. I know that higher handicap gliders like older Schreders are included but honestly I don't see those showing up in numbers. It seems like there is little to gain from having very large handicaps in club class from a size of fleet/participation perspective so that may be the far more productive place to reduce the range of handicaps. It turns out that including modern standard class - extending to Discus 2 versus stopping at Discus a or ASW-24 expands the handicap range by only 0.01, whereas including a bunch of older gliders below the standard Libelle expands it by 0.05 or more. I need to get the numbers, but I'm guessing that there are a lot more active glider pilots wanting to race at the Modern Standard side of the equation than those with Sisus and HP-11s and the handicap range required is 1/5 as wide - or less. I expect you get many more capable pilots on the higher performance end, but it doesn't appear to be at all an issue of the handicap expansion - at least based on the data.



I think the idea of creating an OLC format for very low performance gliders may indeed make a much more accessible entry at the low end rather than trying to include them in Club Class were you could get a lot more vibrant competitive participation by moving 1% up in performance to give an outlet for Modern Standard gliders - and get a solution for the east/west travel problem. This presumes that you are interested in increasing competitiveness of Club rather than restricting it for a VERY small increment in handicap range.



As to the Std/15M range - it looks like 0.92 to 0.87 gets you most of the latest generation Std and 15M plus some older 15M. That seems like a good critical mass of installed base of gliders.



I'd be very interested to see what a lift strength and wind handicap adjustment would look like for FAI classes, Peter. I'd say let's take a look.



9B