![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is Purpose of Sports Class Nationals? | Frank Paynter | Soaring | 28 | July 5th 06 09:10 PM |
Sports class tasking | [email protected] | Soaring | 12 | April 25th 05 01:32 PM |
Carrying flight gear on the airlines | Peter MacPherson | Piloting | 20 | November 25th 04 12:29 AM |
Two airspace classes for one airspace? (KOQU) | John R | Piloting | 8 | June 30th 04 04:46 AM |
Naval Air Refueling Needs Deferred in Air Force Tanker Plan | Henry J Cobb | Military Aviation | 47 | May 22nd 04 03:36 AM |