|
| 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
August 16th 05, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Thinking about handicapping contest weather
I've been replaying on-line contest .IGC files with Henryk Birecki's
"GPS_LOG WinCE". (This is a training function to learn Henryk's software) It's possible to set the software so auto-select the McCready number based on actual thermal strengths. Other software can do the same thing. The average M number is a pretty good way to determine how good the day was. For example, one day might be a M= 6.1 and the result is some very long, fast flights. Another might be a M=2.2 and shorter and slower flights result. My thought is that it might be possible to run the day's contest results through similar software to determine the average M number and use that number to handicap the weather in addition to handicapping the gliders. This is a simplistic way to reduce the day's soaring weather to a single number.The result would be to make the contest more equal for different gliders. That would interest me because my Nimbus 2C is not competitive with it's handicap in strong weather since the US Sports Class disallows water ballast. On the other hand, smaller gliders are not competitive in weak weather where the unballasted Nimbus is at it's best. Canceling WX effects could make the Sports Class more attractive. Thoughts? Bill Daniels 
|
|
#2
August 16th 05, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bill Daniels wrote:
I've been replaying on-line contest .IGC files with Henryk Birecki's "GPS_LOG WinCE". (This is a training function to learn Henryk's software) It's possible to set the software so auto-select the McCready number based on actual thermal strengths. Other software can do the same thing. The average M number is a pretty good way to determine how good the day was. For example, one day might be a M= 6.1 and the result is some very long, fast flights. Another might be a M=2.2 and shorter and slower flights result. My thought is that it might be possible to run the day's contest results through similar software to determine the average M number and use that number to handicap the weather in addition to handicapping the gliders. This is a simplistic way to reduce the day's soaring weather to a single number.The result would be to make the contest more equal for different gliders. That would interest me because my Nimbus 2C is not competitive with it's handicap in strong weather since the US Sports Class disallows water ballast. On the other hand, smaller gliders are not competitive in weak weather where the unballasted Nimbus is at it's best. Canceling WX effects could make the Sports Class more attractive. Thoughts? Bill Daniels Do you mean that every glider will have to a weather handicap value for each strength of weather? In your example your Nimbus needs a "favourable" weathercap on strong days and the smaller gliders need their favourable number on weak days. What I'd like is a handicap calculation that allows my small glider to score top points when I land out trying to cross those reeeeeally big blue gaps that only your big wings can handle :-) Martin, UK
|
|
#3
August 16th 05, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Do you mean that every glider will have to a weather
handicap value for each strength of weather? In your example your Nimbus needs a 'favourable' weathercap on strong days and the smaller gliders need their favourable number on weak days. What I'd like is a handicap calculation that allows my small glider to score top points when I land out trying to cross those reeeeeally big blue gaps that only your big wings can handle :-) Martin, UK Alot like AAT's then- great in theory- until you landout! On topic, this was done at the British Overseas Nationals. Results he http://www.soaringclub.com/Framesets...BONnewstxt.htm Shaun
|
|
#5
August 17th 05, 02:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ups.com... Bill Daniels wrote: I've been replaying on-line contest .IGC files with Henryk Birecki's "GPS_LOG WinCE". (This is a training function to learn Henryk's software) It's possible to set the software so auto-select the McCready number based on actual thermal strengths. Other software can do the same thing. The average M number is a pretty good way to determine how good the day was. For example, one day might be a M= 6.1 and the result is some very long, fast flights. Another might be a M=2.2 and shorter and slower flights result. My thought is that it might be possible to run the day's contest results through similar software to determine the average M number and use that number to handicap the weather in addition to handicapping the gliders. This is a simplistic way to reduce the day's soaring weather to a single number.The result would be to make the contest more equal for different gliders. That would interest me because my Nimbus 2C is not competitive with it's handicap in strong weather since the US Sports Class disallows water ballast. On the other hand, smaller gliders are not competitive in weak weather where the unballasted Nimbus is at it's best. Canceling WX effects could make the Sports Class more attractive. Thoughts? Bill Daniels Do you mean that every glider will have to a weather handicap value for each strength of weather? In your example your Nimbus needs a "favourable" weathercap on strong days and the smaller gliders need their favourable number on weak days. Well, I was sort of heading toward the idea of letting a computer look at all the competitors .IGC files to get a "power number" for the day. This would be a number related to the average strength of the thermals encountered during the time window from opening the start gate to the close of the task. This number would then be used, after the fact, as it were, to alter the glider handicap table so as to make it fair for the day. The competitors collective .IGC files contain a lot of information about the soarability of the day. There might be a way to extract these data for weather handicapping. No doubt, someone has thought of this. Bill Daniels
|
|
#6
August 17th 05, 04:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Of course, this thought goes to pot on a ridge day
like you will have at Mifflin, PA, or New Castle, VA. Or a wave site like Omarama. And it may get seriously flawed on an 'endless streets' day at a site like Uvalde. Best bet is just take what you've got and go have fun. Steve Leonard
|
|
#7
August 17th 05, 06:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bill Daniels wrote:
I've been replaying on-line contest .IGC files with Henryk Birecki's 'GPS_LOG WinCE'. (This is a training function to learn Henryk's software) It's possible to set the software so auto-select the McCready number based on actual thermal strengths. Other software can do the same thing. The average M number is a pretty good way to determine how good the day was. For example, one day might be a M= 6.1 and the result is some very long, fast flights. Another might be a M=2.2 and shorter and slower flights result. My thought is that it might be possible to run the day's contest results through similar software to determine the average M number and use that number to handicap the weather in addition to handicapping the gliders. This is a simplistic way to reduce the day's soaring weather to a single number.The result would be to make the contest more equal for different gliders. That would interest me because my Nimbus 2C is not competitive with it's handicap in strong weather since the US Sports Class disallows water ballast. On the other hand, smaller gliders are not competitive in weak weather where the unballasted Nimbus is at it's best. Canceling WX effects could make the Sports Class more attractive. Thoughts? Part of the problem in accomplishing this is that a large part the average climb for the day is influenced by the individual pilot. I've seen two pilots flying identical tasks one of whom saw an average thermal strength of 5.5 knots and the other of 9 knots (!). Picking the best thermals is the key differentiator in cross-country speed (and hence distance). By handicapping for it you are in part discounting skill - probably the opposite of what's intended. If you average over multiple traces you get into small numbers problems in most areas because few OLC pilots fly the same tasks on the same day. It would be great to equalize for weather (or even better, for weather/sailplane combinations) - but the more I think about it the less likely it seems that there is enough information available to estimate the 'pure' weather effects. If I fly 1 mile away from another pilot and find a blue street that ups my XC speed (and distance) by 20% was that pilot skill or a weather difference that we should equalize for? How about if I'm 10 miles away, 100 miles away, 1000 miles away? It's worth further thought, but the basic problem is the best pilots fly in the upper 10% of the lift strength distribution while less skilled pilots flying in the same air are lucky to fly in the upper 1/3 of the distribution. 9B
|
|
#8
August 17th 05, 03:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Andy Blackburn" wrote in message ... Bill Daniels wrote: I've been replaying on-line contest .IGC files with Henryk Birecki's 'GPS_LOG WinCE'. (This is a training function to learn Henryk's software) It's possible to set the software so auto-select the McCready number based on actual thermal strengths. Other software can do the same thing. The average M number is a pretty good way to determine how good the day was. For example, one day might be a M= 6.1 and the result is some very long, fast flights. Another might be a M=2.2 and shorter and slower flights result. My thought is that it might be possible to run the day's contest results through similar software to determine the average M number and use that number to handicap the weather in addition to handicapping the gliders. This is a simplistic way to reduce the day's soaring weather to a single number.The result would be to make the contest more equal for different gliders. That would interest me because my Nimbus 2C is not competitive with it's handicap in strong weather since the US Sports Class disallows water ballast. On the other hand, smaller gliders are not competitive in weak weather where the unballasted Nimbus is at it's best. Canceling WX effects could make the Sports Class more attractive. Thoughts? Part of the problem in accomplishing this is that a large part the average climb for the day is influenced by the individual pilot. I've seen two pilots flying identical tasks one of whom saw an average thermal strength of 5.5 knots and the other of 9 knots (!). Picking the best thermals is the key differentiator in cross-country speed (and hence distance). By handicapping for it you are in part discounting skill - probably the opposite of what's intended. If you average over multiple traces you get into small numbers problems in most areas because few OLC pilots fly the same tasks on the same day. It would be great to equalize for weather (or even better, for weather/sailplane combinations) - but the more I think about it the less likely it seems that there is enough information available to estimate the 'pure' weather effects. If I fly 1 mile away from another pilot and find a blue street that ups my XC speed (and distance) by 20% was that pilot skill or a weather difference that we should equalize for? How about if I'm 10 miles away, 100 miles away, 1000 miles away? It's worth further thought, but the basic problem is the best pilots fly in the upper 10% of the lift strength distribution while less skilled pilots flying in the same air are lucky to fly in the upper 1/3 of the distribution. 9B Of course, no system will be perfect and it's easy to find situations that would make it difficult. With wave or ridge lift available, the weather factor could be devalued as most pilots would be able to use the lift effectively. The biggest problems with weather are at the very strong or very weak end of the thermal spectrum. For example. Region nine at Parowan vs. the Sports Class Nationals at Ionia, Michigan. I've analyzed a number of .IGC files from the On-Line Contest that were flown in the same general area on the same day. The optimum McCready numbers were fairly close to each other. I think that most doing the same could reasonably be expected to say, "That was a 5 knot day". I was thinking of a real contest where the flying was restricted to a task area and the pilots were likely to be fairly good at thermalling. To help get a more accurate picture of the day, the lower 25% of the contestants could be discarded. If the upper 25% of the pilots got 5 knots +or- 1knot at the best hour of the day, that would seem to be a pretty good indication of the best the day had to offer. Bill Daniels
|
|
#9
August 17th 05, 04:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
At 14:18 17 August 2005, Bill Daniels wrote:
I was thinking of a real contest where the flying was restricted to a task area and the pilots were likely to be fairly good at thermalling. To help get a more accurate picture of the day, the lower 25% of the contestants could be discarded. If the upper 25% of the pilots got 5 knots +or- 1knot at the best hour of the day, that would seem to be a pretty good indication of the best the day had to offer. Oh, I thought you were suggesting a system for OLC purposes - where the sample size would probably be too small on average to be generally useful. In a 'real' contest situation you might get enough numbers to get usable results. I've talked about this with members of the competition committee because I think the idea has merit, at least in theory. Most think it's too complicated and that we get enough complaints about 'unfair' handicaps as it is. Honestly, I think it would be hard to come up with a McCready adjustment for every glider - particularly since most achieved cross-country speeds far exceed the theoretical McCready speed so it's not reasonable to base an adjustment on McCready theory alone. In my experience the thing that really spreads out the pack in sports class is actually the ratio of interthermal distance to height of the lift band. Wind speed in the boundary layer also matters a lot. The guys flying the little gliders at Parowan this year made heroic, but very low scoring flights on the windy days. If someone could come up with a reliable algorithm for calculating the 'day strength slope' in the handicap for all gliders I'd be very impressed. 9B
|
|
#10
August 18th 05, 02:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Brazillians use a weather based handicapping system for their nationals
(not enough gliders in any class to have a class based championship?) You might want to look into it before inventing something from scratch. Perhaps a Brazillian could post to tell us a bit about it? regards, dave r. "Andy Blackburn" wrote in message ... At 14:18 17 August 2005, Bill Daniels wrote: I was thinking of a real contest where the flying was restricted to a task area and the pilots were likely to be fairly good at thermalling. To help get a more accurate picture of the day, the lower 25% of the contestants could be discarded. If the upper 25% of the pilots got 5 knots +or- 1knot at the best hour of the day, that would seem to be a pretty good indication of the best the day had to offer. Oh, I thought you were suggesting a system for OLC purposes - where the sample size would probably be too small on average to be generally useful. In a 'real' contest situation you might get enough numbers to get usable results. I've talked about this with members of the competition committee because I think the idea has merit, at least in theory. Most think it's too complicated and that we get enough complaints about 'unfair' handicaps as it is. Honestly, I think it would be hard to come up with a McCready adjustment for every glider - particularly since most achieved cross-country speeds far exceed the theoretical McCready speed so it's not reasonable to base an adjustment on McCready theory alone. In my experience the thing that really spreads out the pack in sports class is actually the ratio of interthermal distance to height of the lift band. Wind speed in the boundary layer also matters a lot. The guys flying the little gliders at Parowan this year made heroic, but very low scoring flights on the windy days. If someone could come up with a reliable algorithm for calculating the 'day strength slope' in the handicap for all gliders I'd be very impressed. 9B
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING | The Ink Company | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 5th 03 12:07 AM |
| And they say the automated Weather Station problems "ASOS" are insignificant because only light aircraft need Weather Observations and forecasts... | Roy | Piloting | 4 | July 12th 03 04:03 PM |
Linear Mode
