AT, TAT, MAT?

Thanks, Raul. I'm very familiar with the published information...
But as some of those authors point out - what people say about flying
and what people do _when_ flying are sometimes different. :-)

That's why I was looking for some anecdotal responses from competition
pilots... How often are they taking big climbs (regardless of whether
its a great thermal)? How often are they driving far enough between
thermals to lose 2000' or more in altitude between climbs?

Take care,

--Noel

On Oct 11, 12:13*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Thanks, Raul. *I'm very familiar with the published information...
But as some of those authors point out - what people say about flying
and what people do _when_ flying are sometimes different. :-)

That's why I was looking for some anecdotal responses from competition
pilots... How often are they taking big climbs (regardless of whether
its a great thermal)? *How often are they driving far enough between
thermals to lose 2000' or more in altitude between climbs?

Take care,

--Noel

Try downloading the flightlogs from SSA.org sailplane racing, contest
results and use seeyou to look at the flights and statistics. Usually
the top three spots for each contest day are posted. That will
provide much more reliable data than anecdotal reports ever will.

Noel - It really depends on the conditions. In the strong conditions we have the top pilots are typically doing a lot
more running, and a lot less thermalling than you would believe advisable/possible.

To do this they are using a much wider soaring band. That means they can be more picky about what thermal they take, and
yes the plan is to make big climbs, as infrequently as possible, in the strongest thermals possible. If you blow it and
get low, you have to take what you can get - the trick is to have the fortitude to leave your weak thermal and look for
better as soon as you have enough height to have a reasonable chance of getting to the next 'good' thermal.

I am constantly amazed at how low the top contest pilots are comfortable to go on a strong day, when the thermals are
decent from low down. Conversely, on other days the same pilots will be using maybe 2-3000 feet working band. Getting
home always beats landing out...

Consequently I tend to be sloooow.

One place to look - Recent contest at Magaliesburg (South Africa)
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...artId=ORIEN 1

Reasonable thermals, lots of wind. Look at the difference between the faster and slower pilots. I am the only one to log
flights on OLC in Club class but there are a few 15m pilots to compare.

What really works is to go and fly a contest, or same task as a competitive pilot. Then when you make a valid comparison
of your performance/decisions in similar conditions.

Don't compare your performance to others. Analyse their techniques, try them - use what works for you.



chipsoars wrote:
On Oct 11, 12:13 pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Thanks, Raul. I'm very familiar with the published information...
But as some of those authors point out - what people say about flying
and what people do _when_ flying are sometimes different. :-)

That's why I was looking for some anecdotal responses from competition
pilots... How often are they taking big climbs (regardless of whether
its a great thermal)? How often are they driving far enough between
thermals to lose 2000' or more in altitude between climbs?

Take care,

--Noel

Try downloading the flightlogs from SSA.org sailplane racing, contest
results and use seeyou to look at the flights and statistics. Usually
the top three spots for each contest day are posted. That will
provide much more reliable data than anecdotal reports ever will.

The height band theory works best when conditions in the task area are
homogeneous -- adjust for your conditions.

I recall a task at the Parowan Region 9 in 2007 that took me from the
clouds out into the blue, 20 miles or more to the next clouds. I left
the clouds at cloudbase at best L/D speed and kept it there. I just
made it to the next lift!

2NO