ResultsÂ*ofÂ*FlightÂ*PerformanceÂ*DeterminationÂ*o fÂ*theÂ*Lakâ€�17aÂ*FES

just look at the current handicap boys and girls, which is equal for pure and FES. is that what it needs to be? you tell me HC.

god of soaring? wow, thanks? take a pill there pal. you'll feel better soon. WTH?

On 2/24/2014 7:17 PM, Sean F (F2) wrote:
just look at the current handicap boys and girls, which is equal for pure and FES. is that what it needs to be? you tell me HC.

god of soaring? wow, thanks? take a pill there pal. you'll feel better soon. WTH?

Have you looked recently? Current handicaps from the SSA web page on 2/24/14

AB Sportine Aviacija LAK-17B W 18 868 0.845
AB Sportine Aviacija LAK-17B FES MW 18 998 0.835

Keep in mind the handicaps are for sports class, no disposable ballast.
So they think the extra weight allowed more than makes up for the extra
drag.

I wonder if there is a handicap adjustment for removing FES blades like
there is for aftermarket wing root fairings or turbulators?

people. please stop trying to add a handicap PENALTY to a glider on the merits of it having a motor and folding propellers on the nose. nothing in the rules considers a motor as a performance advantage. there is no precedent for it. if there is i challenge you to name it. the idea of a penalty for being a motor-glider is absurd. an asg29e does not get an additional handicap penalty because it has a motor last i checked.

the only fact that will be considered here is that there is a CLEAR performance degradation (significant and for OBVIOUS reasons) for gliders equipped with the FES system on the nose of the aircraft. the FES glider has more drag, PERIOD. look at the performance charts. the glider suffers this drag penalty every second it flies vs. the pure version. the idea that a motor somehow provides an advantage is subjective fantasy. no other motor-glider gets a penalty for being a motor-glider alone. again this logic is absurd. but please, show us your examples.

handicaps are based on performance data and gross weights, PERIOD.

this is what we are discussing here. PERIOD.

lets focus on facts here and standard procedures for handicap assignment... PERIOD.

On Monday, February 24, 2014 12:21:30 PM UTC-5, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 9:20:13 AM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:

Looks like 2-4% to me from the L/D diagrams. Very significant. Handicap committee? Sean



Don't forget the adjustment the other direction for the higher weight. There is a formula for that, too, Sean.

By the way don't we need two sets of handicaps one adjusting for the weight for sports class and one not adjusting for the weight for FAI handicap contests with water?