A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WGC Open Design Comparison



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old August 20th 12, 11:40 PM
Brad Alston Brad Alston is offline
Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Jun 2011
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Posts: 79
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Nadler View Post
On Monday, August 20, 2012 2:09:57 PM UTC-4, Gary Osoba wrote:
With all the drama in the 2012 WGC Open Class, here's how the various

designs compared by total average points, followed by the total number

of ships flown through the end of the contest (for calculating

statistical variance):



11427 JS-1C (4)

11316 Concordia (1)

11240 EB-29 (2)

11089 Quintus (7)

11069 Antares 23 (1)

10339 Nimbus 4 (2)

9977 EB-28 (4)

8962 ASH-25 (1) Another damaged and withdrew

7631 ASW-22BL



I did not include powered models as separate designs since the ships

were all in high ballast most of the contest. Obviously, designs with

only 1 or 2 gliders in the contest can vary statistically much more,

i.e. it might not be a good idea to bet against 4 or 5 Concordia's.

The Antares 23 and Quintus share the same wing, and should be very

similar in performance. Pilots in the top two designs above were

essentially learning to fly them during the contest, and that may be

true for several of the other pilot/ship combinations. I did not have

the opportunity to speak with many of the pilots.



The numbers are for this contest only, and its conditions, flown by

the respective pilots, etc., etc. Further disclaimer- I do not have an

affiliation with any of the makers, nor have I owned a glider produced

by any of them. Just the numbers.



An interesting design revolution is going on here. Feel free to

correct if I got anything wrong.



Best Regards,



Gary Osoba



Were all the JS-1 flown in open class the new "C"
stretch model, or were some of them "B" 18-meter ?
Score-sheet shows some B models IIRC ?

See ya, Dave
Sorry, this is a bit off topic of design...

I am not a competition pilot so my question are out of total ignorance...please forgive. I enjoyed following the 2012 WGC online very much.

The one thing I notice as the days progressed was that it seemed, and totally anecdotal of course, was that pilots from the same country finished very close to each other. Could it be that team flying techniques are more refined outside the U.S.?...thus giving the advantage of having at least two ships, instead of one, finding/utilizing the best lift lines to the benefit of the team. Is that sort of thing common practice in these sorts of contests? Do the U.S. pilots get a chance to develop their team flying skills?

Brad.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
open design practices and homebuilts. [email protected] Home Built 7 September 4th 10 01:38 PM
Comparison of older Open Class gliders SoaringXCellence Soaring 5 March 15th 08 05:02 PM
F-22 Comparison robert arndt Military Aviation 39 December 4th 03 04:25 PM
Comparison of IFR simulators Chris Kurz Simulators 0 October 27th 03 10:35 AM
EMW A6 Comparison to X-15 robert arndt Military Aviation 8 October 2nd 03 02:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.