View Single Post
  #15  
Old February 25th 14, 01:22 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,124
Default Results*of*Flight*Performance*Determination*o f*the*Lak‐17a*FES

On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:
I had no intention of skewing volunteers! Just trying to understand the process. Yes I am passionate about the Lak17b FES. I assumed (wrongly) that the HC was a more proactive body. Social media and even Google Groups seem to be a much easier way to ask questions than emailing. Perhaps the SSA Handicap Committee could consider creating a Google Group or... (hold on to your chairs) even a Facebook group? Social is a much more efficient means of communication and open discussion that email for sure. Facebook groups for example can be private and each member can be approved once credentials are confirmed. Just a thought. Sincerely, Sean On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:00:39 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:04:10 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote: My initial goal was to press home that the FES system (blades, etc) has a significant impact in aerodynamic performance (drag) over the exact same glider without FES I think that it is now clear that a credible study has shown FES performance degradation that is both measurable and significant. I'm not sure why I should have to fill out a form for action to happen? While there may only be 2 Lak17b FES in the US at current, there are also others in Canada. A re-factored handicap may encourage a few more! Can someone from the handicap committee do the "rough math" (assume 2-4% drag) on the Lak17bFES handicap with a 75 lbs increase weight. Does that result in a handicap? What is the equation or equation set used to create a handicap? Or is it a subjective process? Thanks, Sean This is a discussion group that facilitates exchange of information and ideas. It is not in any way a formal part of the competition rules process. If you have a request of the rules or handicap committees you should make that request directly to them. Skewering volunteers in the hope of accomplishing your objective will accomplish nothing. The polar information referenced will be useful in allowing the handicap folks a chance to project expected cross coutry speed and create an appropriate handicap. UH


If you have input for the RC, or the HC for that matter, the time needed to organize your thoughts and any supporting information is and order of magnitude greater that that needed to do the e-mail itself.
If it is not worth taking the time to thoughtfully put the input together, it certainly would not be worth much of their time to consider it. Every e-mail sent to the RC should, and as far as I recall when chair did, get a response and was added to the list of topics to be considered when putting together the annual rules change agenda.
UH