Evan,

I wonder if there has been a study done on tradeoffs between sink rate and circle size. Of course, the problem is that thermals are not very consistent...

And just to make things clear, I also vary my speed and bank angle until I find what I think is the best climb.

But I disagree that the best speed cannot be somewhat quantified. Stall is obviously the slowest - and that speed changes based on at least two variables. How far above stall - up to CL max, or perhaps even faster in a tight, turbulent thermal at 60 degrees of bank) is optimum? Without knowing what stall speed or min sink is, you are guessing or relying on experience or glider feedback. If you are not experienced, or your glide does not give much feedback, you are left with guessing - probably on the high side because of all the "stall spin" stories you have read here on RAS.

So if it is easy to display, in real time, what stall/min sink/Cl max is at your current flight condition, that data helps calibrate your "experience" quicker.

I find it amusing that we are raving about new technology varios and debating the relative merits of PNA thermal centering displays, while the airspeed cue we display in the cockpit to use all the new info is still just a mechanical airspeed indicator. Some gliders talk a lot, so that monitoring the airspeed is not very necessary. Others, like my ls6, have very little change in feel from the stall up to ridiculously high thermalling speeds - only the nose position relative to the horizon is a givaway to how fast I'm flying, once trimmed up. So the technique of pulling till you feel the stall buffet and easing off doesn't work very well!

Anyway- interesting discussion.

Cheers - gotta go give a glider ride.

Kirk
66