World Championship gliders

P7 seems to do just as well in ASG29 as D2a.
Jim

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 11:07:01 AM UTC-7, wrote:

I suspect that the size of the intellect, motivation, commitment, and preparation on the part of the person in the cockpit has an order of magnitude more importance than the size of the fuselage he or she is in.

UH

Interesting though Tom. Good point that you were the dealer though :-). I did not know the wings in the "a" models were allowed to be longer. But now that I think about it that does make sense. Shocking. Clearly the narrower fuselage and longer wings results in a dual performance advantage. Less drag/higher aspect ratio. Otherwise, why would the builder bother? This reminds me of the age of handicap sailing back in the 70s and 80s.

I have been a competitor and coach in the sport of sailing at a fairly high level. Sailing is a tremendously complex sport. One of my coaches taught me the following principle: focus on the controllable variables (positive) and don't get "caught up" in the frustration of uncontrollable variables. Or the only way to affect uncontrollable variables is to out perfect your competitors in controllable variable execution. More on this later...

The sport of "big boat" sailing became an all out designer/handicap war in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. Back then a very big element of the sport was designers and owners spending tens to hundreds of thousands each year modifying and building new boats to "beat" the handicap rule. That is to gain a fixed performance advantage over your competitors! Meanwhile rule makers changed rules constantly to plug holes in the rule that designers were exploiting. Generally the owners willingness to spend money and the designers willingness to get paid won the battle over the rule makers. Today that market (custom big boat (28-55 ft) handicap racing) has been almost completely destroyed because of it. Everyone hated the fact that boats become uncompetitive in a meter of months as new "custom" boats were built. They also hated knowing they were better sailors but getting beat by an "uncontrollable variable!" That is a boat that had a "rigged" handicap. In fact this was the norm. Tremendous damage was done to the sport because of it.

Only "one design" sailing classes are meaningfully successful today. One design means not just the same wingspan or "design rule" but the same manufacturer and the exact same boat (glider) for all competitors. This is guaranteed as part of the class charter. The class runs independently from the builder in fact.

The reason for this "evolution" in the sport of sailing is that fewer and fewer owners enjoyed putting a lot of time and effort into a sport (mastering the controllable variables such as sail shape, tacking, jybing, tactics and starting) only to lose because a new design comes along that provides a competitive advantage (uncontrollable variables). Only one rich owner could win at a time :-)! People wanted an EVEN PLAYING FIELD on which to be measured. Standard boats guaranteed to be identical, standardized race courses, condition limits, crew weights, etc.

I think soaring could use the concept of one design gliders. Something new and modern, of reasonable performance, reasonable price in which a large group of owners can buy with the confidence that in 5 years something new isn't going to come along with the specific goal of making what you own uncompetitive. It's a nasty cycle if you really think about it. Soaring has the same thing going on as sailing did back then, albeit at a slower pace.

Perhaps a change in course (owner driven) is in need?

Sean

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:17:24 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
Interesting though Tom. Good point that you were the dealer though :-). I did not know the wings in the "a" models were allowed to be longer. But now that I think about it that does make sense. Shocking. Clearly the narrower fuselage and longer wings results in a dual performance advantage. Less drag/higher aspect ratio. Otherwise, why would the builder bother? This reminds me of the age of handicap sailing back in the 70s and 80s.



I have been a competitor and coach in the sport of sailing at a fairly high level. Sailing is a tremendously complex sport. One of my coaches taught me the following principle: focus on the controllable variables (positive) and don't get "caught up" in the frustration of uncontrollable variables. Or the only way to affect uncontrollable variables is to out perfect your competitors in controllable variable execution. More on this later...



The sport of "big boat" sailing became an all out designer/handicap war in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. Back then a very big element of the sport was designers and owners spending tens to hundreds of thousands each year modifying and building new boats to "beat" the handicap rule. That is to gain a fixed performance advantage over your competitors! Meanwhile rule makers changed rules constantly to plug holes in the rule that designers were exploiting. Generally the owners willingness to spend money and the designers willingness to get paid won the battle over the rule makers. Today that market (custom big boat (28-55 ft) handicap racing) has been almost completely destroyed because of it. Everyone hated the fact that boats become uncompetitive in a meter of months as new "custom" boats were built. They also hated knowing they were better sailors but getting beat by an "uncontrollable variable!" That is a boat that had a "rigged" handicap. In fact this was the norm. Tremendous damage was done to the sport because of it.



Only "one design" sailing classes are meaningfully successful today. One design means not just the same wingspan or "design rule" but the same manufacturer and the exact same boat (glider) for all competitors. This is guaranteed as part of the class charter. The class runs independently from the builder in fact.



The reason for this "evolution" in the sport of sailing is that fewer and fewer owners enjoyed putting a lot of time and effort into a sport (mastering the controllable variables such as sail shape, tacking, jybing, tactics and starting) only to lose because a new design comes along that provides a competitive advantage (uncontrollable variables). Only one rich owner could win at a time :-)! People wanted an EVEN PLAYING FIELD on which to be measured. Standard boats guaranteed to be identical, standardized race courses, condition limits, crew weights, etc.



I think soaring could use the concept of one design gliders. Something new and modern, of reasonable performance, reasonable price in which a large group of owners can buy with the confidence that in 5 years something new isn't going to come along with the specific goal of making what you own uncompetitive. It's a nasty cycle if you really think about it. Soaring has the same thing going on as sailing did back then, albeit at a slower pace.



Perhaps a change in course (owner driven) is in need?



Sean

In the US, we don't have "one design", except for the failed PW-5 experiment, and 1-26's, but we do have excellent parity in 15M, Std, and 18M with the first two having plenty of competitive gliders available at pretty reasonable prices.
I'm not sure what change would make for more stability or accessibility.
UH

I agree the 15/18 meter thing is going well, for now. No glider in these classes has a clear advantage (perhaps the Diana 2 but the company is a mess....) but only a certain subset of gliders are competitive in each class. If you don't have a 27, V2 in 15m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/15m/486_15m.htm) or a 29, V2 or JS1 in 18m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/18m/486_18m.htm), good luck! This has been the case for 10 years or so. But for how much longer will that last?

If a new glider comes along that is a "game changer" in either class (only a matter of time) the delicate balance that we currently enjoy would likely collapse pretty quickly. And hundreds of gliders that are today competitive will become basically obsolete.

Imagine if the Duckhawk had turned out to be "unbeatable" or clearly better in 15m and 20 US guys/gals ordered them. Imagine if 1st-8th at the US 15m nationals was composed of Duckhawks (every year), then a mix of 27s and V2's, etc. For how long would the Nationals attract 27s and D2s? Sure, a few would upgrade their gliders to the new performance level but many would simply no longer attend.

In 18m (and 15m as well), the rumored Ventus 3 approaches perhaps as early next year. Deposits are already flying into the US dealers hands. Why? Because pilots all want to buy a competitive advantage. This is part of the game in soaring today. If the V3 turns out to be dominant (its design goal!) then the V2's, 29's etc all the sudden scramble for the new performance level. But a certain number will simply give up on the Nationals.

If a designer/builder "nails it" and designs/builds a game changing glider....all bets are off. The risk is that the 15/18 meter classes get destroyed and not enough new buyers are willing to spend the money to "be competitive." A net loss initially that may never recover.

In the US, our already delicate Nationals scene would be severely disputed by such a glider. The SSA response would likely need to be handicapping. Etc, etc. A whole new set of problems there.

The PW5 was WAY too low of a performance level for One Design to work. If a glider of the 45:1 or greater performance was available at a reasonable price, a builder could get tremendous buy in for a one design class at all levels (Nationals and World level). One Design is a completely different mindset than trying to leapfrog other builders performance level. In leapfrogging, a builder gets a surge of sales and then a steep taper. In One Design the builder gets a gradual build in sales after an initial commitment from perhaps 50-100 buyers, then a steady track of sales over 20-30 years or more.

I for one would be very interested and supportive of a mid/high performance One Design glider concept being offered by a builder.

One Design is also less about the builder and more about developing a large consortium of like minded pilots. A group of pilots who are thinking long term.

Imagine is the ASW27 or LS8 or D2, etc was introduced as a one design class.. Or look at it this way. The Olympics does not even allow different builders of their One Design boats. All boats are built in the same run, etc. Soaring could learn a thing or two from sailing I think.

Sean

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 2:31:34 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
I agree the 15/18 meter thing is going well, for now. No glider in these classes has a clear advantage (perhaps the Diana 2 but the company is a mess...) but only a certain subset of gliders are competitive in each class. If you don't have a 27, V2 in 15m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/15m/486_15m.htm) or a 29, V2 or JS1 in 18m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/18m/486_18m.htm), good luck! This has been the case for 10 years or so. But for how much longer will that last?



If a new glider comes along that is a "game changer" in either class (only a matter of time) the delicate balance that we currently enjoy would likely collapse pretty quickly. And hundreds of gliders that are today competitive will become basically obsolete.



Imagine if the Duckhawk had turned out to be "unbeatable" or clearly better in 15m and 20 US guys/gals ordered them. Imagine if 1st-8th at the US 15m nationals was composed of Duckhawks (every year), then a mix of 27s and V2's, etc. For how long would the Nationals attract 27s and D2s? Sure, a few would upgrade their gliders to the new performance level but many would simply no longer attend.



In 18m (and 15m as well), the rumored Ventus 3 approaches perhaps as early next year. Deposits are already flying into the US dealers hands. Why? Because pilots all want to buy a competitive advantage. This is part of the game in soaring today. If the V3 turns out to be dominant (its design goal!) then the V2's, 29's etc all the sudden scramble for the new performance level. But a certain number will simply give up on the Nationals.



If a designer/builder "nails it" and designs/builds a game changing glider...all bets are off. The risk is that the 15/18 meter classes get destroyed and not enough new buyers are willing to spend the money to "be competitive." A net loss initially that may never recover.



In the US, our already delicate Nationals scene would be severely disputed by such a glider. The SSA response would likely need to be handicapping. Etc, etc. A whole new set of problems there.



The PW5 was WAY too low of a performance level for One Design to work. If a glider of the 45:1 or greater performance was available at a reasonable price, a builder could get tremendous buy in for a one design class at all levels (Nationals and World level). One Design is a completely different mindset than trying to leapfrog other builders performance level. In leapfrogging, a builder gets a surge of sales and then a steep taper. In One Design the builder gets a gradual build in sales after an initial commitment from perhaps 50-100 buyers, then a steady track of sales over 20-30 years or more.



I for one would be very interested and supportive of a mid/high performance One Design glider concept being offered by a builder.



One Design is also less about the builder and more about developing a large consortium of like minded pilots. A group of pilots who are thinking long term.



Imagine is the ASW27 or LS8 or D2, etc was introduced as a one design class. Or look at it this way. The Olympics does not even allow different builders of their One Design boats. All boats are built in the same run, etc.. Soaring could learn a thing or two from sailing I think.



Sean

Of course a massive shift to a one design glider costs the same to the participants as a massive shift to a new competitive glider.

Even in one design yacht racing, some boats seem to be faster than others whether is it newer sails, a 3 sigma light hull, or whatever. That's why the fairest racing is done in collegiate, where in many regattas crews rotate boats every race of the series. Bringing a "hot" or tweaked boat then gives you no advantage. Somehow I don't see that being agreed to in soaring....

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:00:12 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 2:31:34 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:

I agree the 15/18 meter thing is going well, for now. No glider in these classes has a clear advantage (perhaps the Diana 2 but the company is a mess...) but only a certain subset of gliders are competitive in each class.. If you don't have a 27, V2 in 15m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/15m/486_15m.htm) or a 29, V2 or JS1 in 18m (http://www.wgc2014.hb.pl/wyniki/18m/486_18m.htm), good luck! This has been the case for 10 years or so. But for how much longer will that last?







If a new glider comes along that is a "game changer" in either class (only a matter of time) the delicate balance that we currently enjoy would likely collapse pretty quickly. And hundreds of gliders that are today competitive will become basically obsolete.







Imagine if the Duckhawk had turned out to be "unbeatable" or clearly better in 15m and 20 US guys/gals ordered them. Imagine if 1st-8th at the US 15m nationals was composed of Duckhawks (every year), then a mix of 27s and V2's, etc. For how long would the Nationals attract 27s and D2s? Sure, a few would upgrade their gliders to the new performance level but many would simply no longer attend.







In 18m (and 15m as well), the rumored Ventus 3 approaches perhaps as early next year. Deposits are already flying into the US dealers hands. Why? Because pilots all want to buy a competitive advantage. This is part of the game in soaring today. If the V3 turns out to be dominant (its design goal!) then the V2's, 29's etc all the sudden scramble for the new performance level. But a certain number will simply give up on the Nationals.







If a designer/builder "nails it" and designs/builds a game changing glider...all bets are off. The risk is that the 15/18 meter classes get destroyed and not enough new buyers are willing to spend the money to "be competitive." A net loss initially that may never recover.







In the US, our already delicate Nationals scene would be severely disputed by such a glider. The SSA response would likely need to be handicapping. Etc, etc. A whole new set of problems there.







The PW5 was WAY too low of a performance level for One Design to work. If a glider of the 45:1 or greater performance was available at a reasonable price, a builder could get tremendous buy in for a one design class at all levels (Nationals and World level). One Design is a completely different mindset than trying to leapfrog other builders performance level. In leapfrogging, a builder gets a surge of sales and then a steep taper. In One Design the builder gets a gradual build in sales after an initial commitment from perhaps 50-100 buyers, then a steady track of sales over 20-30 years or more.







I for one would be very interested and supportive of a mid/high performance One Design glider concept being offered by a builder.







One Design is also less about the builder and more about developing a large consortium of like minded pilots. A group of pilots who are thinking long term.







Imagine is the ASW27 or LS8 or D2, etc was introduced as a one design class. Or look at it this way. The Olympics does not even allow different builders of their One Design boats. All boats are built in the same run, etc. Soaring could learn a thing or two from sailing I think.







Sean



Of course a massive shift to a one design glider costs the same to the participants as a massive shift to a new competitive glider.



Even in one design yacht racing, some boats seem to be faster than others whether is it newer sails, a 3 sigma light hull, or whatever. That's why the fairest racing is done in collegiate, where in many regattas crews rotate boats every race of the series. Bringing a "hot" or tweaked boat then gives you no advantage. Somehow I don't see that being agreed to in soaring.....

maybe we need to adopt a claim rule like the hometown dirt track does with IMCA hobby stocks and the like. If we think you've been tweaking a bit too much on your (insert glider here), I get to buy it!

True but your one design glider would be competitive for many years. Currently your looking at 5-10 years before it becomes obsolete.

Originally Posted by Sean Fidler

True but your one design glider would be competitive for many years. Currently your looking at 5-10 years before it becomes obsolete.

That may well prove to be the case but the Ventus 2 first won a worlds in 1995 (15m) and still figures prominently even today. There have been incremental improvements for sure but it's fundamentally the same glider.

Colin

At 00:45 07 August 2014, Sean Fidler wrote:
True but your one design glider would be competitive for many years.
Currently your looking at 5-10 years before it becomes obsolete.


Discus 2a/LS8 - getting on for 20 year old designs now - well the 8 is
even older considering its essentialy an unflapped 6.

At 00:45 07 August 2014, Sean Fidler wrote:
True but your one design glider would be competitive for many years.
Currently your looking at 5-10 years before it becomes obsolete.


Discus 2a/LS8 - getting on for 20 year old designs now - well the 8 is
even older considering its essentialy an unflapped 6.