Does the FAI think its April 1st?

tiistai 3. lokakuuta 2017 14.57.45 UTC+3 Muttley kirjoitti:
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 7:30:07 PM UTC+1, Paul T wrote:
http://www.fai.org/igc-our-sport/handicaps

So many misplaced handicaps its a joke. Whoever came up with this
list was clearly smoking some illegal substance at the time.

May be you should read this first

http://static.skysight.io/hc.pdf

Document on how they arrived at the changed Handicaps

1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate handicaps based on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and weather model.

2. Hmm... Computer generatend handicap spread is too large. Let's make it, shall we say, umm... 70% instead.

3. Done

Very scientific.

If you give a empty list of glider types to 100 competition pilots and ask them to individually write down their opionion of fair handicaps, you can create a averaged list that is fair to everyone (and you will be surprised how everyone will end up with same handicaps). Fair handicaps are actually quite obvious, no reason to use this kind of shoddy pseudoscience.

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 9:03:43 AM UTC-4, krasw wrote:
tiistai 3. lokakuuta 2017 14.57.45 UTC+3 Muttley kirjoitti:
On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 7:30:07 PM UTC+1, Paul T wrote:
http://www.fai.org/igc-our-sport/handicaps

So many misplaced handicaps its a joke. Whoever came up with this
list was clearly smoking some illegal substance at the time.

May be you should read this first

http://static.skysight.io/hc.pdf

Document on how they arrived at the changed Handicaps

1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate handicaps based on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and weather model.

2. Hmm... Computer generatend handicap spread is too large. Let's make it, shall we say, umm... 70% instead.

3. Done

Very scientific.

If you give a empty list of glider types to 100 competition pilots and ask them to individually write down their opionion of fair handicaps, you can create a averaged list that is fair to everyone (and you will be surprised how everyone will end up with same handicaps). Fair handicaps are actually quite obvious, no reason to use this kind of shoddy pseudoscience.

If the objective is to drive club class to an ASW-20 dominated club class, the exercise should be successful.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate handicaps based on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and weather model.

What exactly would be crappy with the Idaflieg measurements?

tiistai 3. lokakuuta 2017 16.30.50 UTC+3 Tango Whisky kirjoitti:

1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate handicaps based on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and weather model.

What exactly would be crappy with the Idaflieg measurements?

I have no other explanation to 304 vs. Mosquito handicaps. Do you?

To digress, we may never know, but I wonder how similar the new weather model used by the FAI is to the new weather model used by Schempp-Hirth to optimise the new Ventus wing?

Le mardi 3 octobre 2017 15:39:20 UTC+2, krasw a écritÂ*:
tiistai 3. lokakuuta 2017 16.30.50 UTC+3 Tango Whisky kirjoitti:

1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate handicaps based on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and weather model.

What exactly would be crappy with the Idaflieg measurements?

I have no other explanation to 304 vs. Mosquito handicaps. Do you?

The Idaflieg measurements involve a massive effort (calibrated reference sailplane, towing both sailplanes early morning high up multiple times, lots of customized measurement electronics and software)and are the most accurate measurements of glider polars you will ever get.

What you then do with the results is another story (which neither bothers nor interests me).

At 15:21 03 October 2017, Tango Whisky wrote:
Le mardi 3 octobre 2017 15:39:20 UTC+2, krasw a
=C3=A9crit=C2=A0:
tiistai 3. lokakuuta 2017 16.30.50 UTC+3 Tango Whisky kirjoitti:
=20
1. Let's make a fancy computer software and calculate
handicaps
bas=
ed on old crappy idaflieg measurements (304 vs. Mosquito!) and
weather
mode=
l.
=20
What exactly would be crappy with the Idaflieg
measurements?
=20
I have no other explanation to 304 vs. Mosquito handicaps. Do
you?

The Idaflieg measurements involve a massive effort (calibrated
reference
sa=
ilplane, towing both sailplanes early morning high up multiple
times, lots
=
of customized measurement electronics and software)and are the
most
accurat=
e measurements of glider polars you will ever get.

What you then do with the results is another story (which neither
bothers
n=
or interests me).

Trouble is sailplanes rarely compete in the smooth morning air!

More axe work at the bottom of the handicap list. Asw19 and cirrus handicapped the same? A light szd-55 with the same handicap as a libelle. And the us wants to adopt this handicap list?

If this change ends up reflected in the us rules I might have to go get a real job again so I can afford to double or triple my investment in the sport so I can stay competitive...