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

Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 19th 19, 10:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

I do quite like the handicapping they use in the F1.0 GP here in Aus.
The handicap is applied as a larger circle around the turnpoint/points in accordance with handicap.
This means speeds are directly comparable ‘off the stick”
Here from memory, we run
Multi class 15m 18m and open
Standard and Club class nationals.
Junior Nationals
20M Nationals.
  #2  
Old May 19th 19, 03:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tim Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

It is time to end the Sports class and 13.5m in the US. We need to focus energy on improving the pilots we have in Club, Std, 15M, 18M and Open. We will have to see if 20M is a viable class as well. The turnout so far indicates there is not a large enough base to make it worth supporting.

The sports class serves no purpose other than a place for pilots to complete when they don't want to drive to their own nationals.

We would be better off with several handicapped contests, similar to Australia, held around the country so no one has to drive more than a day to complete in their own class.

The US process is unfriendly to those that work and have younger families. If we wish to improve the overall number of pilots that race and the quality of our pilots we need to stop pretending it is still 1960 and revise the entire process.

  #3  
Old May 19th 19, 07:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

Well Tim, you are wrong below.

The sports class serves no purpose other than a place for pilots to complete when they don't want to drive to their own nationals.


The sports class also gives me in my DG400 a place to compete, as well as a number of other ships that don't fall into another class to compete.

Kevin
92
  #4  
Old May 20th 19, 12:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tim Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

Actually Kevin,

The DG400 can fly in 15M, 18M and/or Club class. I don't see you signed up for the Sports Class Nationals.

Tim


  #5  
Old May 20th 19, 10:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Steve Leonard[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

On Sunday, May 19, 2019 at 6:45:44 PM UTC-5, Tim Taylor wrote:
Actually Kevin,

The DG400 can fly in 15M, 18M and/or Club class. I don't see you signed up for the Sports Class Nationals.

Tim


Not Club Class, Tim. Those with motors have now been removed from the approved list, even if they were within the range. Also, those in range but with greater than 15 meter span were removed from the US Club Class List.

Steve Leonard
  #6  
Old May 21st 19, 12:41 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

As far as development for the Nationals, the 1-26 group is the one group that traditionally has gotten scheduling the best for someone that is still woking. Usually practice Monday and Tues with the contest beginning Wed, and ending up in time to have a couple of days to drive home. So only 2 weeks vacation are burnt.

Kevin
92
formerly 192
  #7  
Old May 21st 19, 01:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy Blackburn[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 608
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

On Monday, May 20, 2019 at 2:39:04 PM UTC-7, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Sunday, May 19, 2019 at 6:45:44 PM UTC-5, Tim Taylor wrote:
Actually Kevin,

The DG400 can fly in 15M, 18M and/or Club class. I don't see you signed up for the Sports Class Nationals.

Tim


Not Club Class, Tim. Those with motors have now been removed from the approved list, even if they were within the range. Also, those in range but with greater than 15 meter span were removed from the US Club Class List.

Steve Leonard


One alternative would be to expand Club Class beyond the FAI definition to include motorgliders, longer wingspans and a wider range of handicaps. Then we could retire Sports Class because it would be totally redundant.

Some people seem to not like keeping Club Class close to the FAI definition. Others seem to want to keep Club Class pure to the FAI definition (no recent generation Standard Class ships, for example). How far afield should we go in expanding Club?

Discuss.

Andy Blackburn
9B
  #8  
Old May 21st 19, 06:38 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 147
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

I think Sports Class has done a lot and we need to keep it - I just question the purpose of crowning a National Champion, especially if a Sports Nats weakens turnout at the other Nats.

The FAI classes, let's conform as best we can to field a team that can win at the Worlds.
  #9  
Old May 23rd 19, 04:12 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Phil Chidekel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes

One alternative would be to expand Club Class beyond the FAI definition to include motorgliders, longer wingspans and a wider range of handicaps. Then we could retire Sports Class because it would be totally redundant.

Some people seem to not like keeping Club Class close to the FAI definition. Others seem to want to keep Club Class pure to the FAI definition (no recent generation Standard Class ships, for example). How far afield should we go in expanding Club?

Discuss.

Andy Blackburn
9B


I fly a Glasflügel 401 Kestrel (which has 17m wings). It was "grandfathered" into club class last year, after it was neglected to be removed from the list when the club class was restricted to a span of 15m.

In my opinion, the purpose of the club class is to take old, inexpensive, and accessible gliders and make them competitive in a racing class. The club class should stay true to this spirit.

The Kestrel fits in the [American] club class handicap range. So does the Open Cirrus. My Kestrel might be worth $15k, and there are numerous Open Cirri listed for under $10k. Despite this, neither of these gliders can compete. Apparently an extra two meters of wing is a bigger advantage than another 25 years of airfoil/structural design evolution found on the Discus 2 or ASW-28.

I can immediately think of two US clubs that own Open Cirri, but these clubs can't send these gliders to compete in the club class nationals. I know of zero US clubs that own an ASW-28 or a Discus 2.

As I see it, we should either adopt the FAI club class definition and conform to the rest of the world, or expand our definition to be more inclusive. I'm not sure where span/motor restrictions came from. These seem like arbitrary and unnecessary limitations, particularly because the spirit of the club class has already been lost when gliders designed in 1967 that cost $10k are racing against gliders designed in 1997 that cost $70k.

To be clear, I'm fine with the new stuff remaining in the class. However, given that the list is already completely whack, there is *no* basis to limit the rest of us from having fun, too.

Rant over. I'm extremely grateful to UH for letting me borrow his ASW-24 to compete this year. But it feels wrong to be going to the club class nationals with something 20 years newer and 2-3 times more expensive than the poor Kestrel who gets left behind.
  #10  
Old May 21st 19, 12:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes


The DG400 can fly in 15M, 18M and/or Club class. I don't see you signed up for the Sports Class Nationals.



No, Only home for DG400 and several other birds now is in Sports. The 400 at least in the east does not climb well in 15 meter, and unless it was a 15 meter handicap class, there would be no reason to enter a 15 meter race. You could "fly" in 15 meter, but certainly not compete.

As for Club Class, it is only 15 meter now and pure gliders.

Still working for a living, so having to settle for the Seniors, Perry, and upcoming Cordele, but I look forward to flying in the Sports Class Natiionals again. Have flown in two, but my work makes it difficult, if not impossible to fly something on the other side of the country, and unfortunately, many nationals are set up so you have to take 3 weeks vacation to make it work with my work, where we cannot take individual days.

Kevin


 




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
Contest Class Development for Future Success - The Case fordeveloping the Handicapped Classes [email protected] Soaring 39 July 17th 14 03:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.