Dolphin flying

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:54:32 PM UTC-5, MNLou wrote:
Hank, Charlie, and Dave -

I should have made myself more clear -

For you "contest monsters" who focus on, fly, and win at the National level, of course you are always racing - even when you are practicing. That's what it takes to get fast. If you fly OLC, you max it out.

My contrast to a contest pilot was a pilot who flies XC but isn't trying to max out speed - just get around the course. Think a 200km triangle on a mid-summer day. Doesn't care too much about speed or how may OLC he/she gets. Just wants to have fun, go someplace, and get home.

I believe that pilot would fly more conservatively to maximize altitude and minimize the risk of landing out. A faster speed that eats up more altitude gains them nothing and potentially costs them big time.

Lou

I do that sort of flying a lot (laid back, just wafting around the area), then again, I also do longer XC's from our place. We don't always get great weather, but if you want to cover some miles, you can't really just waft along, you need to keep the pace up.
My 500K took almost 7 hours (on thermals in southern NY), when it worked, I had to keep moving, when it didn't I went slow.
Not really any different than a contest flight, just longer.

Not saying everyone needs to do long flights, or "scorch the skies" for speed, some just like to get high and take a local tour. Nothing wrong with that.

But if you want to do contests, or, longer XC flights, you have to practice it (faster/more efficient flying), you can't just decide, "Hey, I never do it, but I will today!"
Just like doing a marathon, you really can't wake up one morning, pull on sneakers and say, "Hey, lets go do a marathon today". It will be a long day and you likely won't feel too good for a week or so after.

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:54:32 PM UTC-5, MNLou wrote:
Hank, Charlie, and Dave -

I should have made myself more clear -

For you "contest monsters" who focus on, fly, and win at the National level, of course you are always racing - even when you are practicing. That's what it takes to get fast. If you fly OLC, you max it out.

My contrast to a contest pilot was a pilot who flies XC but isn't trying to max out speed - just get around the course. Think a 200km triangle on a mid-summer day. Doesn't care too much about speed or how may OLC he/she gets. Just wants to have fun, go someplace, and get home.

I believe that pilot would fly more conservatively to maximize altitude and minimize the risk of landing out. A faster speed that eats up more altitude gains them nothing and potentially costs them big time.

Lou

I doubt that I fly much faster than you do between thermals when flying cross country. What I probably do more, and possibly better, is make modest changes in speed in response to or anticipation of air mass movement, and likely a lot more deviation to optomise my path so as to spend as little time in bad air as I can.
I don't land out all that often. The last off field landing I made from my home field was probably 20 years ago. My landings in fields in contests average about 1 every two or three years and I fly about 40 tasks a year.
The impression that contest pilots go fast by taking big risks is wrong in my experience. The percentages are in keeping risk as low as possible. That doesn't mean we're floating at cloud base, but we are being pretty careful..
UH

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:54:32 PM UTC-5, MNLou wrote:
I believe that ... would fly more conservatively to maximize altitude
and minimize the risk of landing out. A faster speed that eats up
more altitude gains them nothing and potentially costs them big time.

You are confusing flying efficiently (fast), and flying aggressively
(which periodically puts you on the ground, not fast)....

On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 6:33:03 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I have actually never met anyone that put McCready value of over 3.5...

Really? You should get out more!
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...=2011&c=C0&sc=

Not possible with MC of 3.5!! Over 100mph!!

On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 11:18:41 AM UTC-5, SoaringXCellence wrote:
if you download the trace, you can see a remarkably long 100 mile run
northward, below 4000 feet, with a -601 L/D for the last 76 miles

The owner was kind enough to invite me to fly while I was waiting for my own ArcusM. I don't think many flew XC this day because of low bases and perceived weak lift. First bit of the flight I circled excessively while getting used to the glider (in which I only had a few hours). After I settled down, I had the owner turn off the very badly-behaved varios (a bad vario is far worse than no vario, but this upset the owner). Managed to string together various lift lines and avoid circling most of the flight.

We had to cut the flight short because of OD and some heavy showers, but still managed 460km and 17% circling IIRC.

The point is, under these conditions MC theory does not apply.
Consequently, neither does MC-derived STF in lift.

Hope that helps,
Best Regards, Dave

On Monday, 15 February 2016 01:28:14 UTC, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 6:33:03 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I have actually never met anyone that put McCready value of over 3.5...

Really? You should get out more!
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...=2011&c=C0&sc=

Not possible with MC of 3.5!! Over 100mph!!

6 out of the top 20 on that day were flying an ASH 26E! And I seem to be selling mine.

On Sunday, 14 February 2016 04:57:42 UTC+2, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:34:32 AM UTC-5, Soartech wrote:
Hint:
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...htId=185517315

See ya, Dave

Dave, What is your point here?

MacCready theory is not always applicable.
Consider:
- What are MacCready theory's assumptions, and when are these not valid?
- Why do good flights often beat expected MC speeds (after accounting
for start-finish altitude differential)?

Hopefully this will be covered in the V3 talk at the convention;
Tilo tells me by analyzing OLC piles of flight logs, the actual
behavior of top pilots shows this, thus better informs how the glider
should be optimized...

Hope this helps,
Best Regards, Dave

Are you saying that MC theory is not valid for gliding long distances using continuous lift?

On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:48:59 AM UTC-5, krasw wrote:
On Sunday, 14 February 2016 04:57:42 UTC+2, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:34:32 AM UTC-5, Soartech wrote:
Hint:
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...htId=185517315

See ya, Dave

Dave, What is your point here?

MacCready theory is not always applicable.
Consider:
- What are MacCready theory's assumptions, and when are these not valid?
- Why do good flights often beat expected MC speeds (after accounting
for start-finish altitude differential)?

Hopefully this will be covered in the V3 talk at the convention;
Tilo tells me by analyzing OLC piles of flight logs, the actual
behavior of top pilots shows this, thus better informs how the glider
should be optimized...

Hope this helps,
Best Regards, Dave

Are you saying that MC theory is not valid for gliding long distances using continuous lift?

Read Brigliadori as he describes extended glide. MC is based on a a model of climb and glide that does not apply directly much of the time, especially with higher performance gliders.
UH

On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 2:46:48 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Was reading an article by Mike Borgelt that when flying through a thermal you will not circle in you should just fly the STF.

I have always slowed in such thermals, sometimes slowing to thermal speed while putting the thermal flaps. I do try to accelerate before I leave the lift. My thought being try to stay in the lift as long as possible while still moving forward, sometimes even s-turning to stay in large thermal but still moving down the course line.

Would appreciate any comments, critique, thoughts...

i was always told by a very talented and well ranked pilot to never slow down below 60kts unless you are going to circle. i try to live by that, and have actually found that while one pilot pulls to thermalling speed, and i gently ease back to 60, he gets maybe 50 feet on me after he pushes back over, but i put distance on him. and i've always found that it's harder to make up horizontal distance vs. 50 or 100 vertical feet on someone (this is east coast dudes). remember that a pull is draggy, and also when you pull up and push back over, that's a "curve" in your flight path. when you only gently slow down to 60, you are flying a short path through the sky. when thinking in the "shortest distance between two points" mentality, remember to think in 3 dimensions. that's is my technique. its simple and effective i think.

On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 4:45:15 PM UTC+3, wrote:
On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 1:48:59 AM UTC-5, krasw wrote:
On Sunday, 14 February 2016 04:57:42 UTC+2, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 10:34:32 AM UTC-5, Soartech wrote:
Hint:
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0...htId=185517315

See ya, Dave

Dave, What is your point here?

MacCready theory is not always applicable.
Consider:
- What are MacCready theory's assumptions, and when are these not valid?
- Why do good flights often beat expected MC speeds (after accounting
for start-finish altitude differential)?

Hopefully this will be covered in the V3 talk at the convention;
Tilo tells me by analyzing OLC piles of flight logs, the actual
behavior of top pilots shows this, thus better informs how the glider
should be optimized...

Hope this helps,
Best Regards, Dave

Are you saying that MC theory is not valid for gliding long distances using continuous lift?

Read Brigliadori as he describes extended glide. MC is based on a a model of climb and glide that does not apply directly much of the time, especially with higher performance gliders.

It was initially derived that way, but I believe it *applies* to other situations too.

If you are running along under a cloud street, the slow thing is to fly just under the clouds speeding up in the lift so you don't get sucked into them, and slowing down when that danger is past. The fast thing is to increase your MC setting (and fly it) enough that you fly fast and drop below cloudbase sufficiently in weaker lift that you can slow down and pull up in lift without entering the clouds.

For high performance gliders the main modification to MC theory is that the conventional output is "speed to fly". The real output should be "angle of attack to fly".

At speeds around 40 - 60 knots they are quite quickly the same thing. But over 100 knots it means that you are simply pulling increased Gs in lift and decreased Gs in sink and you might well pass through the area of lift of sink with very little change in airspeed.

Intuitively, you're "bouncing off" the lift. And sink can't rob energy from you while you're in a low drag near zero lift configuration.