US club class definition

Beginner's Question for UH or other recognized experts...

Is the handicap for either club class or sports class just based on a glider's "Best L/D" at a given wing loading (I assume max theoretical wing loading) or does it also take into account how straight or curved a glider's polar is? What effect does wing loading have on the handicap, if any?

/Chris Schrader (B2G)

On Monday, February 27, 2017 at 3:12:39 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Beginner's Question for UH or other recognized experts...

Is the handicap for either club class or sports class just based on a glider's "Best L/D" at a given wing loading (I assume max theoretical wing loading) or does it also take into account how straight or curved a glider's polar is? What effect does wing loading have on the handicap, if any?

/Chris Schrader (B2G)

Non expert, unrecognizable opinion. Handicaps are based more on the polar curve for a sailplane without ballast, and a set of assumed conditions. It is a measure of the cross country achievable speed with a given type of task, wind, and thermal strength. There were many assumptions made in determining actual achievable climb rate based on vertical motion of the air in which the plane will climb. Glide polars for calculation have been anything from factory provided, to those measured by the Idaflieg, Dick Johnson, Paul Bikle, and others.

A specific sailplane type was set as the "Standard" and assigned a handicap of 1.0. In the US, higher performance (higher achievable cross country speed in the assumed conditions) gives a lower handicap number. The handicap is, under the defined conditions, to correct the achieved speed of any plane with the same pilot to have the same handicapped speed on the same day. In other words, the handicap is attempting to make all planes equal, and let the best pilot win.

The basic handicaps have been adjusted in numerous ways over the years. I had heard that Carl had used contest results to fine tune things. There have been attempts to adjust the basic handicap for different locations with stronger or weaker lift than the initial assumed lift, more or less wind, etc.

As to wing loading, the same plane at a higher wing loading will have a lower handicap number. This goes back to the assumptions, and they lead you to the conclusion that if you are able to climb at the assumed rate, a heavier model of the same plane will achieve a higher cross country speed. So, it should have a lower handicap number, because in the US system, achieved speed is multiplied by the HC to determine "handicapped speed".

In the US, there are now adjustments made to the handicap if the plane and pilot is either above or below the reference weight. So, a plane and pilot that is over the reference weight will have its handicap number reduced, and if the plane and pilot is below the reference weight, its handicap number will be increased.

That is my understanding of the current system in the US as it stands today.. The same handicap number defined for "Sports Class" is used if a plane is flown in "Club Class". It is just that "Club Class" only permits planes of a certain span (or less) and a certain handicap range to participate. "Sports Class" lets anyone compete.

Hope this helps.

Steve Leonard

All this arguing over who is the winner, when it takes an indepth education to understand who won given the complexities of the race. Meanwhile, the Daytona 500 was last Sunday and it was crystal clear who won the race. Millions watched it televised live around the world.

Soaring is exciting, it's thrilling, but all of these complexities reduces the interest of everyone to basically nothing.

Here in the world of Soaring, crossing the finish line first or last is entirely irrelevant. Only the elite few who have graduated from the College of Soaring Nonsense, can understand the race. Understanding how the rules work is about equal to understanding the tax code....

Once again, we find ourselves fighting over rules, and wondering why soaring is in a demise......hmmm, is this a parallel???

The more simple the rules are, the more attractive the sport is!

I would offer an "alternative fact", while soaring is declining in the US, I doubt it has anything to do with the Club Class definition, or with handicapping of club class. Hijacking an unrelated problem to bolster your position on yet another in-related issue is diffusing of the most important issue, "new blood".

1On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 10:22:20 AM UTC-8, wrote:
All this arguing over who is the winner, when it takes an indepth education to understand who won given the complexities of the race. Meanwhile, the Daytona 500 was last Sunday and it was crystal clear who won the race. Millions watched it televised live around the world.

Soaring is exciting, it's thrilling, but all of these complexities reduces the interest of everyone to basically nothing.

Here in the world of Soaring, crossing the finish line first or last is entirely irrelevant. Only the elite few who have graduated from the College of Soaring Nonsense, can understand the race. Understanding how the rules work is about equal to understanding the tax code....

Once again, we find ourselves fighting over rules, and wondering why soaring is in a demise......hmmm, is this a parallel???

The more simple the rules are, the more attractive the sport is!

On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 12:22:20 PM UTC-6, wrote:
All this arguing over who is the winner, when it takes an indepth education to understand who won given the complexities of the race. Meanwhile, the Daytona 500 was last Sunday and it was crystal clear who won the race. Millions watched it televised live around the world.

Soaring is exciting, it's thrilling, but all of these complexities reduces the interest of everyone to basically nothing.

Here in the world of Soaring, crossing the finish line first or last is entirely irrelevant. Only the elite few who have graduated from the College of Soaring Nonsense, can understand the race. Understanding how the rules work is about equal to understanding the tax code....

Once again, we find ourselves fighting over rules, and wondering why soaring is in a demise......hmmm, is this a parallel???

The more simple the rules are, the more attractive the sport is!

Have you ever actually raced a glider? Every time I have, it has always been pretty obvious who the winners and losers have been. Perhaps not immediately, but soon enough.

Of course, if you need immediate gratification...

Kirk
66

On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 11:43:31 AM UTC-6, kirk.stant wrote:
On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 12:22:20 PM UTC-6, wrote:
All this arguing over who is the winner, when it takes an indepth education to understand who won given the complexities of the race. Meanwhile, the Daytona 500 was last Sunday and it was crystal clear who won the race. Millions watched it televised live around the world.

Soaring is exciting, it's thrilling, but all of these complexities reduces the interest of everyone to basically nothing.

Here in the world of Soaring, crossing the finish line first or last is entirely irrelevant. Only the elite few who have graduated from the College of Soaring Nonsense, can understand the race. Understanding how the rules work is about equal to understanding the tax code....

Once again, we find ourselves fighting over rules, and wondering why soaring is in a demise......hmmm, is this a parallel???

The more simple the rules are, the more attractive the sport is!

Have you ever actually raced a glider? Every time I have, it has always been pretty obvious who the winners and losers have been. Perhaps not immediately, but soon enough.

Of course, if you need immediate gratification...

Kirk
66

Kirk, in case you missed it: Wilbur is one of Sean's many pseudonyms, he is blessed with so many personalities. He thinks employing other screen names to support his position is really clever. So sad.

On Monday, February 27, 2017 at 6:02:51 PM UTC-5, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Monday, February 27, 2017 at 3:12:39 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Beginner's Question for UH or other recognized experts...

Is the handicap for either club class or sports class just based on a glider's "Best L/D" at a given wing loading (I assume max theoretical wing loading) or does it also take into account how straight or curved a glider's polar is? What effect does wing loading have on the handicap, if any?

/Chris Schrader (B2G)

Non expert, unrecognizable opinion. Handicaps are based more on the polar curve for a sailplane without ballast, and a set of assumed conditions. It is a measure of the cross country achievable speed with a given type of task, wind, and thermal strength. There were many assumptions made in determining actual achievable climb rate based on vertical motion of the air in which the plane will climb. Glide polars for calculation have been anything from factory provided, to those measured by the Idaflieg, Dick Johnson, Paul Bikle, and others.

A specific sailplane type was set as the "Standard" and assigned a handicap of 1.0. In the US, higher performance (higher achievable cross country speed in the assumed conditions) gives a lower handicap number. The handicap is, under the defined conditions, to correct the achieved speed of any plane with the same pilot to have the same handicapped speed on the same day.. In other words, the handicap is attempting to make all planes equal, and let the best pilot win.

The basic handicaps have been adjusted in numerous ways over the years. I had heard that Carl had used contest results to fine tune things. There have been attempts to adjust the basic handicap for different locations with stronger or weaker lift than the initial assumed lift, more or less wind, etc.

As to wing loading, the same plane at a higher wing loading will have a lower handicap number. This goes back to the assumptions, and they lead you to the conclusion that if you are able to climb at the assumed rate, a heavier model of the same plane will achieve a higher cross country speed. So, it should have a lower handicap number, because in the US system, achieved speed is multiplied by the HC to determine "handicapped speed".

In the US, there are now adjustments made to the handicap if the plane and pilot is either above or below the reference weight. So, a plane and pilot that is over the reference weight will have its handicap number reduced, and if the plane and pilot is below the reference weight, its handicap number will be increased.

That is my understanding of the current system in the US as it stands today. The same handicap number defined for "Sports Class" is used if a plane is flown in "Club Class". It is just that "Club Class" only permits planes of a certain span (or less) and a certain handicap range to participate. "Sports Class" lets anyone compete.

Hope this helps.

Steve Leonard

This is a good synopsis of how the handicapping system works.
UH

On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 1:22:20 PM UTC-5, wrote:
All this arguing over who is the winner, when it takes an indepth education to understand who won given the complexities of the race. Meanwhile, the Daytona 500 was last Sunday and it was crystal clear who won the race. Millions watched it televised live around the world.

Soaring is exciting, it's thrilling, but all of these complexities reduces the interest of everyone to basically nothing.

Here in the world of Soaring, crossing the finish line first or last is entirely irrelevant. Only the elite few who have graduated from the College of Soaring Nonsense, can understand the race. Understanding how the rules work is about equal to understanding the tax code....

Once again, we find ourselves fighting over rules, and wondering why soaring is in a demise......hmmm, is this a parallel???

The more simple the rules are, the more attractive the sport is!

I didn't see any fighting. What did I miss?
As for complexity, look at Nascar rules. Their rule book makes ours look like a post card.
They do put on a good to great show, yet they struggle to retain viewers.
FWIW
UH

I have always had a difficult time understanding the attraction of NASCAR, they race around a track making left turns, in cars they call stock when absolutely nothing on them is stock. Grand Prix, seems much more exciting and is a sport enjoyed all over the world. Was it really that much fun to run from the cops with a trunk full of bootleg liquor? And what the heck does an American motor sport have to do with gliding?

On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 5:44:37 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote: SNIP And what the heck does an American motor sport have to do with gliding?

NASCAR is still the most popular in-person spectator sport in the U.S. American football is the most watched, including on TV.

The most popular participation athletic activity is fitness walking, followed by running, followed by treadmill (which, based on my observation, comprises a mix of fitness walking and running combined with reading magazines and watching television).

With the exception of the soaring Grand Prix enthusiasts, I'm not sure many glider pilots care too much about soaring becoming more of a spectator sport. It's probably never going to budge the needle. We do care about boosting participation, not just altruistically to share it with others but also selfishly to gain a little more influence in airspace and regulatory decisions. I'd say another reason is so gliders and soaring equipment could be less expensive but there already seem to be way more suppliers than the volume of sales could possibly justify so I'm not optimistic that even a doubling of activity would reduce my costs very much.

But speaking of money, that's one common thread in NASCAR and NFL football: sponsorship, advertising, subscription, tickets, merchandising, etc. None of that is likely to be available in soaring. Many think that's a good thing; we argue enough about arcane rules decisions just for fun. Add money and I hate to think what RAS would sound like.

As someone who's been a fitness enthusiast for 40 years, I know one thing that makes fitness walking or running attractive is that almost anyone can get into it easily. The only cost is a pair of shoes. The other gear is optional. The "rules" are simple, even for races. You can start running without any instruction and you can continue to train and improve (at least on an age-adjusted basis) for a lifetime. Once you gain some experience, you realize that it's not particularly weather dependent. So, among other things, you can actually plan the rest of your life around it. And you can easily share it with lots of other enthusiasts in all kinds of organized, informal, and/or competitive ways. It can be a big part of your social life, or you can be a solitary enthusiast. You can fit your workout in almost any time. Races and camps are held in all kinds of great places to visit so that even non-participating families enjoy going along for the ride.

None of the foregoing is true about soaring. It's amazing soaring still exists at all, actually.

With regard to competition, I do think rules complexity can be intimidating, even discouraging. I say that having been competing since 1968 and having come back from multi-year layoffs three different times, forcing me to "catch up" on the latest rules changes. I think the rules could be simpler (but wouldn't want to try to do it myself). I prefer certain types of tasks over others (but would not want to return to the days of 100% assigned tasks--we lost too many contest days that way, thank you). I think the cost of a new glider is insane (but I'm currently refinishing my 25-year-old ASW 24 that is still competitive in at least 3 classes).

Why is soaring, especially competitive soaring, declining? Probably not because of the factors I listed. Those have always been true. Soaring was never popular. What's changed is the plethora of alternative leisure activities available to the average American and the different lifestyles and attitudes today.

All the sniping over the rules is amusing to me. I suspect you could change almost any aspect of the rules--even throw them away and just invite everyone to show up and fly it off--and it wouldn't change much. The exceptions would be at soaring's version of destination resorts, such as Nephi, where the allure of spectacular conditions and a variety of flying activities appeals. But this year's OLC Camp and last year's 3-class nationals were both oversubscribed, so that probably says something about the futility of tinkering with the rules to improve participation.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try to "get it right". I've certainly joined the debate at times. But I can compete pretty much head to head in my glider in Standard, Sports, and Club Classes (referring to sailplane performance, not pilot ability). And that, coupled with a handful of regionals within easy driving distance and an almost sure-thing attractive national contest somewhere every year, already provides more alternatives than I have time.

Chip Bearden