ResultsÂ*ofÂ*FlightÂ*PerformanceÂ*DeterminationÂ*o fÂ*theÂ*Lakâ€�17aÂ*FES

Some guidance on the Lak17bFES contest results here (look at 18 meter overall middle of page):

http://www.wgc2012uvalde.us/index.ph...I temid=7#18M

My understanding is that these were fairly accomplished pilots. Clearly the FES is not "helping!"



On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:
I had no intention of skewing volunteers! Just trying to understand the process. Yes I am passionate about the Lak17b FES. I assumed (wrongly) that the HC was a more proactive body.



Social media and even Google Groups seem to be a much easier way to ask questions than emailing. Perhaps the SSA Handicap Committee could consider creating a Google Group or... (hold on to your chairs) even a Facebook group?



Social is a much more efficient means of communication and open discussion that email for sure. Facebook groups for example can be private and each member can be approved once credentials are confirmed.



Just a thought.



Sincerely,



Sean



On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:00:39 PM UTC-5, wrote:

On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:04:10 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:



My initial goal was to press home that the FES system (blades, etc) has a significant impact in aerodynamic performance (drag) over the exact same glider without FES I think that it is now clear that a credible study has shown FES performance degradation that is both measurable and significant.. I'm not sure why I should have to fill out a form for action to happen? While there may only be 2 Lak17b FES in the US at current, there are also others in Canada. A re-factored handicap may encourage a few more! Can someone from the handicap committee do the "rough math" (assume 2-4% drag) on the Lak17bFES handicap with a 75 lbs increase weight. Does that result in a handicap? What is the equation or equation set used to create a handicap? Or is it a subjective process? Thanks, Sean







This is a discussion group that facilitates exchange of information and ideas.



It is not in any way a formal part of the competition rules process.



If you have a request of the rules or handicap committees you should make that request directly to them.



Skewering volunteers in the hope of accomplishing your objective will accomplish nothing.



The polar information referenced will be useful in allowing the handicap folks a chance to project expected cross coutry speed and create an appropriate handicap.



UH

Based upon these "results" the handicap of a LAK-17 FES should be 31% lower than an ASG-29. I'm sure we can agree that is not accurate. Perhaps you should do the math before spouting an opinion.

On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:51:33 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Some guidance on the Lak17bFES contest results here (look at 18 meter overall middle of page):



http://www.wgc2012uvalde.us/index.ph...I temid=7#18M



My understanding is that these were fairly accomplished pilots. Clearly the FES is not "helping!"







On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:

I had no intention of skewing volunteers! Just trying to understand the process. Yes I am passionate about the Lak17b FES. I assumed (wrongly) that the HC was a more proactive body.







Social media and even Google Groups seem to be a much easier way to ask questions than emailing. Perhaps the SSA Handicap Committee could consider creating a Google Group or... (hold on to your chairs) even a Facebook group?







Social is a much more efficient means of communication and open discussion that email for sure. Facebook groups for example can be private and each member can be approved once credentials are confirmed.







Just a thought.







Sincerely,







Sean







On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:00:39 PM UTC-5, wrote:



On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:04:10 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:







My initial goal was to press home that the FES system (blades, etc) has a significant impact in aerodynamic performance (drag) over the exact same glider without FES I think that it is now clear that a credible study has shown FES performance degradation that is both measurable and significant. I'm not sure why I should have to fill out a form for action to happen? While there may only be 2 Lak17b FES in the US at current, there are also others in Canada. A re-factored handicap may encourage a few more! Can someone from the handicap committee do the "rough math" (assume 2-4% drag) on the Lak17bFES handicap with a 75 lbs increase weight. Does that result in a handicap? What is the equation or equation set used to create a handicap? Or is it a subjective process? Thanks, Sean















This is a discussion group that facilitates exchange of information and ideas.







It is not in any way a formal part of the competition rules process.







If you have a request of the rules or handicap committees you should make that request directly to them.







Skewering volunteers in the hope of accomplishing your objective will accomplish nothing.







The polar information referenced will be useful in allowing the handicap folks a chance to project expected cross coutry speed and create an appropriate handicap.







UH

On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:
I had no intention of skewing volunteers!

Actually that is exactly what you intended. Since us mere mortals could never live up to your standards, we must be roasted over an opinion fire to make an example of us so know when will question Sean, the god of gliding knowledge!

On Monday, February 24, 2014 2:41:57 PM UTC-8, Kevin Christner wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:

I had no intention of skewing volunteers!



Actually that is exactly what you intended. Since us mere mortals could never live up to your standards, we must be roasted over an opinion fire to make an example of us so know when will question Sean, the god of gliding knowledge!

I am not a competition pilot myself but find it absurd that a glider with FES will get better handicap than one without due to loss of 1 point in glide performance. Surely the advantage of self retrieve outweight 1 point in glide. Otherwise just take the blades off during the contest.

Ramy

On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:40:22 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote:
I had no intention of skewing volunteers! Just trying to understand the process. Yes I am passionate about the Lak17b FES. I assumed (wrongly) that the HC was a more proactive body. Social media and even Google Groups seem to be a much easier way to ask questions than emailing. Perhaps the SSA Handicap Committee could consider creating a Google Group or... (hold on to your chairs) even a Facebook group? Social is a much more efficient means of communication and open discussion that email for sure. Facebook groups for example can be private and each member can be approved once credentials are confirmed. Just a thought. Sincerely, Sean On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:00:39 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:04:10 PM UTC-5, Sean F (F2) wrote: My initial goal was to press home that the FES system (blades, etc) has a significant impact in aerodynamic performance (drag) over the exact same glider without FES I think that it is now clear that a credible study has shown FES performance degradation that is both measurable and significant. I'm not sure why I should have to fill out a form for action to happen? While there may only be 2 Lak17b FES in the US at current, there are also others in Canada. A re-factored handicap may encourage a few more! Can someone from the handicap committee do the "rough math" (assume 2-4% drag) on the Lak17bFES handicap with a 75 lbs increase weight. Does that result in a handicap? What is the equation or equation set used to create a handicap? Or is it a subjective process? Thanks, Sean This is a discussion group that facilitates exchange of information and ideas. It is not in any way a formal part of the competition rules process. If you have a request of the rules or handicap committees you should make that request directly to them. Skewering volunteers in the hope of accomplishing your objective will accomplish nothing. The polar information referenced will be useful in allowing the handicap folks a chance to project expected cross coutry speed and create an appropriate handicap. UH

If you have input for the RC, or the HC for that matter, the time needed to organize your thoughts and any supporting information is and order of magnitude greater that that needed to do the e-mail itself.
If it is not worth taking the time to thoughtfully put the input together, it certainly would not be worth much of their time to consider it. Every e-mail sent to the RC should, and as far as I recall when chair did, get a response and was added to the list of topics to be considered when putting together the annual rules change agenda.
UH

just look at the current handicap boys and girls, which is equal for pure and FES. is that what it needs to be? you tell me HC.

god of soaring? wow, thanks? take a pill there pal. you'll feel better soon. WTH?

On 2/24/2014 7:17 PM, Sean F (F2) wrote:
just look at the current handicap boys and girls, which is equal for pure and FES. is that what it needs to be? you tell me HC.

god of soaring? wow, thanks? take a pill there pal. you'll feel better soon. WTH?

Have you looked recently? Current handicaps from the SSA web page on 2/24/14

AB Sportine Aviacija LAK-17B W 18 868 0.845
AB Sportine Aviacija LAK-17B FES MW 18 998 0.835

Keep in mind the handicaps are for sports class, no disposable ballast.
So they think the extra weight allowed more than makes up for the extra
drag.

I wonder if there is a handicap adjustment for removing FES blades like
there is for aftermarket wing root fairings or turbulators?

people. please stop trying to add a handicap PENALTY to a glider on the merits of it having a motor and folding propellers on the nose. nothing in the rules considers a motor as a performance advantage. there is no precedent for it. if there is i challenge you to name it. the idea of a penalty for being a motor-glider is absurd. an asg29e does not get an additional handicap penalty because it has a motor last i checked.

the only fact that will be considered here is that there is a CLEAR performance degradation (significant and for OBVIOUS reasons) for gliders equipped with the FES system on the nose of the aircraft. the FES glider has more drag, PERIOD. look at the performance charts. the glider suffers this drag penalty every second it flies vs. the pure version. the idea that a motor somehow provides an advantage is subjective fantasy. no other motor-glider gets a penalty for being a motor-glider alone. again this logic is absurd. but please, show us your examples.

handicaps are based on performance data and gross weights, PERIOD.

this is what we are discussing here. PERIOD.

lets focus on facts here and standard procedures for handicap assignment... PERIOD.

ill bet money that handicap is only based on weight differences.

HC, please describe how this handicap was calculated? was there any aerodynamic (see study) considerations? or is this handicap based purely on 75 lbs additional mass?

On 2/24/2014 7:37 PM, Sean F (F2) wrote:
ill bet money that handicap is only based on weight differences.

HC, please describe how this handicap was calculated? was there any aerodynamic (see study) considerations? or is this handicap based purely on 75 lbs additional mass?

Current scoring rules adjust handicap 2% per 100 lbs difference from
reference weight. The weight difference here is 130 lbs. Handicap
difference is 1 %. If you just showed up with a heavy 17B, the
adjustment would be 2.6%.

Theoretical increase in glide speed for 130 lbs extra in the LAK 17B is
7%.

I don't know what kind of thermal model the handicappers use to know
what kind of climb degradation they assume.

Also the spreadsheet version of the handicaps show it was updated in the
last week.

Sure, its not fair. No handicap is ever fair. But they are part of the
game in sports class.