FES in Contests

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:42:22 PM UTC-5, Steve Leonard wrote:
Rather than checking out the videos (link didn't work for me, but I have seen the videos of the tests being conducted), you can check out the SSA Website. If you do, you will see the LAK-17B-18 FES does have its own handicap number, and it is different than the LAK-17B-18. The difference is in line, in both weight delta and handicap delta, to the LAK-17A-18 to the LAK-17AT-18. The delta for either is .01.



That said, you may want to look and see which way, and then look harder for that data from the Akaflieg.



Have fun at the GP this weekend, Sean. Wish I could be there to fly with you guys.



Steve

I saw a German test somewhere a few months ago which showed handicap in the range of 2% if I could only remember where the document was located. It was a good technical paper. Maybe someone has a link.

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:30:23 -0800 (PST), "Sean F (F2)"
wrote:

CHECK OUT THE VIDOES ON THIS THREAD: https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!...ng/QIeXikPEkaY

.... text deleted.
Yes, I am thinking about converting my Lak17a to FES someday....

Flying to Florida as I type.... :-)

Sean

The referenced video indicates that Idaflieg has the data you need to
resolve this issue.

Suggest an interested party contact Luka Znidarsic at LZ Design
(www.front-electric-sustainer.com)

The video seems to indicate the manufacturer participated in these
tests, he would be a likely first contact for release of the Idaflieg
data.

Bob

In article "Sean F (F2)" writes:

I think at least a 1% handicap is warranted. Something! Not a huge amount=
of these gliders in the market, but there are 20 or so and several new Lak=
17b FES in the US and Canada. The handicap is affecting the decision to co=
nvert gliders in some cases. Not just Laks but the usual suspects.

Perhaps it shold be a inverse handicap, as the motorglider pilots are often
more willing to head off in directions where a landout would be a problem.

Since they have less risk involved in their choices, they should receive less
benefit. Sure, they don't win the day if they start the engine, but they don't
landout in the rocks, either.

( For the common argument that one should not depend on the engine - if folks
never depended on a sustainer, then they would not be buying them. )

Alan

On Friday, February 14, 2014 4:06:02 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
In article "Sean F (F2)" writes:



I think at least a 1% handicap is warranted. Something! Not a huge amount=

of these gliders in the market, but there are 20 or so and several new Lak=

17b FES in the US and Canada. The handicap is affecting the decision to co=

nvert gliders in some cases. Not just Laks but the usual suspects.



Perhaps it shold be a inverse handicap, as the motorglider pilots are often

more willing to head off in directions where a landout would be a problem.



Since they have less risk involved in their choices, they should receive less

benefit. Sure, they don't win the day if they start the engine, but they don't

landout in the rocks, either.



( For the common argument that one should not depend on the engine - if folks

never depended on a sustainer, then they would not be buying them. )



Alan

Would you really put your life at risk going into unlandable terrain hoping your engine is going to work (regardless if it electric or internal combustion)? If you think this way I suggest you stay away from engines or your life might be cut short.

On 2/14/2014 9:15 AM, wrote:
Would you really put your life at risk going into unlandable terrain hoping your engine is going to work (regardless if it electric or internal combustion)?

I don't think that you would need to hunt very hard to find stories of
pilots doing exactly that WITHOUT engines.

Vaughn

Is there a form of sailplane race that rewards pilots for skillfully maintaining a quantifiable margin of error without gross lapses above or below that margin of error?

A calculation over the recorded flight path that factors altitude, distance to known_to_be_safe landing fields, and wind and weather might produce an objective score.

That is the kind of XC flying that I want to do and a flying competition that in principle rewards risk taking is something that I want to steer clear of.

I'm truly ignorant of how risk taking is rewarded in sailplane racing, but the 11% flying mortality rate for world champion glider pilots made an impression. I realize that lower levels of racing involve on average less risk taking.

I realize that calculated risk taking with thin margins is a valuable skill in contexts like warfare and investment banking. I realize that all flying involves calculated risk taking, but doing that with high achievable margins of safety seems to me to be very sporting and fun. I'm much more interested in executing a relatively safe flight than in flying a big triangle.

Can someone point me to existing resources/programs that score flight paths from the risk taking perspective?

I don't know of any such thing.

Risk taking is a very personal thing. Some people enjoy taking big risks
while others refuse to take any. There are many levels of endeavor in
between. What you describe sounds to me like an auto ralley where the
winners are not the fastest but those who come closest to the prescribed
time. You can certainly set up tasks like that for yourself but I'll bet
you won't be able to populate a contest with those conditions.

Do what you are comfortable with but please don't try to enforce your risk
tolerance on others.

I realize that arguing against "safety" is like arguing against "the
children", but there are a lot of people who would quit flying if it was as
"safe" as some folks seem to want.

"son_of_flubber" wrote in message
...
Is there a form of sailplane race that rewards pilots for skillfully
maintaining a quantifiable margin of error without gross lapses above or
below that margin of error?

A calculation over the recorded flight path that factors altitude, distance
to known_to_be_safe landing fields, and wind and weather might produce an
objective score.

That is the kind of XC flying that I want to do and a flying competition
that in principle rewards risk taking is something that I want to steer
clear of.

I'm truly ignorant of how risk taking is rewarded in sailplane racing, but
the 11% flying mortality rate for world champion glider pilots made an
impression. I realize that lower levels of racing involve on average less
risk taking.

I realize that calculated risk taking with thin margins is a valuable skill
in contexts like warfare and investment banking. I realize that all flying
involves calculated risk taking, but doing that with high achievable margins
of safety seems to me to be very sporting and fun. I'm much more interested
in executing a relatively safe flight than in flying a big triangle.

Can someone point me to existing resources/programs that score flight paths
from the risk taking perspective?

On Friday, February 14, 2014 10:43:02 AM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:
Is there a form of sailplane race that rewards pilots for skillfully maintaining a quantifiable margin of error without gross lapses above or below that margin of error?


No, thank goodness. However, OLC lets you pick the weather and terrain you fly over, so if you think OLC is racing, then it's probably the closest.


A calculation over the recorded flight path that factors altitude, distance to known_to_be_safe landing fields, and wind and weather might produce an objective score.


An objective score of what? How do you quantify ALL the terrain you are flying over? How do you record the micro weather across all the contest area, all the time? What are you measuring, how safe a pilot flys, measured against someones (yours?) definition of safety? How would that be a RACE?


That is the kind of XC flying that I want to do and a flying competition that in principle rewards risk taking is something that I want to steer clear of.


And the beauty of XC flying is that you (as PIC) can do exactly that - fly to your level of risk and comfort. No-one is making you go anywhere. But if you want to race and measure yourself against others, you will have to stretch you comfort level to go faster. But again, you can't win with a broken glider, so risk management is still essential!

But you say you don't want to participate in a competition that rewards risk taking? So, please name one type of competition that doesn't reward some kind of risk taking? Once everyone has similar equipment and training, then it comes down to decision-making, which is the essence of risk taking!


I'm truly ignorant of how risk taking is rewarded in sailplane racing, but the 11% flying mortality rate for world champion glider pilots made an impression. I realize that lower levels of racing involve on average less risk taking.


That 11% mortality isn't during contest flying, I believe. It's top pilots pushing their luck while training or just out flying, trying to get the same rush they get during racing!

I realize that calculated risk taking with thin margins is a valuable skill in contexts like warfare and investment banking. I realize that all flying involves calculated risk taking, but doing that with high achievable margins of safety seems to me to be very sporting and fun. I'm much more interested in executing a relatively safe flight than in flying a big triangle..


Then do that! And have fun. But (and this, to me, is like the claims that OLC is racing) realize that some pilots really like the challenge of going fast and managing risk and winning a RACE, and if you want to play in that playground you will have to learn the rules. If you are watching the Olympics, you can see people taking risks everywhere. It's what people like doing! But they are taking calculated risks in activities that they are skilled at and are comfortable managing those risks. Glider racers feel that way about glider racing (I know I do, in my amateurish fashion), but I sure wouldn't want to try Skeleton - just as I'm sure a Skeleton racer wouldn't want to jump into a glider with not training and go racing.

Can someone point me to existing resources/programs that score flight paths from the risk taking perspective?

I suggest using SeeYou to see how efficiently you are flying - and where you are breaking your own risk levels, during your own flights. That's what I (and a lot of pilots a lot faster than me) do. But without being in the pilots mind during a flight, it's hard to judge what he is doing by watching his flight, other than at the technical level.

Get a glider and go XC. Then try a local race. You may find it enjoyable.

Cheers,

Kirk
66

On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:39:36 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
What you describe sounds to me like an auto ralley where the
winners are not the fastest but those who come closest to the prescribed
time.

Spot on. There is a parallel there. Road rally is a competition but not a race.
http://www.ner.org/rally/rdral/about-road-rally

Road rallys are for people who love to drive, and who like to compete, but don't want to race. They emphasize safety by requiring an average speed under the posted speed limit.


Do what you are comfortable with but please don't try to enforce your risk
tolerance on others.

I simply stated why sailplane racing does not appeal to me and what sort of competition (rally style) would appeal to me. The discussion of how FES lets a racer mitigate risk is very specific and it got me thinking in a more general way about how risk factors into competition.

I realize that arguing against "safety" is like arguing against "the
children", but there are a lot of people who would quit flying if it was as
"safe" as some folks seem to want.

I agree 100%. Soaring would be a lot less interesting if it were not potentially mortal.

On Friday, February 14, 2014 1:13:46 PM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:

But you say you don't want to participate in a competition that rewards risk taking? So, please name one type of competition that doesn't reward some kind of risk taking?


I'm just saying that some risks like circling at low AGL and being low and far from a landable field could be quantified and incorporated into scoring. I don't expect sailplane competition to do much if any of that in a general way ever.

Maybe the idea would get traction on something (like OLC) that incorporated safety margins in scoring. GPS logs make that possible.