Engineered Systems LtdProgramme and Project Management by Ed Johnston |
Mobile +44 (0)7860 663886 |
How to Go Fastest
Debunking the Myth
With clearly marked thermals regularly distributed, the mythology
is to “run fast and climb high”. Well if you can continue to find
strongest climbs from low down throughout 65 hours of racing, you
will win this way.
However generally speaking, low was slow. It was risky going down
to below 4000 MSL as good thermals were increasingly difficult to
find. Over that much time racing you didn’t want to risk the one low
point that could easily cost 100pt or more.
So the most rewarding strategy was to run fast but within the
sweet spot, stay with the clouds if you could and maximise the
chances of finding the strongest thermals.
Height Bands
Very often the clouds were short lived, showing where thermals
had been rather than where they were. If you got even 2000ft below
base (often at 7-8000) you started to lose touch with the clouds.
You can find strong lift from low down, but it becomes a real
lottery the lower you get. Flying low down under clouds increased
chances, but very often you found the climb a few Km before, or just
after leaving the area of clouds high above.
As you got lower, the risks and stakes increased. Often if you
kept your nerve, you would find a thermal just by pressing on and
cutting more air. However the lower you got the bigger the loss if
you failed to connect. Do you take the 4kt from 4500 just to stay in
touch, or press on to the possible 6kt ahead risking an even bigger
loss if you don’t find it?
However all this improved as cloud amounts increased. On a 2-3
octa day, thermals would be bubbles with little connection to the
clouds. If we got 4-5 octa then they worked much more consistently
from lower and allowed good running from medium levels.
Nature of Thermals
Even with more cloud though, the peak climbs and performances
were found in tiny little cores. It was entirely possible to fly
right by a good thermal while a following glider 200m to one side
would hook a good core.
The down side of this is it tempts you to going on too long,
looking for a decent climb but risking that low point. It is hard
taking 4kt when you know there is 6 to be had, but you can really
fall off a cliff by being forced into a really slow climb from low
down.
Usually the best speeds where achieved by those that routed
round, staying in rising air as much as possible, reducing height
loss and maximising the chances of hitting the big climbs. Matthias
Sturm and Sebastian Kawa were the pick of the field, often losing
least in the glide or achieving the same glide performance 10kph
faster. Frequently they did not achieve the best average climb rates
but needed less height to complete the task or just flew faster
while losing the same height.
Conversely the Italians did spectacularly badly in this respect,
failing to find good runs and pushing too far too often and
regularly having low, slow get away climbs.
Judging how far to deviate for a good route was a big challenge.
Sometimes it was spectacularly good to route around a small or
larger hole, but every deviation cost track distance and time with
some good looking clouds not working at all. Again Kawa seemed to
get this right time after time while mere mortals made occasional
mistakes.
Impact on Scoring
With such bursty, small thermals, it was entirely possible to
find 9kt on a 6kt day. If you got one it was worth 30pts for each
one, sometimes much more! On day 10, Mattius Sturm got one long, bad
run on an into wind leg. Two slow into-wind climbs later and he had
lost 300pts to Kawa, leaving him to stay clear and win the
competition comfortably.
Getting better running was gaining by inches but those inches
added up! Even taking account of average speeds, Sturm often gained
40-80pts over a flight this way. Kawa often gained 80-100pts by
gaining the same performance at higher average speeds.
