I've never really like using percentages For water ballast. Question: does 100% water ballast mean the water tanks are full or does it only mean up to max all up weight? I'm guessing it only means max all up weight here which can present a problem for some.
Modern day gliders can carry more water than is needed for MAUW. I know that this is not strictly "by the book" but in places where the weather goes ballistic like australia (when we're not under water) people do go above MAUW using water ballast. The glider I fly has a MAUW of 820kg and that is easily reached with two pilots. When the conditions really get going then the glider is brought up to 1,000kg. If the settings were done by litres then it wouldn't matter what the MAUW is or how much water the glider can carry. Better yet if it was done as kilos the empty non flying weight of the glider could be plugged in and then both pilot, wing ballast and tail ballast could be plugged in to suit all aspects each time you fly. This would suit two seaters and gliders with different pilots with different weights. Another take on this is how Borgelt instruments does water ballast. You can choose a ballast setting between 1.0 and 1.6. 1.0 is the glider at min flying weight i.e. No water ballast and min pilot weight. 1.6 is 1.6 times the min flying weight. This accounts for all aspects of flying weight quite simply. Just something to think about. Chad Nowak On 05/01/2011, at 22:28, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > That's a very good approach, Max. > It would be more intuitive and probably also more accurate. > It would also eliminate the need of creating different polars for different > pilots. > > Usually there are polars available for a given glider at a given mass > including an average pilot or something. > Only in few cases have I seen max and min load polars. > XCSoar would then have to do the shifting of the polar based on the mass > given in a polar file, finding the difference to the actual empty mass and > then add pilot and water, I suppose. > It would be good, if readily available polar files could still be used, with > XCSoar doing this math internally. > > While we're at it: > We also have bugs in percent. > What would a 100% bugged glider look like? > > Martin > --- > > > Am 05.01.2011 um 12:56 schrieb Max Kellermann: >> What I never understood is why we enter the ballast in percent. The >> water containers I carry to my glider are labeled with "litres", not >> "percent". >> >> I'd like XCSoar to know the empty weight of my glider, and allow me to >> enter additional mass added to that (my own body mass, ballast, >> oxygen, fuel). No special polar for solo flights in a double-seated >> glider. >> >> Max > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers > to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, > should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database > without downtime or disruption > http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl > _______________________________________________ > Xcsoar-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC) One Node allows customers to consolidate database storage, standardize their database environment, and, should the need arise, upgrade to a full multi-node Oracle RAC database without downtime or disruption http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Xcsoar-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
