If you are thinking of a motorglider as saving you from an unsafe landout, you are a Statistic - In -Waiting. What a motorglider does is save you the inconvenience of a safe landout and retrieve. If anything, it makes landouts more dangerous, as the pilot workload at a critical point increases (and this is an argument for electric, which typically takes less attention). A motorglider does not increase your range over unlandable terrain, or improve your chances for a safe landout (not reliably, anyway). Your example of continuous 7 - 9 knot sink for example, would be turned into continuous 5 - 7 knot sink with a typical sustainer, and it would take the most powerful of self launch power plants to turn that into a climb (even if you are lucky enough to have the motor start). A motor is no substitute for intelligent decisions, and it is not a substitute for having an easy glide angle to a safe landing site at all times. I have two friends with motorgliders left in trees that can bear witness.

Regarding who might replace an ICE with electric: I might be a candidate, if my engine were to fail in a way that required replacement. The $30K replacement cost and 6 months waiting time certainly would allow some contemplation. The glider already has doors, a prop, a boom, a jack to deploy the boom, capacity to carry around 150 lbs in a spacious engine bay. All that is left are the hard bits: motor, motor drive, and battery.

On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 10:36:11 AM UTC-8, John Johnson wrote:
Enjoying this thread. I'm a newbie - flying XC for about a year now. I definitely would like self-launch capability and just some 'modest' sustaining capacity left over. My land outs and close calls to-date could have all been mitigated by 10min (or less) of sustaining assist. If I fly so deep into marginal conditions that I need an hour of power to get home, I must have really made some bad decisions. Soaring conditions here in southern AZ are pretty great but land out options can be challenging. I see sustaining needs as more about dealing with localized exceptions and improving your land out choices. If I needed 1 launch or 10-15min flight time, I don't think the conditions were aligned for the XC flight I was looking for anyway.

Example: I was recently surprised by continuous 7-9kt sink over a 15mi final glide. I started out with a 3200' agl arrival altitude cushion and watched it drop to 200ft as I soldiered home and left my last favorable LO options behind. I was stuck looking at an emergency bailout on a mine tailing that has generated a number of scary tales in my club. I was lucky to find some lift off a local feature just 2mi out and got enough altitude to make the field in good shape. 2-3min of powered sustaining flight would have made that a non-event.

One launch and some modest assist capacity would be awesome and fit my primary goals:
- independent launch capability
- backup for the times I need a short boost to avoid a land out or help get me to a safer land out option
- I'm ok with landing out on occasion if its safe and retrievable
- Really prefer electric over ICE

Seems like the current mast-mounted electric technology is just about there for my goals. It's now more about solution maturity, track record, and $$ as I watch how things shake out. I do, however, want hear about alternate use models and scenarios that could affect my decisions.

JJ