C'mon JJ - Flying both motorized and non-motorized, I can definitely state:

- The decision height with the motor is MUTCH higher, if you want to be
safe,

- The decision point is MUTCH more critical - try a failed motor-start,
followed by a non-retract, then landing with huge drag/sink of motor out...
Don't even think about trying an air-start low over the small field that
would
be fine with the (lighter, slower, low-drag) unpowered glider. Yea, it
usually
starts, but then this HAS happened to me (over an airport, TWICE).

- There have been multiple times I didn't finish because I had to decide to
air-start HIGH, and I would easily have finished in the unpowered glider
with lower and less critical decision heights.

I love the flexibiliity of the motor-glider, but it comes at a significant
penalty. Less so with a sustainer of course, which is a much better
compromise if you've got a tow to get started.

See ya, Dave


"JJ Sinclair" wrote in message
...
There are several questions concerning motorgliders on this years SSA /
SRA
pilot poll. Some of the questions may have been spurred by my letter dated
7/11
03 which follows

Members of the rules committee,
A few years back, we allowed motorgliders to have their engines available
for
in-flight retrieves, in regional and national competition. I thought it
was a
mistake at the time, but nothing much happened. No motorglider won the
nationals. The top pilots didn't rush right out and buy a motorglider.
This is
changing, I have flown with several motorgliders in open class in the last
few
years. Some very capable pilots are flying motorgliders and they enjoy a
distinct advantage. Allow me to give an example; At region 8 championships
on
day 2, the sky had been completely overcast for hours. The 5 contestants
in
open class were working warm areas of freshly plowed ground. We all made
it to
the last turn point, some 30 miles from home. None of us had enough
altitude to
attempt a final glide home. Two landed at the turn point, but the two
motorgliders started a final glide for home over mostly unlandable
terrain.
They were hoping for a bump to get them home. Not getting the bump, they
both
started their engines a few miles from home and got distance points to the
location where they started their engines. A few years back, I tried a
similar
final glide without sufficient altitude in my non-motorized Nimbus 3. I
ended
up a mile short with a broken ship.

I contend this is clearly an unfair advantage. I recommend we consider
returning to the rule that allowed the motorglider to have their engine
available for in-flight use, but they must land to get distance points.
Any
in-flight use would result in zero points for the day. They would still
have
the option of using a constructive landout, as is the case with
non-motorized
ships. The constructive land out is claimed after a landing, but not at
the
point of engine start. This rule would make motorgliders exactly EQUAL to
non-motored sailplanes, but still allow them the option of using their
engines
if the situation warranted its use. Allowing the engine to be available
would
also negate the argument that motorglider insurance may be invalidated if
their
engines were disabled. After landing, the motorglider would have the
option of
selflaunching and flying back to the contest airport.

Before the present rules were adopted, the motorglider was scored at the
last
achieved turnpoint, after an engine start. Returning to this rule wouldn't
be
fair because they could still make a final glide without sufficient
altitude.
If they didn't make it, and started their engine, they still get scored at
the
last achieved turnpoint. There would be no reason not to try the unsafe
final
glide.

On a lesser important note, some creative rules interpretation is occuring
at
the regional level. Some regions have optained a waver of the "All
launches
will be by aerotow" rule. I would ask that no more waivers be granted
because
selflaunching allowes the motorglider to drive around until they find a
good
thermal, before shutting down their engines.The non-motored contestant
must
release shortly after reaching release altitude. The creative rules
interpretation has also led to something called an "In-flight relight",
where a
low motorglider just flies within 1 mile of the airport and then starts up
his
engine and performs his in-flight relight. This is also clearly unfair to
the
non-motored sailplane who must land, possibly with water, shove his
sailplane
back to the end of the runway, and wait for a tow plane to come out. I
request
that more specific language be use to make these practices unavailable in
the
future.

Thank you for your consideration of the indicated rules changes. I request
these issues be placed on the fall pilots poll.
JJ Sinclair
PS. Please don't interpret my position as bad-mouthing motorgliders, we
need
them to fill out our fledgling 18 meter class and to bolster our dwindling
open
class. Zero points for engine use, may seem harsh, but after your careful
consideration, I believe you will come to the conclusion it is the only
way to
level the playing field again.

JJ Sinclair