wrote:
Net cost: $1750 - $1800 - 420= $500 cheaper to fly a SLS!


I was thinking that you can prove anything with statistics, but
justifying a sailplane would be a serious challenge.

Seriously, I doubt anyone is going to purchase an Antares to "save
money". More likely because: - its an unbelievably good sailplane,
raising the bar in comfort, handling, and performance,

And this why I think it's worthwhile to consider only the cost of the
motor when looking at costs of an SLSversus an upowered glider. Some
people think an SLS is expensive because they look at the total of a
sailplane with the motor, not realizing most of that money is buying a
high performance glider, fancy instruments, and a great trailer.

- the propulsion system is more powerful and reliable than other
alternatives, especially at high density altitudes, and - only one
lever to operate the propulsion system

I expect the electric gliders to have more predictable costs than the
gasoline powered alternatives, because electric motors tend to be much
more reliable. Exactly how long the batteries will last before they need
replacing isn't known, but it's still more predictable than when you'll
have a problem with your gasoline engine. And without a doubt, you will
be able to replace the battery with a cheaper, lighter, and more
powerful battery 5 or 10 years. That doesn't happen with the gasoline
motors!

This guy is good!

Wait till you hear me tell you how explain to your spouse why her
financial well-being depends on you getting an expensive glider!

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"