Comparison of glider classes at Uvalde...

Considering only the 12 competition days that all three classes were scored...

The average winning speed in 18m class was 148.9kph (92.5mph).

In 15m, the average winner was 4.6% slower than 18m at 142.0kph (88.2mph).

Open class winner was 0.8% faster than 18m on average at 150.1kph (93.3mph).

Isn't it interesting that all of that new technology in open class had so little actual benefit in the final analysis?

On Aug 20, 8:34*am, Steve Koerner wrote:
Considering only the 12 competition days that all three classes were scored...

The average winning speed in 18m class was 148.9kph (92.5mph).

In 15m, the average winner was 4.6% slower than 18m at 142.0kph (88.2mph)..

Open class winner was 0.8% faster than 18m on average at 150.1kph (93.3mph).

Isn't it interesting that all of that new technology in open class had so little actual benefit in the final analysis?

But how do the prices of the gliders compare? We are pricing the
majority of pilots out of the market for a minor gain in performance.

On Monday, August 20, 2012 10:34:29 AM UTC-4, Steve Koerner wrote:
Isn't it interesting that all of that new technology in open
class had so little actual benefit in the final analysis?

Careful, longer wing classes had generally longer
tasks, and longer tasks mean lower speeds.
So, the span benefit is understated in your analysis.

In all classes, higher wing-loadings have really paid
in Uvalde weather. And newer gliders carry higher
wing-loadings MUCH better even in weak weather.

Best Regards, Dave

Dave - You're right that open class flew further but not by a lot: 575km averaged over the 12 days vs 534km in 18m class. Parity time-on-task would have the open class going 538km to the 18m 534km; the additional 37km puts them out 14.8 minutes longer. I'll agree that there would be a small effect from the open class having to bracket a longer soaring day; but the 15 minutes addition is not enough to make much difference and does not alter my own conclusion on the matter.

On Aug 20, 9:41*am, Tim Taylor wrote:
On Aug 20, 8:34*am, Steve Koerner wrote:

Considering only the 12 competition days that all three classes were scored...

The average winning speed in 18m class was 148.9kph (92.5mph).

In 15m, the average winner was 4.6% slower than 18m at 142.0kph (88.2mph).

Open class winner was 0.8% faster than 18m on average at 150.1kph (93.3mph).

Isn't it interesting that all of that new technology in open class had so little actual benefit in the final analysis?

But how do the prices of the gliders compare? *We are pricing the
majority of pilots out of the market for a minor gain in performance.

The real advantage of open class is not in booming weather, it's when
the weather gets weak and a 60:1 glide takes you over fields full of
landed-out 15 meter gliders. Bigger gliders also can carry motors and
still get light wingloadings when times get tough. The amazing part of
flying in Uvalde is no 2 knot days.

Anyway, "we" aren't pricing pilots out of anything. The manufacturers
have made available a wide variety of contest worthy gliders, from the
PW5, to standard, 15, 18, duo, and open. You can buy fly and compete
at the world level in any of these you'd like. The interesting fact is
that pilots are voting with their wallets for the very best, despite
astronomical cost. PW5 class died from lack of interest, and no new
standard or 15 meter gliders are being produced. This is entirely by
the choice of pilots, not some amorphous "we" behind the scenes.

John Cochrane

On Aug 20, 9:27*am, John Cochrane
wrote:

...no new standard or 15 meter gliders are being produced...

Careful there, John, or we'll have to start debating the semantic fine
points of "are" and "produced." In the sense of established
manufacturers, I imagine that that's true. But it bears noting that
amateur builders, taken as a whole, are currently the single greatest
contributor to the US general aviation fleet. So even though
relatively few general aviation airplanes are being "produced" these
days, a heckuva lot of them are popping out of garages and entering
the US fleet. I happen think it is within the realm of possibility to
bring some of that enthusiasm and resourcefulness to bear on soaring
as well as powered flight.

This is entirely by the choice of pilots, not some amorphous
"we" behind the scenes.

No disagreement there. One of the primary lessons of the PW5 (for me,
at least) is that it costs about the same to make a pretty glider as
it does to make a not-so-pretty one. One of the other lessons is that
the technologies for making carbon fiber wing spars cost-effectively
are now very mature, and consequently the incremental cost
differential between 13m and 15m has gotten pretty small. It's as if
15m is the new 13m. The differential between 15m and 18m has also
gotten smaller, but is still substantial. The differential between 18m
and 28m is still astronomical, and plays to an audience that is very
picky, so I am grateful I don't play that house.

Thanks, Bob K.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/HP-24...t/200931354951

On Monday, August 20, 2012 9:27:12 AM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:

Anyway, "we" aren't pricing pilots out of anything. The manufacturers have made available a wide variety of contest worthy gliders, from the PW5, to standard, 15, 18, duo, and open. You can buy fly and compete at the world level in any of these you'd like. The interesting fact is that pilots are voting with their wallets for the very best, despite astronomical cost. PW5 class died from lack of interest, and no new standard or 15 meter gliders are being produced. This is entirely by the choice of pilots, not some amorphous "we" behind the scenes.

John Cochrane

____________________________

In a replacement market where the rate of performance improvement within a fixed span envelope has slowed considerably (you can be very competitive in a 15-year old 15M glider), it's not too surprising that the market for new production is limited. Given that dynamic it's also not too surprising that much of the development and new sales would be in larger spans that can also accomodate motors. It's not so much in my view that pilots want only "the very best", but that the "very best" product categories are ones where there isn't a big resale market yet. 15M is still a bigger market than Open or 18M if you look at it from the perspective of installed base of ships, contest participation, OLC miles, etc. You just don't need to buy new to get into it and if the market isn't growing overall, you don't need a lot of production.

On Aug 20, 6:01*pm, wrote:
On Monday, August 20, 2012 9:27:12 AM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:

Anyway, "we" aren't pricing pilots out of anything. The manufacturers have made available a wide variety of contest worthy gliders, from the PW5, to standard, 15, 18, duo, and open. You can buy fly and compete at the world level in any of these you'd like. The interesting fact is that pilots are voting with their wallets for the very best, despite astronomical cost. PW5 class died from lack of interest, and no new standard or 15 meter gliders are being produced. This is entirely by the choice of pilots, not some amorphous "we" behind the scenes.

John Cochrane

____________________________

In a replacement market where the rate of performance improvement within a fixed span envelope has slowed considerably (you can be very competitive in a 15-year old 15M glider), it's not too surprising that the market for new production is limited. Given that dynamic it's also not too surprising that much of the development and new sales would be in larger spans that can also accomodate motors. *It's not so much in my view that pilots want only "the very best", but that *the "very best" product categories are ones where there isn't a big resale market yet. *15M is still a bigger market than Open or 18M if you look at it from the perspective of installed base of ships, contest participation, OLC miles, etc. You just don't need to buy new to get into it and if the market isn't growing overall, you don't need a lot of production.

Hear here! Let the 15 meter two-design class live long and prosper!
(ASW27 owner)
John Cochrane

On Monday, August 20, 2012 5:06:48 PM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:

Hear here! Let the 15 meter two-design class live long and prosper!

(ASW27 owner)

John Cochrane

I don't begrudge the sailplane OEMs the urge to create markets to drive some revenues - I'd hate to see what a new -27B would cost without people buying new -31s and -29s in volume to cover the fixed costs of the business. In a climate where taxing the rich has gotten to be so in vogue here's a situation where the richer folks kinda volunteer to subsidize the rest of the market a bit. Thanks!

9B (another 27 owner)

On Monday, August 20, 2012 5:26:05 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, August 20, 2012 5:06:48 PM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:



Hear here! Let the 15 meter two-design class live long and prosper!



(ASW27 owner)



John Cochrane



I don't begrudge the sailplane OEMs the urge to create markets to drive some revenues - I'd hate to see what a new -27B would cost without people buying new -31s and -29s in volume to cover the fixed costs of the business. In a climate where taxing the rich has gotten to be so in vogue here's a situation where the richer folks kinda volunteer to subsidize the rest of the market a bit. Thanks!



9B (another 27 owner)

Huh? Subsidizing what market? Is here a market for new ASW-27 AFAIK. Yes they are still on Schleichers web site, but 1. can you still order one and 2. if so how many are being ordered, and 3. At what cost--compered to an ASG-29/15 and ASG-29/18?

With the slightly higher-performance ASG-29/15 available I could only imagine Schleicher keeping around the ASW-27 if there was significant reduced build cost, production capacity to build those gliders and a market willing to buy them new.

What I suspect may be more relevant for terms of making 15m class racers affordable is not existing design 15m gliders being manufacture, but rather new variants like the ASG-29/15 which helps suppress used prices of ASW-27.

The ASW-27 and ASG-29 gliders use basically the same fuselage, the wing in the '29 will be more expensive to manufacture because its multi-part wing and just more complex and a bit stronger, but once tooled up I'd be surprised if the cost to manufacture difference is really that significant (within say a $100k-$150k delivered price range, who cares about another $10k (guessing) higher base price if that gives you the option to also purchase 18m tips.

Once the tooling/moulds are produced they are sunk costs, unless there are other reasons you might as well use the new moulds vs. the old ones. I could imagine production reason for a manufacture to want to push older models if the in-mould work time and mould capacity is is the long tent pole for manufacturing, but with so much finishing and hand work involved in a glider construction my gut field is the moulding/tooling time may not be the main production limit -- anybody have a practical feel for this? And even if it is there a new model in class just basically kills demand of the older model, partially because a manufacturer can't lower the price low-enough to be compelling (esp. vs. a now depressed used market price because the new-toy just created increased supply of the old-toy in the used market).

If there was enough margin, a elastic price/performance demand curve and manufacturers with sufficient production resources then a manufacturer could keep manufacturing an old generation product at an lower price point, but I just don't see that happening. I suspect the manufacturers operate much more in a mode where "this is our latest toy" and orders fill up very fast and the factory goes ape-**** crazy trying to crank out as many of those models as possible--especially for fear of long order lead times killing new orders and to support getting as many glides in the hands of top (and middling racers) to ensure lots of wins for the design. And their competition is all doing the same. And I bet the top manufactures are extremely focused on the very leading edge, especially caring about 18m and now open class race results (e.g. ASG-29 vs. JS1-C, JS1-C vs. SH Quintus, etc -- notice how Jonkers, a small manufacturer, have very effectively positioned themselves in both the key 18m and open class mind-share races here).

The evolution of the 18m vs. 15m class has obviously been a boon for manufactures able to keep up. Now the next effort seems to be modest-open class, gliders that have a hope or running at high wing loadings and flying fast on strong days. I love this stuff even if I may not ever own one. There was a lot to be said for the ASG-29 with 15m and 18m wings, but now the 18m/21m/23m options must look pretty compelling for lots of purchasers. It seems weekly I hear of another JS-1C order....


Darryl