Time for Separate 18m Records?

On Monday, 20 April 2020 20:53:51 UTC+3, Roy B. wrote:
Hello Kristian:

You wrote,
"You can fly as fast with modern 18m class glider as anything else".

Perhaps you can fly as fast - But I am not sure that you can fly as far. But the same statement can be made about speed in a 15m glider compared to an 18m glider in strong conditions.

But, to your point, I've wondered why someone would pay all that extra money for an EB-29 if they can get the same performance from an 18m glider costing very much less?

The fact of too many classes is a separate problem - not a reason to exclude a deserving new class. Perhaps some existing classes should be discontinued or consolidated.

ROY

If you look at current world records, these are all flown in exceptional weather (Argentinian wave or Namibian desert thermals) where long wings are really not an advantage. Yes you can fly longer with EB-29 in European weak day, but then you are not flying a record.

Discontinuing class is more or less unprecedented in FAI history (which is a shame).

In my opinion, the 15m/Open is simple way of doing things. 13.5m is just historical burden of massively failed class that should have no record category or competition class.

I would actually like to acknowledge records made with pure glider. Now there is a difference.

Kristian:
I think that you are correct about the world records - but more pilots (who cannot afford to go to Namibia or Argentina) are interested in national records for their country - and in those countries the difference between 18m and 27m is important.

And on your last point, "I would actually like to acknowledge records made with pure glider. Now there is a difference" I agree completely. With a motor available, it is a different sport.

Best regards
ROY

On Tuesday, 21 April 2020 14:29:09 UTC+3, Roy B. wrote:
Kristian:
I think that you are correct about the world records - but more pilots (who cannot afford to go to Namibia or Argentina) are interested in national records for their country - and in those countries the difference between 18m and 27m is important.


But you can do what ever you like with national records, you don't need FAI for that.

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 7:29:09 AM UTC-4, Roy B. wrote:
Kristian:
I think that you are correct about the world records - but more pilots (who cannot afford to go to Namibia or Argentina) are interested in national records for their country - and in those countries the difference between 18m and 27m is important.

And on your last point, "I would actually like to acknowledge records made with pure glider. Now there is a difference" I agree completely. With a motor available, it is a different sport.

Best regards
ROY

With a motor available it is an entirely different approach to sticking your neck out on a limb. Many times I cross the state and late in the afternoon must combat a headwind and declining conditions. I get back home, close my triangle and sit down and have a cold brew! Have I ever not made it back home, YES. Not to knock the guys and gals with motorgliders, although I do poke a bit of fun at them over the radio. I will call on the radio and ask if any of you guys at Seminole are flying your motorgliders? They usually laugh and say yes, they do have a good sense of humor!

“13.5m is just historical burden of massively failed class that should have no record category or competition class�

Well thats a slap in the face to all us guys flying them! Stick you ass in one of these short wing birds and set a record before you condemn the whole class.

If guys are worried that state, national, and world records are no longer attainable without oudles of money or super ships look at the 13 meter record lists, there are many areas where a person of meager means can chase records specially at the state level..

Dan
Holder of 6 13n records

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 8:29:57 AM UTC-7, Bob Youngblood wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 7:29:09 AM UTC-4, Roy B. wrote:
Kristian:
I think that you are correct about the world records - but more pilots (who cannot afford to go to Namibia or Argentina) are interested in national records for their country - and in those countries the difference between 18m and 27m is important.

And on your last point, "I would actually like to acknowledge records made with pure glider. Now there is a difference" I agree completely. With a motor available, it is a different sport.

Best regards
ROY

With a motor available it is an entirely different approach to sticking your neck out on a limb. Many times I cross the state and late in the afternoon must combat a headwind and declining conditions. I get back home, close my triangle and sit down and have a cold brew! Have I ever not made it back home, YES. Not to knock the guys and gals with motorgliders, although I do poke a bit of fun at them over the radio. I will call on the radio and ask if any of you guys at Seminole are flying your motorgliders? They usually laugh and say yes, they do have a good sense of humor!

"With a motor available it is an entirely different approach to sticking your neck out on a limb." I find that pilots who believe this are nearly all ones who do not frequently (if ever) fly cross country in a motorglider, and are therefore speaking from ignorance. Sticking your neck out on a limb by depending on a motor is self limiting activity as even many time world champions have recently found out. It is a convenience, not a safety tool. As a convenience does it contribute to longer flights? It can, because the inconvenience of a retrieve is less of a consideration. So if you want your record attempts to be convenient and easy, either buy a motorglider or hire a full retrieve crew (the latter will cost you less).

I have asked this before without response: produce an example of a record owned by a motorglider that was achieved by flying too low over unlandable terrain. If you cannot, then you have no argument.

That should get this thread well hijacked! :-)

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 7:34:19 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 8:29:57 AM UTC-7, Bob Youngblood wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 7:29:09 AM UTC-4, Roy B. wrote:
Kristian:
I think that you are correct about the world records - but more pilots (who cannot afford to go to Namibia or Argentina) are interested in national records for their country - and in those countries the difference between 18m and 27m is important.

And on your last point, "I would actually like to acknowledge records made with pure glider. Now there is a difference" I agree completely. With a motor available, it is a different sport.

Best regards
ROY

With a motor available it is an entirely different approach to sticking your neck out on a limb. Many times I cross the state and late in the afternoon must combat a headwind and declining conditions. I get back home, close my triangle and sit down and have a cold brew! Have I ever not made it back home, YES. Not to knock the guys and gals with motorgliders, although I do poke a bit of fun at them over the radio. I will call on the radio and ask if any of you guys at Seminole are flying your motorgliders? They usually laugh and say yes, they do have a good sense of humor!

"With a motor available it is an entirely different approach to sticking your neck out on a limb." I find that pilots who believe this are nearly all ones who do not frequently (if ever) fly cross country in a motorglider, and are therefore speaking from ignorance. Sticking your neck out on a limb by depending on a motor is self limiting activity as even many time world champions have recently found out. It is a convenience, not a safety tool. As a convenience does it contribute to longer flights? It can, because the inconvenience of a retrieve is less of a consideration. So if you want your record attempts to be convenient and easy, either buy a motorglider or hire a full retrieve crew (the latter will cost you less).

I have asked this before without response: produce an example of a record owned by a motorglider that was achieved by flying too low over unlandable terrain. If you cannot, then you have no argument.

That should get this thread well hijacked! :-)

Not really. The most important thing is confidence. Having a motor improves confidence.
For the original question make all the records brand and model specific. Problem solved.

Jfitch wrote:
"produce an example of a record owned by a motorglider that was achieved by flying too low over unlandable terrain. If you cannot, then you have no argument."

The reason for no response is that this is a false challenge. The issue is not safety nor flying over unlandable terrain. The availability of a motor is a risk management tool. It helps the pilot manage much more than just safety risks. It allows for management of land out risk, risk of adverse decision in crossing large overcast areas or potentially unworkable blue areas, risk of delay by flying into loss of convection, risk of overnight retrieves and other non dangerous risks. The pure glider pilot has only his or her wits to manage those risks and no other tool if they are wrong - and so they make more conservative decisions. But they are not "safer" decisions. That is why I say that availability of a motor makes it a different sport.

I concede that in good conditions close to home there is very little difference between having a motor and not. The difference arises when you are far from home and faced with a decision that might put you on the ground. The fellow with the motor has a tool that makes that decision much less consequential. This is why I believe that the records should be different categories.

ROY

Anybody arguing for or against motorgliders as a "safety" solution or "risk management tool" when flying over ANY terrain except an actual airport with suitable runway access needs to see Dave Nadler's presentation at the 2020 SSA Convention on motorglider reliability REALITY.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R--m0NDR0j8

Many thanks to Dave, one of the most experienced motorglider enthusiasts, but a realist above all.

Also, thanks for his eye-opening analysis of a catastrophic in-flight emergency that resulted in a dual bailout and crash in a remote area. The video explaining his experience and its aftermath should be required viewing for all aspiring (and current) cross-country pilots. It definitely reorganized my thinking!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8I3A3dqsu0

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:46:47 PM UTC-7, Roy B. wrote:
Jfitch wrote:
"produce an example of a record owned by a motorglider that was achieved by flying too low over unlandable terrain. If you cannot, then you have no argument."

The reason for no response is that this is a false challenge. The issue is not safety nor flying over unlandable terrain. The availability of a motor is a risk management tool. It helps the pilot manage much more than just safety risks. It allows for management of land out risk, risk of adverse decision in crossing large overcast areas or potentially unworkable blue areas, risk of delay by flying into loss of convection, risk of overnight retrieves and other non dangerous risks. The pure glider pilot has only his or her wits to manage those risks and no other tool if they are wrong - and so they make more conservative decisions. But they are not "safer" decisions. That is why I say that availability of a motor makes it a different sport.

I concede that in good conditions close to home there is very little difference between having a motor and not. The difference arises when you are far from home and faced with a decision that might put you on the ground. The fellow with the motor has a tool that makes that decision much less consequential. This is why I believe that the records should be different categories.

ROY

"The issue is not safety nor flying over unlandable terrain. The availability of a motor is a risk management tool." Your premise then is that a motorglider makes record attempts more convenient and therefore easier. There is no doubt about this. However there are MANY things that make record attempts more convenient and easier: the availability of a full time crew, higher performance gliders (even in the same class), the proximity of good soaring terrain to your home, independent wealth, etc. A motor is not the only - or even foremost - difference. So if you want the granularity of motors introduced to records, then several other differentiators should come at the same time, or even first. No one would suggest that it is easier to set a 15m record in a PIK20E vs. a JS-3 because it has a motor.

I've no problem with increasing the granularity of records. The motivation for records is vanity (I say that without judgement - do what turns your prop), and so increasing the opportunity to indulge is overall to the good. There is no need for them to be a zero sum game. Picking out motors as an exception among many variations seems arbitrary. My preference would be to have a "claiming record" such as is done in auto and horse racing. You claim a record, say in the $20,000 class. If your record is recognized anyone may purchase that glider from you for $20,000. This would quickly sort out motors or not, new gliders vs. old, and even expensive avionics. Most pilots would hesitate to enter their JS-3 or AS-33 in the $20K class against the PIK20E, knowing anyone could buy their glider for $20K if the record was granted.