Motorgliders (long)

Hey, Tom. I wasn't talking about you. I have no doubt that you could have
done your 1000K with a pure sailplane. You did your homework and deserve
the bragging rights. I was speaking of others who just keep relying on the
engine to save the day when it goes bad until they get lucky and bag a big
flight.

There are also sailplane pilots who venture over dangerous terrain and get
lucky enough to get away with it - for awhile.

However, there are others who make their own luck with skill and knowledge
and have flown astonishing flights for many decades with incident. These
people have done their homework, understand the risks and how to manage
them. Most of them kept notebooks with drawings and notes about safe
landing sites in difficult areas. they spent a lot of time driving remote
area to get this information. As I said, it takes work and perseverance to
make the big flights without a motor. I respect that.

Bill Daniels


"Tom Serkowski" wrote in message
m...
Holy cow Bill, you can't be serious?!

The only differences I've observed so far a

- I can take a 'tow' when I feel like it and can 'release' at a place
convenient to me. In other words, I don't wait in line for takeoff
and I have the 'towplane' all to myself and can 'hang on' for 20 or 30
miles as I seek a good/convenient place to release. This, of course,
is not while participating in a contest.

- I worry less about needing a retreive. I still think about it and
plan my glides appropriately. I sweat just as hard in my ASH-26E as I
did in the ASW-20B when I'm low. I don't want to use the engine. It
'spoils' a soaring acheivement for me.

The bottom line is that flying a self-launcher or turbo, is probably
very similar to going XC back in the 40's and 50's. Back then
sailplanes flew slow enough that the crew could generally keep up and
stay below the pilot. Today, XC speeds are just too high (nost of the
time) for this to be possible. The motor is just an extension of the
crew. When I finally do start the engine and begin climbing away, I'm
just as exhausted and disappointed as I would have been if I'd landed.
And, I don't think I've put any less effort into the flight than your
'pure' sailplane pilot.

Flying as if the motor will ALWAYS start is a very bad idea and is
equivalent to pressing on because 'there will be a thermal ahead'. In
either case, the plane and the pilot may be hurt. Some people do it
anyway, whether they have a motor or not. So where on your 'hero
list' would you put the 'pure' sailplane pilot who pushed on into
unlandable terrain and got away with it?

-Tom
ASH-26E (5Z)

"Bill Daniels" wrote in message
link.net...
We fly merely for the bragging rights. MG's are a very convenient, low
risk, low effort way to fly. Pure sailplanes are hard work and require
that
an endless series of difficult decisions be made before and during
flight.
Pure sailplanes will always earn the greatest bragging rights for any
given
flight.

They should also earn the greatest points in contests.

I think JJ is right to dig in his heels and insist that this sport
remain
soaring in the traditional sense.

Bill Daniels

In article . net,
says...
Hey, Tom. I wasn't talking about you. I have no doubt that you could have
done your 1000K with a pure sailplane. You did your homework and deserve
the bragging rights. I was speaking of others who just keep relying on the
engine to save the day when it goes bad until they get lucky and bag a big
flight.

There are also sailplane pilots who venture over dangerous terrain and get
lucky enough to get away with it - for awhile.

However, there are others who make their own luck with skill and knowledge
and have flown astonishing flights for many decades with incident. These
people have done their homework, understand the risks and how to manage
them. Most of them kept notebooks with drawings and notes about safe
landing sites in difficult areas. they spent a lot of time driving remote
area to get this information. As I said, it takes work and perseverance to
make the big flights without a motor. I respect that.

So, it takes "work and perseverance" to make a big flight without a
motor, but you also credit Tom with "work and perseverance", even though
he flies with a motor. It sounds like it's not the motor that's
important to you, but your perception of how much skill vs luck went
into the flight. In other words, just like we've always done:

- the 1-26 driver gets big credit for a 500K flight, but not the ASW 22
pilot

- the 500K done at Minden gets a ho-hum, but the 500K done in Minnesota
gets a "job well done!"

- the guy that lands out, hitch hikes home, then retrieves himself gets
the admiration; the guy that lands at an airport and gets an aero-
retrieve doesn't even get a "how did it go"

Someday, motors in gliders won't seem so special, and they'll just be
one more factor in how we judge a glider pilot. Personally, my favorite
way is to measure the size of the smile on his (or her) face after
landing.

--
== change the decimal.point in my address to . to reply directly

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
t...
In article . net,
says...

Someday, motors in gliders won't seem so special, and they'll just be
one more factor in how we judge a glider pilot. Personally, my favorite
way is to measure the size of the smile on his (or her) face after
landing.


And really, that's what it's all about. Enjoyment, fun, and appreciation for
the beauty and majesty that soaring brings. It matters not if your L/D is 15
or 60, if your ship has fabric or carbon wings, or if there's a motor along
or not. Not one little bit. For those whining and complaining about motors -
get over it. You don't have to have one if you don't want.

Motorgliders are here to stay. The fact that most of the new ships have
engines probably means there are good reasons for the motor, other than rich
Americans wanting to spend more money on their toys. I fly motorgliders and
enjoy the freedom, convenience, and ability to fly places you would never
ever see a engineless glider. Not so much due to unlandable terrain, but
more due to logistics, a lack of facilities and tow planes. Two years ago, 4
Stemmes flew a 9 day trip from CA to Telluride . . . no tow planes, no
ground support and not possible without a motorglider.

At Minden yesterday, I watched a group of sailplanes waiting at the staging
area for a tow. Some pilots were getting high tows to the crest of the
Sierras and this was probably slowing things down I guess. As I readied my
Stemme for the flight back to Napa, CA, I watched some 10 motorgliders
self-launch. No wait, just start and go. I climbed to 16K and did a final
glide home across the central valley. Not my favorite way to soar, but I was
still smiling after I landed.

--
bumper
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003

- the guy that lands out, hitch hikes home, then retrieves himself gets
the admiration;

I have hitched a ride home twice in an airplane, once off a dry lake! Then
went to self retrieve.