US Dollar sinks to new low against Euro

I would always choose the 15 meter glider.......following what you have been
saying the 15 meter would then not be the "same" performance as the 13 meter
glider.....but better!
Also.having flown a lot of different types of glider and airplanes over
several years, including some ultra-lite or 'lite" types there is still no
way to compare these with the extra mass and groovy feeling of the (for the
lack of a better word) real sailplanes.....
tim

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
Erik mann wrote:

What is it that economists always throw out... ceteris paribus...

I agree that if one started with a clean sheet of paper, then maybe you
can lop off a few pounds on the fuselage, change the planform, etc.
(though, having looked at the structure of some of these ships,
I'm not so sure I would want to fly them or land them off-field...
but I digress). Keeping everthing else equal, is the "best" use of
engineering to start with a shorter span as a design goal? Maybe it
is, as the weight savings on the spar and carry-through structure allows
for a good range of wingloading while bringing along the other
benefits mentioned elswhere (ease of assembly, transport, etc.)?
Or, maybe the design goal should be 40:1 performance at the lowest
cost, irrespective of span?

That was my proposed goal: LS4 performance at the lowest manufacturing
cost. The obvious solution will be a smaller glider, made possible by
the improved aerodynamics, design, and materials that became available in
the 24 years since the LS4 was designed.

A few have suggested 40:1 is not possible at less than 15 meter span, but
when 15 meter spans can now do 48:1 or better, this is not sensible.

Most people that have objected to this smaller span solution have done so
mainly on the "it doesn't cost THAT much more to ..." grounds; i.e.,
proposing a more expensive glider than one that will just match the LS4.
This might indeed yield a more viable product, but it doesn't meet the
goal of a "cheaper LS4".

Which would you prefer, at the same price: a new LS4, or an new 13 meter
with identical performance, handling, and safety? I would choose the 13
meter glider, but many/most would not, even though it's smaller size and
lighter weight would make it easier to rig, to push around, to retrieve,
to tow (in it's trailer or behind a tow plane), even to wax!

Old habits and dreams die slowly, I think. Glider pilots are mostly a very
conservative bunch.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message

A few have suggested 40:1 is not possible at less than 15 meter span, but
when 15 meter spans can now do 48:1 or better, this is not sensible.

Most people that have objected to this smaller span solution have done so
mainly on the "it doesn't cost THAT much more to ..." grounds; i.e.,
proposing a more expensive glider than one that will just match the LS4.
This might indeed yield a more viable product, but it doesn't meet the
goal of a "cheaper LS4".

Which would you prefer, at the same price: a new LS4, or an new 13 meter
with identical performance, handling, and safety? I would choose the 13
meter glider, but many/most would not, even though it's smaller size and
lighter weight would make it easier to rig, to push around, to retrieve,
to tow (in it's trailer or behind a tow plane), even to wax!

Old habits and dreams die slowly, I think. Glider pilots are mostly a very
conservative bunch.

Tim Mara wrote:
I would always choose the 15 meter glider.......following what you
have been
saying the 15 meter would then not be the "same" performance as the
13 meter
glider.....but better!
Also.having flown a lot of different types of glider and airplanes over
several years, including some ultra-lite or 'lite" types there is
still no
way to compare these with the extra mass and groovy feeling of the
(for the
lack of a better word) real sailplanes.....
tim

This thread is reminding me of a Monty Python skit:

Span span span span
Span span span span
Lovely span! Wonderful span!*

The message I'm getting is that the market (us) wants LS-4 like
performance for a lot less money. A number of manufacturers are putting
out gliders that are close, but miss the mark in one way or another. I
suspect they, with good intentions, say to themselves in that self
assured glider pilot kind of way,
"I know what will fix this sport. I'm going to build it, people will
fly it, and I will be their savior."
OK, maybe not the savior part, but I'm sure each of them thinks they've
got the solution.
Or worse, a committee gets together and designs something (nearly) no
one wants.
Do these guys ever do extensive, international, market research that
asks the one true question (that Tim alludes to above)?
"What will YOU buy?" "When push comes to dollars and you picture
yourself in a new glider, what is it like?" Asking participants at the
latest Worlds isn't enough.
From what I read, what we *Really* want to fly sounds like "A big shiny
high performance gliders for half as much money." Is that what you
really want? Works for me.
The price of Russias and PW-5s has dropped over recent years because
IMHO they don't fit into this picture. I think SparrowHawks are very
cool but I won't give up my Mosquito for one.
The whole hand made glider industry is a dead end anachronism and the
end is approaching (see the ASW-28 wing shrinkage, Discus CS AD, sale of
RS threads for recent examples). High tech ultralights, minigliders and
old designs built with cheap labor nibble at the edges, but don't break
down the central dogma of the big manufacturers.

The manufacturers should be asking owners, clubs, students etc. what
they *Really want to buy*, not just "We build these gliders for these
prices. Which do you want?" Then apply some well established material
and manufacturing technology as well as marketing, and try to build it.
At worst they'll end up where they're headed anyway.

Shawn


* http://www.mailmsg.com/sounds/spam-song.wav for the original

Tim Mara wrote:
I would always choose the 15 meter glider.......following what you have been
saying the 15 meter would then not be the "same" performance as the 13 meter
glider.....but better!

Tim, you completely missed the point: the choice was between gliders of
IDENTICAL performance. Even so, you made my point: a lot of RAS pilots
have a bias to 15 meters, REGARDLESS of the performance!

Also.having flown a lot of different types of glider and airplanes over
several years, including some ultra-lite or 'lite" types there is still no
way to compare these with the extra mass and groovy feeling of the (for the
lack of a better word) real sailplanes.....

And yet, one of the elements cited most by the people that own the
shorter span sailplanes is the improved response of the glider, so you
can "feel the air" better and maneuver more quickly while thermalling.
Your preference might just be habit and lack of exposure to the modern
small span gliders, like the SparrowHawk, Apis, Silent, etc. These are
not your father's 1-26! (This is not disparagement of the 1-26, but a
recognition of how different the new gliders are).

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Tim Mara wrote:
.. there is still no
way to compare these with the extra mass and groovy feeling of the (for the
lack of a better word) real sailplanes.....
tim


Groovy. That is the perfect word.

Fred