LS-4 ? What about 1-26 ?

I'm so new at soaring that I have only taken one glider ride in my life.
Having established that I'm not an expert on much of anything, here's my 2
cents worth. The VOLUME envisioned to make an affordable plane would
possibly make VFR flight impossible because of the huge number of planes in
the air. So getting a cheap sailplane, might kill the sport that you want
to promote. I can imagine having to apply for an airspace usage permit much
as we have to apply months or years in advance for reservations at some of
the most popular National Parks. On the other hand, I'm one of the people
that will have to join a club to have afford access to a plane.

My two cents
....john__________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________

"smjmitchell" wrote in message
u...
I don't think that performance is a big cost driver.

The major cost drivers a
* development costs
* certification costs
* labour (for production)
* raw material costs

I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value irrespective
of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material
cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a
glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper.

The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. ...

Welcome to soaring, John.

The 'crowded skies' bogy is largely a fabrication of the evening news
'talking heads' and their editors who want to frighten people into watching
their programs (and their sponsors commercials).

In actuality, on the busiest days, there are only about 5000 aircraft
airborne over the 48 states at any time. Most of these are at altitudes
much higher than gliders usually fly or in the vicinity of major airports.
As avgas prices increase, the private piston fleet flies fewer and fewer
hours so the traffic density below 18,000 feet may actually be decreasing.
Most glider flying is done in remote areas where air traffic is very low.
In summary, there's LOTS of room in the sky to fly gliders. The glider
fleet could increase tenfold or more without problems.

Where a problem might arise is with the 'uphill capacity' of a local soaring
operation to launch a large number of gliders. A solution is 'self-launch'
gliders or my preferred solution - winches.

Unfortunately, it's a fact that the population of glider pilots is shrinking
which translates into fewer businesses and clubs where one can find gliders
to fly or tows to launch privately owned gliders.

The choice is a shrinking sport, a stagnant one or a growing one. I think
the happiest choice is a growing one. Cheaper gliders are a part of the
solution.

Bill Daniels





"JohnWN in Burke, VA" wrote in message
news:Uvpld.1596$iR.1168@lakeread04...
I'm so new at soaring that I have only taken one glider ride in my life.
Having established that I'm not an expert on much of anything, here's my 2
cents worth. The VOLUME envisioned to make an affordable plane would
possibly make VFR flight impossible because of the huge number of planes
in
the air. So getting a cheap sailplane, might kill the sport that you want
to promote. I can imagine having to apply for an airspace usage permit
much
as we have to apply months or years in advance for reservations at some of
the most popular National Parks. On the other hand, I'm one of the people
that will have to join a club to have afford access to a plane.

My two cents

....john__________________________________________ ___________________________
_____________________________________

"smjmitchell" wrote in message
u...
I don't think that performance is a big cost driver.

The major cost drivers a
* development costs
* certification costs
* labour (for production)
* raw material costs

I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value
irrespective
of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material
cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a
glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper.

The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. ...

Ok, I'm going to weigh in here!

I am a relatively new glider pilot but I have flown power, hang
gliders. I have also been a skydiver. I am now living in Germany and
as I have a glider club 10 minutes from the house, last year I decided
to get my soaring license. I could have used my power ticket o get a
license here in a short time but that (I feel) would have been a
mistake. The differences in the 2 sports go beyond landing,
navigation, and airspace knowledge.

I am also a sailor and have built sailboats commercially. The biggest
gains in efficiency in sailboat production came about from modular
construction. This is being used in the sailplane building process to
some extent.

But!!! The next biggest gain would be in using 2 part molds for the
wings and fuselage. What this means is there is a mold with 2 parts
for the upper wing and 2 parts for the lower wing. This means the wing
skins would have 4 molds (port and starboard). The fuse would have 4
molds (2 port and 2 starboard). This would decrease the amount of
labor involved in each part.

The upper wing mold would include the spar cavity, you would lay the
spar into the inside upper wing mold spar cavity before laying the
wing skin. Using precut/prepreg E glass with Divincell (or other
appropriate) cellular core, you would lay the skin and spray gel coat
on the upper (outer) mold and compress the 2 molds. Using vacuum and
heat to assure proper resin consistency will mitigate voids and
delamination problems.

When the upper wing skin is cured it would be mated with the lower
wing skin (both still in there outer molds) and bonded. The airbrake
module would slide into the laser cut bay in the upper wing with
Kevlar rigging wires (not pushrods). The aileron and the aileron
controls (also Kevlar wire) would be installed.

The fuse would follow the same procedure.

Now, we must build 2-300 of these planes just to break even on the
tooling (not development) so we have to agree on one design,
preferably one already in existence. If we could sell 4-500 units in a
2-3 year time frame then we could (possibly) have a viable business
model.

Sound like an LS4 clone to me!

Bob

(The proceeding is a very opinionated and un-researched scenario)

In article k1qld.501341$mD.200090@attbi_s02,
"Bill Daniels" wrote:

The choice is a shrinking sport, a stagnant one or a growing one. I think
the happiest choice is a growing one. Cheaper gliders are a part of the
solution.

I agree.

And you can't grow the sport by everyone buying used LS4s and Discii.
Only newly-built gliders can do it.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Bill Daniels wrote:
Welcome to soaring, John.

The 'crowded skies' bogy is largely a fabrication of the evening news
'talking heads' and their editors who want to frighten people into watching
their programs (and their sponsors commercials).

In actuality, on the busiest days, there are only about 5000 aircraft
airborne over the 48 states at any time. Most of these are at altitudes
much higher than gliders usually fly or in the vicinity of major airports.
As avgas prices increase, the private piston fleet flies fewer and fewer
hours so the traffic density below 18,000 feet may actually be decreasing.
Most glider flying is done in remote areas where air traffic is very low.
In summary, there's LOTS of room in the sky to fly gliders. The glider
fleet could increase tenfold or more without problems.

Where a problem might arise is with the 'uphill capacity' of a local soaring
operation to launch a large number of gliders. A solution is 'self-launch'
gliders or my preferred solution - winches.

Unfortunately, it's a fact that the population of glider pilots is shrinking
which translates into fewer businesses and clubs where one can find gliders
to fly or tows to launch privately owned gliders.

The choice is a shrinking sport, a stagnant one or a growing one. I think
the happiest choice is a growing one. Cheaper gliders are a part of the
solution.

Bill Daniels



Hey Bill

Happy to announce that in some parts soaring is growing. We had four gliders in
one thermal on Sunday for the first time since I joined the club four years ago.
We could have launched one more, but the bridle for the Blanik failed launching
#1, so #2 had to go back to the hangar.

Used to be we battled to have enough members around to get an instructor and
student up reliably. On a good day we might launch two simultaneously, but three
was very very rare.

For what it is worth we had a very strange day with 7/8 or more cloud a lot of
the time, but lots of lift. Presumably the cold air caused by rain in the area
was drifting in and displacing relatively warmer air. In the occasional bit of
sunshine the thermals were very tight but very strong. Had the unusual
experience of getting 3-4m/s up at 20minutes to legal sunset. Airbrakes open for
most of the last fifteen minutes... (Thinks, maybe this is how the British
weather works)

Strange but fun. Which is the point, focus on it being fun and people join, I am
no longer the youngster at the club (at 40). This is also good.


"JohnWN in Burke, VA" wrote in message
news:Uvpld.1596$iR.1168@lakeread04...

I'm so new at soaring that I have only taken one glider ride in my life.
Having established that I'm not an expert on much of anything, here's my 2
cents worth. The VOLUME envisioned to make an affordable plane would
possibly make VFR flight impossible because of the huge number of planes

in

the air. So getting a cheap sailplane, might kill the sport that you want
to promote. I can imagine having to apply for an airspace usage permit

much

as we have to apply months or years in advance for reservations at some of
the most popular National Parks. On the other hand, I'm one of the people
that will have to join a club to have afford access to a plane.

My two cents


...john___________________________________________ __________________________
_____________________________________

"smjmitchell" wrote in message
.au...

I don't think that performance is a big cost driver.

The major cost drivers a
* development costs
* certification costs
* labour (for production)
* raw material costs

I suspect that all of these drivers will have a similar value

irrespective

of whether the glider is a APIS, 1-26 or LS-4. OK ... maybe the material
cost will vary a little but the difference is not going to result in a
glider that is 1/3 or 1/2 cheaper.

The biggest issue with the cost of airplanes is quite simply VOLUME. ...