![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
you guys are funny!
For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower performance is just frustrating when trying XC. i have no experience flying cross country in anything 35:1 or higher, but it seems to me like it may be kind of boring, i mean you are way up in the air all the time, never get close to the ground until youve made the goal, wheres the excitement?? Makes the "club" less exclusive - I became a cross-county pilot and fly in contests because I fly a ship I can afford. Modest initial cost, inexpensive insurance, zero maintenance - amen and this is why i bought the Cherokee they did not seem to be having much fun, because they landed out all the damn time. now im afraid to move up to high performance soaring, if landing out isnt fun, of course as long as nothing gets broken, then what is fun? ive had nearly as much fun on some of my retrieves as some of my flights. oh i like the 'claim' idea. reminds me of when i used to go to the local dirt track races. other racers had the opportunity to claim parts of the top 5 cars at the end of the race. preset prices for standard items. kept costs down for everyone and helped even the playing field. i think we should just leave those poor PW-5's alone, i mean usually RAS doesnt start picking on them until at least later into the fall or winter. I personally like the idea of a one design class for contests. I wouldnt even care WHICH design it was but as long as it was affordable enough for an average pilot to get into. when the entire field is running the same glider in the same weather over the same course the only way you win is by being the best pilot and isnt that what we are trying to figure out anyway? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 4, 3:20 pm, wrote:
you guys are funny! For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower performance is just frustrating when trying XC. i have no experience flying cross country in anything 35:1 or higher, but it seems to me like it may be kind of boring, i mean you are way up in the air all the time, never get close to the ground until youve made the goal, wheres the excitement?? Wow, I must be doing it wrong, I get close to the ground pretty often. Makes the "club" less exclusive - I became a cross-county pilot and fly in contests because I fly a ship I can afford. Modest initial cost, inexpensive insurance, zero maintenance - amen and this is why i bought the Cherokee they did not seem to be having much fun, because they landed out all the damn time. now im afraid to move up to high performance soaring, if landing out isnt fun, of course as long as nothing gets broken, then what is fun? ive had nearly as much fun on some of my retrieves as some of my flights. I've had a few fun retrieves, but landing out every other flight is not fun for me. I have already driven 2 hours to the airport, and have to drive home afterwards. Put in there a 1-4 hour retrieve and it's a damn long day. And at contests, you have to have a crew if you're going to land out that often. Most of us don't have enough people volunteering to hang out at an airport for a week. oh i like the 'claim' idea. reminds me of when i used to go to the local dirt track races. other racers had the opportunity to claim parts of the top 5 cars at the end of the race. preset prices for standard items. kept costs down for everyone and helped even the playing field. i think we should just leave those poor PW-5's alone, i mean usually RAS doesnt start picking on them until at least later into the fall or winter. I personally like the idea of a one design class for contests. I wouldnt even care WHICH design it was but as long as it was affordable enough for an average pilot to get into. when the entire field is running the same glider in the same weather over the same course the only way you win is by being the best pilot and isnt that what we are trying to figure out anyway? I also like one design, but I go to contests to have fun, not to figure out who the best pilot is. Todd |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have limited XC experience in a nominally greater than 1:35 Std Cirrus, and
early XC in a 1:27 Blanik L13, and a couple of flights in a Kestrel 19. Of the three performance bands the Standard class Cirrus is the most fun for me - probably because it is mine, and I have the most experience in it. The lower performance is very frustrating because it is so slow getting anywhere. The performance of the Kestrel means that you have to fly far to be challenging - in high winds even the Cirrus can get tiresome trying to go upwind... Getting low is a consequence of weather and pilot choices. Where I fly there is usually lots of energy and anything less than 2000 feet AGL is "low" and wasting time because the thermals tend to get scrappy and disorganised. That said I have spent my fair share of time grinding away from some low position. Usually as a consequence of my poor decision making. Landouts happen to all of them, even the 1:60+ uber bugsmashers. They just tend to happen a lot further away from home. Which can make retrieves a real adventure, or unmitigated pain. Consider the crew a little while ago who I watched scurrying around for a second trailer that could handle an 18m racer when both of their pilots called below glide 150km away at 17:00... On rural dirt roads in the part of the world these guys were in that could be a very long process. Consider that the area these guys were getting low in is pretty uninhabited. As one French pilot found out in the 2001 worlds, there are places you can land in a tilled field and have , no radio comms, no cell phone and no building in sight from the circuit. How pleasant an outlanding is depends largely on crew and how easy it is to get your glider home. The one outlanding involving the L13 was a nightmare. The trailer is open, and the fittings badly designed, and now old and abused. Then he lands where the rocks prevent getting a trailer in close. Conversely, the Cirrus is easy to derig and has a good trailer, so it is no major problem most of the time. Never tried it , but there is an adage that you know who your real friends are the second time you ask them to retrieve you with a Kestrel 19. How much fun you have depends on your attitude - not on your equipment. wrote: you guys are funny! For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower performance is just frustrating when trying XC. i have no experience flying cross country in anything 35:1 or higher, but it seems to me like it may be kind of boring, i mean you are way up in the air all the time, never get close to the ground until youve made the goal, wheres the excitement?? Makes the "club" less exclusive - I became a cross-county pilot and fly in contests because I fly a ship I can afford. Modest initial cost, inexpensive insurance, zero maintenance - amen and this is why i bought the Cherokee they did not seem to be having much fun, because they landed out all the damn time. now im afraid to move up to high performance soaring, if landing out isnt fun, of course as long as nothing gets broken, then what is fun? ive had nearly as much fun on some of my retrieves as some of my flights. oh i like the 'claim' idea. reminds me of when i used to go to the local dirt track races. other racers had the opportunity to claim parts of the top 5 cars at the end of the race. preset prices for standard items. kept costs down for everyone and helped even the playing field. i think we sould just leave those poor PW-5's alone, i mean usually RAS doesnt start picking on them until at least later into the fall or winter. I personally like the idea of a one design class for contests. I wouldnt even care WHICH design it was but as long as it was affordable enough for an average pilot to get into. when the entire field is running the same glider in the same weather over the same course the only way you win is by being the best pilot and isnt that what we are trying to figure out anyway? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 4, 8:20 pm, wrote:
you guys are funny! For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower performance is just frustrating when trying XC. i have no experience flying cross country in anything 35:1 or higher, but it seems to me like it may be kind of boring, i mean you are way up in the air all the time, never get close to the ground until youve made the goal, wheres the excitement?? The goalposts move, the fun remains. snip they did not seem to be having much fun, because they landed out all the damn time. now im afraid to move up to high performance soaring, if landing out isnt fun, of course as long as nothing gets broken, then what is fun? Soaring? ![]() ive had nearly as much fun on some of my retrieves as some of my flights. snip |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: PW-5 World Class Sailplane | Mike I Green[_2_] | Soaring | 0 | May 11th 07 05:30 AM |
FS: PW-5 World Class Sailplane | Mike I Green[_2_] | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | May 1st 07 04:50 PM |
Is everybody afraid of World Class? | Jacek Kobiesa | Soaring | 79 | August 27th 04 10:47 PM |
Is everybody afraid of World Class ... | Dead Cat | Soaring | 1 | August 23rd 04 11:21 AM |
US Standard Class and World Class Nationals at Hobbs | Ken Sorenson | Soaring | 7 | July 16th 04 04:03 AM |