Short Wings Gliders

On Jan 30, 9:56*am, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:34:56 -0800 (PST), Brad
wrote:

Maybe the younger generation and their quest for adrenalin laced
activites would find competitive soaring compelling, but how many can
afford their own sailplane?

Hi Brad,

I admit that - from a European point of view- I'm having difficulties
to understand why most US based glider pilots think that it's
necessary to own a glider.

Here in Europe by far most gliders are owned by clubs, making it
possible for the club members to fligh latest technology for a yearly
price that hardly exceeds $800.

For most clubs in Germany *it's common nowadays that student pilots
fly LS-4 or DG-300. Basic *training is usually done in ASK-21 these
days. Nearly any club clubs offer flapped ships (ASW-20, ASW-27) and
state-of-the-art doubleseaters (Duo Dicus, DG-505) to its members.
There is absolutely no interest in flying something inferior.

Why isn't it possible to do that in the US? A couple of US clubs whose
homepages I've seen seem to be able to do that.

Bye
Andreas

Lets see, why? Mmmm.... Population density differences. Differences in
geographic scale - i.e. borrowing glider to haul long distances to a
competition would often have more impact on a club in the USA. A long
history of established clubs in Europe that just is not here in the
USA. USA clubs and commercial operations with many klunky basic
trainers and natural inertia to get off this/sometimes a rigid belief
that is a much better approach than glass ships. Lower cost and more
interesting sports like hang gliding and paragliding that have been
particularly strong in the USA. A higher cost basis (e.g. less winch
operations in the USA) which suppresses ability to spend money on a
more modern fleet. A pilot licensing system that has nothing to do
with encouraging the sport or XC flying. A mishandling of XC training/
transition at many clubs and commercial operations that sees a huge
drop off in licensed pilots who never go XC let alone ever compete in
a contest (numbers comparing Europe to the USA would be interesting).
An economic inability to purchase newer fleets (remember the USA
buying power for European glass has been hurting). And on an on..

Instead of worrying about the gloom there are clubs in the USA that
get people into standard class and higher performance double seaters
ASAP and promote XC flying and loaning out gliders for camps and
safari's etc. I also strongly believe clubs need a Duo Discus or
DG-1000S class two seater ships for cross country mentoring and just
to have gliders in their fleet to interest/get new members to aspire
to. Bay Area Soaring Associates is an example or a club with a
DG-1000S and DG-505 (and a several standard class single seaters
etc.)

The other difference in the USA is there are relatively more
commercial operators than in Europe. And what is a club in one place
and a commercial operation can be all blurred. In California if I want
to fly something besides my ASH-26E I can rent an ASW-24 or similar,
Duo Discus and even an ASH-25 at very reasonable rates (and without
any hassles of club membership, maintenance etc). However as with
clubs what you find with commercial operators vary widely (clubs and
operators with gliders not set up for proper XC drive me nuts, crappy
varios, insufficient batteries, radios that don't work, no pee tube,
etc. and they wonder why they can't attract members...). Most
commercial operators are not going to want gliders leaving on safaris
or contests etc. (but it can happen at times).

Getting back to the original thread, adding another glider contest
class would do nothing to encourage an increase in gliding and is
likely to just make more work for everybody. If there is a informal
class of gliders that is organically successful and being held back
due to lack of formally organized contests or lack of class rules/
standardization between designs then by all means draw up another FAI
class. I suspect there is naturally something just anti-low cost
associated in establishing a conventional (not-one design) racing
class. Innovation within the class and the willingness of pilots to
pay for race winning designs drive up costs. And at the other extreme
where chasing a one-design type class where the performance is too low
to be an easy to fly XC machine - I think the oft used ~40:1 wisdom is
an interesting break point (there are two places I fly frequently
where a PW5, Russian or Sparrowhawk type glider is a non-starter since
I could not make typical final glide back from where the lift is).

If you want to lower costs you need reasonable volume and given the
thing is going to cost a reasonable amount of money you need to make
sure it is appealing enough to a wide audience even if that involves
stretching wingspan, and costs, to get into a performance sweetspot
(we can argue about what that sweetspot). Especially when compared to
the bang for the buck achieved when purchasing a used standard (or
15m) glider. Then just to top it off the World Class effort really
screwed up by having a design that just looks like a pregnant guppy. A
bit of a handicap in encourage the buzz and excitement a new class
would need. (Sorry PW5 owners, and I know many of you do some great
impressive flights in the PW5 and have blast in it.).


Darryl

At 19:32 30 January 2009, Darryl Ramm wrote:

Lower cost and more
interesting sports like hang gliding and paragliding that have been
particularly strong in the USA.

Another point is competition from power flying, which is a much more
attractive proposition in the US. I believe I'm correct in thinking that
flying power in most of Europe is much more expensive (and more highly
restricted) than in the US.

Jim Beckman

Lower cost and more
interesting sports like hang gliding and paragliding that have been
particularly strong in the USA.

If you want to fly something modestly attractive, paragliding is bot
cheaper than gliding at all. And not more interesting, either. Most
paragliders I know look with envy to the gliders. (Don't ask me why they
don't change, though.)

Another point is competition from power flying, which is a much more
attractive proposition in the US. I believe I'm correct in thinking that
flying power in most of Europe is much more expensive (and more highly
restricted) than in the US.

I don't know a single glider pilot who doesn't think that power flying
is just plain dull. Certainly useful, but nevertheless dull.

Andreas,

It is a mind-set in US clubs. First, hardly any clubs use winches and
they must spend enormous amounts of money to own, operate, and insure tow
planes. Second, there are few places where a winch could be used that are
near a population area big enough to draw members to support a club; we see
a turnover of about 15% of the membership every year. Third, we are busy,
busy, busy in this country; we work longer hours and have more time
constraints than Europeans (I think this has been proved), and this means
that we want to show up, rig, fly, and leave without staying around all
day to help others and to be a true club where people hang out and
socialize with families. Most clubs don't have female pilots and wives
and girlfriends grow tired of coming to a place where there is nothing for
them to do or no one to socialize with. Fourth, all of this means we want
our own equipment so that we can treat it as we wish without consulting
others about it; this pride of ownership means that privately owned
gliders are beautifully kept, for the most part, and club machines are
"junk" in the words of a short-term (4 years) resident from Finland.

At 17:56 30 January 2009, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:34:56 -0800 (PST), Brad
wrote:

Maybe the younger generation and their quest for adrenalin laced
activites would find competitive soaring compelling, but how many can
afford their own sailplane?

Hi Brad,

I admit that - from a European point of view- I'm having difficulties
to understand why most US based glider pilots think that it's
necessary to own a glider.

Here in Europe by far most gliders are owned by clubs, making it
possible for the club members to fligh latest technology for a yearly
price that hardly exceeds $800.

For most clubs in Germany it's common nowadays that student pilots
fly LS-4 or DG-300. Basic training is usually done in ASK-21 these
days. Nearly any club clubs offer flapped ships (ASW-20, ASW-27) and
state-of-the-art doubleseaters (Duo Dicus, DG-505) to its members.
There is absolutely no interest in flying something inferior.


Why isn't it possible to do that in the US? A couple of US clubs whose
homepages I've seen seem to be able to do that.




Bye
Andreas

At 17:56 30 January 2009, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:34:56 -0800 (PST), Brad
wrote:

Maybe the younger generation and their quest for adrenalin laced
activites would find competitive soaring compelling, but how many can
afford their own sailplane?

Hi Brad,

I admit that - from a European point of view- I'm having difficulties
to understand why most US based glider pilots think that it's
necessary to own a glider.

Here in Europe by far most gliders are owned by clubs, making it
possible for the club members to fligh latest technology for a yearly
price that hardly exceeds $800.

For most clubs in Germany it's common nowadays that student pilots
fly LS-4 or DG-300. Basic training is usually done in ASK-21 these
days. Nearly any club clubs offer flapped ships (ASW-20, ASW-27) and
state-of-the-art doubleseaters (Duo Dicus, DG-505) to its members.
There is absolutely no interest in flying something inferior.


Why isn't it possible to do that in the US? A couple of US clubs whose
homepages I've seen seem to be able to do that.




Bye
Andreas

Andreas,
the problems in the US and Canada are two fold.
Glider pilots per capita and as a result pilot density.
Also an important differance is the individualistic approach in the US.

There are a number of clubs that operate on the European model and are
successful but there are not enough of them due to the points mentioned
above.

Here in Ontario Canada, with about 12M people, only two Clubs approach
the European model. In Canada with 33M people we only have 1500 Glider
pilots.

I give you a personal example of the problem. When I started gliding in
my mid forties I was established and I owned by then a house in a small
town. The Club I joint was a 1hr drive away . The club had 35 members and
20 were mostly active. We had a Scout tow plane, a 2-33,a Blanik, a twin
astir and a
single astir. No club house and we did not own the field.
Due to a serious of unfortunate events the club went belly up.
I now became a roving pilot. The closest clubs were 3 and 4 hours way. In
the end I did not join any club I became a member at large of the National
club and joint the contest circuit. It was not ideal but still gratifying
and enjoyable.
Lucky for me I was able to pursue the hobby that way.
Now That I will reduce my contest flying, I wish I had a club nearby.
Selling the house and buying an other one near a club is out of the
question. Well, it looks like I may to buy a used self launcher which is
cheaper then moving.
Regards
Udo

Here are some local statistics - Houston TX area:

At my club we had 9 short wing gliders last season.
*One PW5 is a club ship and was flown in the World class
nationals by a member.
*4 PW5's are private and only one does not go X/C.
*3 Russia's are private, 2 go X/C and the third is working
toward that goal.
*One Woodstock is flown X/C by its builder on a regular basis.
*4 of the pilots have attended at least one X/C camp at a
location hundreds of miles away.
*All of the owners are over 50 except one.
*Two of the Russia's were sold this winter and the members are
moving up to 15M ships.

Here the short wing ships are doing what the SSA intended:
allowing prospective X/C pilots to buy affordable ships that are
relatively new and have performance that is good enough to go
X/C. I guess "affordable" should be used carefully, as we are all
"older" and probably have more disposable income than the
younger members. I have only seen one "youngster" buy a ship
in the last 5 years. I think disposable income is shrinking for our
younger pilots. I don't see as many these days, but perhaps I
am just no longer paying attention.

So... If our group of older pilots represents a larger group of
pilots nationwide (debatable) then competitions might want to be
oriented to fulfill their wants and desires. From personal
experience I can tell you this group of newbies does not want to
spend time getting their noses rubbed in the dirt by a bunch of
super pilots flying super ships. If you want them them to go to a
race IMHO, make it more like a camp or a mentoring program
and hold it separately from the longer wing competitions. Lots of
us just want to go fly with like minded friends. Some will feel
competitive, many will attend just to learn and build stick time. I
really think we need to look at this in a whole new way to make
it successful. Low stress, high fun factor.

I can tell you that within our club, we have doubled the number
of X/C pilots in the last 5 years. X/C has really come alive
because of the short wings.

Brian

At 21:30 30 January 2009, Brian Bange wrote:

At my club we had 9 short wing gliders last season.

.....I can tell you this group of newbies does not want to
spend time getting their noses rubbed in the dirt by a bunch of super
pilots flying super ships. If you want them them to go to a race IMHO,
make it more like a camp or a mentoring program and hold it separately
from the longer wing competitions. Lots of us just want to go fly with
like minded friends.

LESS THEN 10 PCT OF GLIDER PILOTS COMPETE!
THE USED MARKET IS FILLED BY THE GLIDERS THEY SOLD....
THOSE GLIDERS WERE DESIGNED TO WIN, OF COURSE!!!

Some will feel competitive, many will attend just to learn and build
stick time. I really think we need to look at this in a whole new way to
make it successful.
Low stress, high fun factor.
I can tell you that within our club, we have doubled the number of X/C
pilots in the last 5 years. X/C has really come alive because of the
short wings.

Brian

WERE THOSE SHORT WINGS GLIDERS DESIGNED FOR FUN AND SAFE FLIGHTS?
OR WERE DESIGNED TO WIN IN THE NEW FAI CLASS:

THE SHORT WINGS HIGH FUN LOW STRESS CLASS

At 18:06 29 January 2009, Greg Arnold wrote:
Brian Bange wrote:
I would be surprised if they ever get enough gliders
together to have a contest. If you are into racing, you will
buy
something with at least 15 meters of span.
Yep. But that is the 1-26. We were talking about a new
13.5
meter class -- such a class would soon disappear without a
trace
due to the lack of interest.
This snobby attitude really gets to me.

Snobby?


If you ask most non-
owners what their dream sailplane is, they'll say a Discus2
or
some other $100K German ship. Getting closer to reality,
they'll
say they would settle for an LS4 or an ASW20. Then at the
level
of disposable income, they most likely have the money for a
K6
or a Russia. I was one of these. I finally analyzed where I
was
at with my flying and my finances and decided that instead
of
waiting for the bank account to have the necessary funds for
old
German glass, I would be farther ahead to get something
now,
fly it for awhile and keep saving, then move up when the
time
was right. 7 years after buying a Russia I am switching to an
ASW20. Was the short wing bird the way to go. YES!!! I
have
had tons of fun learning to fly X/C with it and will miss it.
Most
pilots I fly with in short wing gliders are not interested in hot
competition. They are interested in improving their skills and
enjoy the comradery of like minded individuals. A fun
contest
like the 1-26ers have I think would be welcomed. I hope the
World class morphs into what Bill Snead suggests - a class
handicapped to +/-5% of the PW5. That would include a lot
of
ships that have no place to go right now. Realizing that one
big
reason that people fly short wing birds is the low cost of
entry,
smaller meets at more locations would be the way to go. Not
too
many people are going to pack up their PW5 or Russia and
travel thousands of miles to compete. Many will however,
drive
within their state to attend. My 2 cents.

Brian Bange

Most of them are not flying in Sports Class now. Why do you
think they
would fly in a 13.5 Meter Class?

And if they were flying in Sports Class, what is to be gained by
establishing a new 13.5 Meter class?

The comment here seems to be roughly the same as when we
see people
advocating kicking the modern gliders out of Sports Class -- if
we just
change the rules, lots of pilots will suddenly come out of the
woodwork
and start completing. Not gonna happen.


Two of us at my club tried to compete in a small mock sports
class that was being set up at a new location to prove to airport
management that they should allow glider competitions there.
One was a PW5 and the other was me in my Russia. The task
was set conservatively, yet neither one of us could finish it. Both
of us have accomplished diamond goal flights. There is just no
way that 30:1 mixes well with 40:1. I read in a report from the
Worlds at Reiti that the PW5's did not thermal well with the
heavier ships. In a gaggle the PW5's would be slower and
tighter, making things interesting for everyone. And, as I said,
the pilots of the short wing ships are in many cases new to the
whole competition scene. A friendly environment and tasks that
are reasonable for pilots of this caliber I think would be
attended. Especially if they were smaller and closer to home.
Mixing 30:1 into the present Sports class with all the other large
ships sharing the same airspace isn't going to attract short wing
attendance. Plus think about the mental aspect. Who wants to
be driving a Honda on the same track with Ferrari's?

Brian