Average OLC flown distance by glider

Interesting to see these figures but wat do they actually mean?
- the high-end gliders are more often flown by high-end pilots
- what has to be taken into account is the number of gliders per type that are present in certain locations with good, average or less good gliding conditions.
For example, no one ships his/hers Ka8 to Namibia or Australia to fly distance records and you will typically find the more experienced pilots over there.

Hello DG300PI,

thanks for letting your concern emerge. This is key to validate my choices.

Interesting to see these figures but wat do they actually mean?
- the high-end gliders are more often flown by high-end pilots

I agree: as obvious as it may sound, no glider "gets there" alone and every ship is usually matched by a pilot with related skills.
This is *exactly* the information I want to show. GliderReview was born to help inexperienced pilots like me navigate the ocean of available gliders. According to this vision, knowing that a glider is usually flown far tells me at least two things:
- it is a glider capable of supporting a pilot able to get that far
- it is a glider that pilots *that* good *nowadays* choose to get that far
I expect both these measures to imply a higher price for the glider.

- what has to be taken into account is the number of gliders per type that are present in certain locations with good, average or less good gliding conditions.

We can re-apply by analogy the same logic he
if a glider has a high average because it is usually flown in Namibia, that means again that it is a glider worth bringing there, thus usually a higher-end ship.

For example, no one ships his/hers Ka8 to Namibia or Australia to fly distance records and you will typically find the more experienced pilots over there.

This is *the* point, not a counterargument: coherently you'll find Ka8 much cheaper than JS1 ;-)

To conclude: I don't need to understand the intimate cause-effect relationship between an indicator and a phenomenon, as long as it lets me understand *a part* of the effects.

As a recap: if a glider is usually flown shorter, it will tend to cost less.

Thank you again!
Would you like to write the review for the DG-300? :-)

Ciao

--
Jacopo

On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 1:45:11 PM UTC+3, Jacopo Romei wrote:
Hello DG300PI,

thanks for letting your concern emerge. This is key to validate my choices.

Interesting to see these figures but wat do they actually mean?
- the high-end gliders are more often flown by high-end pilots

I agree: as obvious as it may sound, no glider "gets there" alone and every ship is usually matched by a pilot with related skills.
This is *exactly* the information I want to show. GliderReview was born to help inexperienced pilots like me navigate the ocean of available gliders. According to this vision, knowing that a glider is usually flown far tells me at least two things:
- it is a glider capable of supporting a pilot able to get that far
- it is a glider that pilots *that* good *nowadays* choose to get that far
I expect both these measures to imply a higher price for the glider.

- what has to be taken into account is the number of gliders per type that are present in certain locations with good, average or less good gliding conditions.

We can re-apply by analogy the same logic he
if a glider has a high average because it is usually flown in Namibia, that means again that it is a glider worth bringing there, thus usually a higher-end ship.

For example, no one ships his/hers Ka8 to Namibia or Australia to fly distance records and you will typically find the more experienced pilots over there.

This is *the* point, not a counterargument: coherently you'll find Ka8 much cheaper than JS1 ;-)

To conclude: I don't need to understand the intimate cause-effect relationship between an indicator and a phenomenon, as long as it lets me understand *a part* of the effects.

As a recap: if a glider is usually flown shorter, it will tend to cost less.

Thank you again!
Would you like to write the review for the DG-300? :-)

I dunno. Booming thermals, high cloudbase -- you could probably do 1000km in a PW5 in Namibia if you just took one there.

I dunno. Booming thermals, high cloudbase -- you
could probably do 1000km in a PW5 in Namibia
if you just took one there.

You could, right.
But reality is narrower: usually no one does.
Last but not least: when coping with normal averages, still possible exceptions are averaged out, by definition.

What could happen in theory is one thing, I see your point. What *usually* happens is what I care most for GliderReview.

I dunno. Booming thermals, high cloudbase -- you could probably do 1000km in a PW5 in Namibia if you just took one there.

Arizona is not Namibia, but we do have some spectacular thermal soaring, often with high cloud base. One of our members, Mike Parker, flew a World Record distance in a PW5 of 626 km here about ten years ago. Not sure about 1000 km, but 850 km looks doable.

Mike

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 8:41:58 PM UTC-5, DG300PI wrote:
Interesting to see these figures but wat do they actually mean?
- the high-end gliders are more often flown by high-end pilots
- what has to be taken into account is the number of gliders per type that are present in certain locations with good, average or less good gliding conditions.
For example, no one ships his/hers Ka8 to Namibia or Australia to fly distance records and you will typically find the more experienced pilots over there.

or less experienced rich ones....

or less experienced rich ones....

Still that would imply a correlation between income and that glider, which is among the main focuses of GliderReview.

Once again: solving the problem of TONS of, say, PW-5 being flown in Namibia is good for academia and thought experiments, but GliderReview is meant to cope with pragmatical retrieval of information about a bunch of market-relevant gliders.

Perhaps you can show price per LD point?

Roel,

Perhaps you can show price per LD point?

That idea was proposed by my friend Stefano Cherchi a few weeks ago.
I am considering it since that day. We'll see!

Thank you for your comment though, it is definitely inspiring.

--
Jacopo

On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 9:06:53 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Perhaps you can show price per LD point?

i don't think thats a relevant metric. how often do we really fly at best L/D speed? best L/D is somewhat irrelevant. If all they were focused on was raw L/D, I'm sure they could make gliders with extraodinary L/D's, but they are trying to optimize the performance over a wide range of speeds.