Death of the 13.5m class?

On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 6:19:19 AM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Yes - about as much as having a dedicated crew for the retrieve. They should be penalized equally.

On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 7:21:12 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 6:19:19 AM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Yes - about as much as having a dedicated crew for the retrieve. They should be penalized equally.

On a 1750 km triangle attempt, which would YOU rather have?

I find the fuss to be somewhat funny.

It is actually a pretty interesting concept. Call using a motor on course whatever you want, but it makes for an interesting game.

The sport is all about managing energy. The addition of a limited amount of reserved power is just another tool in that equation.

There are fascinating tradeoffs that result from having power. For instance, do you use the motor to increase speed in cruise, or do you keep it in reserve to mitigate the risk of landing out in the end? Do you use it to help increase your acheived climbrate, assisting weak thermals to net an acheived climb of 4 knots for each thermal you take? Do you use it to go straight through the blue hole rather than deviating?

In effect, you could have the option of becoming a Concordia for a while at the flip of a switch.

It's a different game. I love the sport as it is. But I can see how this new game could be appealing too.

All the best,
Daniel

Powered flight is not gliding and powered airplanes, no matter how long and skinny their wings may be, are not gliders.

On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 6:41:38 PM UTC-8, wrote:
I find the fuss to be somewhat funny.

It is actually a pretty interesting concept. Call using a motor on course whatever you want, but it makes for an interesting game.

The sport is all about managing energy. The addition of a limited amount of reserved power is just another tool in that equation.

There are fascinating tradeoffs that result from having power. For instance, do you use the motor to increase speed in cruise, or do you keep it in reserve to mitigate the risk of landing out in the end? Do you use it to help increase your acheived climbrate, assisting weak thermals to net an acheived climb of 4 knots for each thermal you take? Do you use it to go straight through the blue hole rather than deviating?

In effect, you could have the option of becoming a Concordia for a while at the flip of a switch.

It's a different game. I love the sport as it is. But I can see how this new game could be appealing too.

All the best,
Daniel

Agreed. A new game with new rules played by pilots in similar aircraft.
But in the bulk of the year when you're not at a contest racing against equals, what is this new game going to feel like?
Jim

Tango Eight wrote on 12/26/2017 6:01 PM:
On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 7:21:12 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 6:19:19 AM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Yes - about as much as having a dedicated crew for the retrieve. They should be penalized equally.

On a 1750 km triangle attempt, which would YOU rather have?

30 years ago - an ASH 25 (or whatever the equivalent was then) and the crew;
today, an ASH 30 Mi.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

Tango Eight wrote on 12/26/2017 6:19 AM:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

I fly a motor glider because it can change how the soaring is done; the result is
I do more soaring, and more interesting soaring, than I would with a towed glider.
I have 2000+ hours in towed gliders, double that in my motorglider, so I'm very
aware of both situations.

As Jon suggests, you could have a very dedicated retrieve crew (and I do - but she
does say the motorglider is the best glider we've ever had) and achieve similar
independence, especially if the crew had a towplane and could tow. It seemed
easier to get a motorglider.

To expand a bit on Jon's point: having a Nimbus 4 instead of a 1-26 will change
how the soaring is done, too, in a big way, bigger than flying a motorized 1-26
(or equivalent). The equipment always affects the choices you make while soaring.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 11:55:37 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Tango Eight wrote on 12/26/2017 6:19 AM:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.

Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.

I fly a motor glider because it can change how the soaring is done

Exactly.

Back to the original point: the motorized guys have a track record in the IGC. Non-motorized guys -- if they care -- should pay attention to that. If Mr Fitch and like minded folk on the IGC can sing 'em all to sleep, well, I'm on my own! At least there's one hard ass left!

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

I have to agree with Eric, here.Â* Patti and I first tried a Pipistrel
Sinus so she could learn to fly, but it was a disappointment to me as a
glider.Â* Fortunately I had kept my LAK-17a for soaring, but she wanted
to try soaring, too, so the Stemme was the ideal solution.Â* We can
launch whenever we want, experience high performance soaring
side-by-side, and go places without a tow plane to worry about.

As to performance, just look at some of Mike Abernathy's flights on
OLC.Â* He knows how to use the Stemme!

On 12/27/2017 7:40 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
On Tuesday, December 26, 2017 at 11:55:37 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Tango Eight wrote on 12/26/2017 6:19 AM:
On Monday, December 25, 2017 at 11:15:18 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Even if the scoring ends with the motor
starting, having a motor can change how the soaring is done.
Behold: honesty. Rare enough to be noteworthy. Thanks, Eric.
I fly a motor glider because it can change how the soaring is done
Exactly.

Back to the original point: the motorized guys have a track record in the IGC. Non-motorized guys -- if they care -- should pay attention to that. If Mr Fitch and like minded folk on the IGC can sing 'em all to sleep, well, I'm on my own! At least there's one hard ass left!

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

--
Dan, 5J

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus