LS-4 ? What about 1-26 ?

What's needed is a breakthrough in materials and processes. I don't know
what that is or if it's even possible but if we are to succeed, it will
require thinking WAY "outside the box".

Agreed it certainly will need some creativity but I am sure it can happen.
It is presumably no more of a step forward than that made by the first
composite sailplanes (Phoebus and Libelle) when compared to the state of the
art at the time, gliders such as the K-6.

It is also probably not something that one person can do in isolation. I
believe we need a 'think tank' (possibly an OSTIV or SSA committee) composed
of existing glider designers, composite specialists, people with
certification background and experienced glider pilots and maintainers. This
would however require careful management because you know what they say
about things designed by a committee. I guess the think tank would generate
concepts and ideas that members could take away (i.e. by direct involvement
in discussions or through published papers and reports) to use in developing
gliders. I don't envisage such a committee actually designing a glider.

I don't think advances such as this can come from academia (with a few
exceptions such as Boermans at Delft but then this is not about
aerodynamics). Academics don't understand commercial pressures and I doubt
they would have a good enough grip on the practical side of manufacturing
and certification.

Rapid advances are currently being made in improving the producability of
composites in yachts, wind turbines and many other commercial applications
(for example see some of the articles at www.compositesworld.com and
subscribe to one of the free magazines they offer).

I would also like to make one additional point re certification. One other
post touched on this subject with reference to the BGA. I think we need to
take a careful look at whether the regulator side of the certification
process could be delegated to an industry body by the FAA and by other
airworthiness authorities around the world. This is not easy to do in a
strict regulatory sence (only the FAA can issue a TC) but it would make
certification cheaper and potentially easier to achieve (for instance the
FAA would simply consider a glider certification program a nuisance, an
industry group with gliding in their blood could encourage and help the
applicant - something they could never expect from the FAA). Costs could
also be lower because a lot of the compliance finding could be done by
enthusiasts for much lower rates than the FAA would charge. I think it is
time that the SSA took a lead in this area and looked at what can be done
under the Sport Plane category. To be honest I don't know quite how
something similar could be done in Europe with their current regulatory
environment.

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. ...

What about the Discus CS?
Made in the Czech republic. Design costs amortised years ago. All the
approvals.
Better performance than the LS4. Better handling (yes I have flown both) Since
it is still in production you wouldnt have to start new production lines etc.
Just get it voted as the new world class and we will all be happy

OscarCVox wrote:

What about the Discus CS?
Made in the Czech republic. Design costs amortised years ago. All the
approvals.
Better performance than the LS4. Better handling (yes I have flown both) Since
it is still in production you wouldnt have to start new production lines etc.
Just get it voted as the new world class and we will all be happy

Is it significantly cheaper (65% or less) than a glider competitive in
the Standard Class? If it isn't, what's the point? Then we'd have two
Standard Classes.

Is it as cheap as the gliders in the Club class? If it is, what's the
point? Why have two club classes?

I hope the World Class will keep it's vision of low cost competition,
not just "a bit cheaper" competition. I know "we will all be happy"
won't happen if the World Class becomes a "me too" class.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

U¿ytkownik "F.L. Whiteley" napisa³ w
wiadomo¶ci ...
I don't know if production methods have changed much. Last I knew,
composite 15m was 1000 hours labor, by far the largest cost component.
(for
comparison C-172 was something like 372 hours 30 years ago).

So... then we return to what I was talking about previously: move to the
countries where the cost of the workhour is low. Just like here (Poland). We
have experienced tradespersons who are into the glider production technology
(wood, glassfibre, and metal as well). Those guys are well qualified, and
don't want too much in reward - the German worker often wants even 30Euros
for his hour. A Pole here woll be happy working for 3-4 US Dollars per hour.
See the difference?
If the production of glider demands 1000 workhours, then labour cost for
Germany may be 39000US$ (at Euro/Dollar = 1.30) and for Poland 3500US $ (at
3.5US$/h) that makes 35500US $ saved just by moving production from Germany
(just an example) to Poland. Add to this that lots of other things necessary
for production are a lot more affordable here, as well as the social
insurance and taxes too. We may manufacture the same product at tenth part
of the cost employing same skilled persons. Not only glider's but other
manufacturers can (and they do!) move here to benefit from this.

If memory serves, development was done by volunteers and university staff
if
memory serves, so there was only a modest license cost per unit.

The design was simply a Masters Thesis for a group of students of
Politechnika Warszawska (Warsaw University of Technology:
http://www.pw.edu.pl)
done under direction of one of the scientists employed there.

Doesn't have to be the LS-4b either. The 304 is another very worthy
candidate. Continuing the PW-5 as a sub-class might also have some
benefit.

Unlike many others, I still say the PW-5 is a good design, which can be
flown by any pilot, at any moment of his development as a pilot, even the
first solo level. The World Class glider was intended to be a 'glider for
everyone', and it is indeed. Maybe LS-4 is very docile, but still requires
'a little bit' more experience than just after the first solo.

Regards,


--
Janusz Kesik
Poland
to reply put my name.surname[at]gazeta.pl
-------------------------------------
See Wroclaw (Breslau) in photography,
The XIX Century, the Festung Breslau, and photos taken today.
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl

Uzytkownik "Charles Yeates" napisal w wiadomosci
...
Frank

Doesn't have to be the LS-4b either. The 304 is another very worthy
candidate. Continuing the PW-5 as a sub-class might also have some
benefit.


New =
LS-4b @ 39,000 Euro
304 @ 40,000 Euro
Smyk @ 17,000 Euro

Why jump up the price of a "one class" ship?

Charles,

I believe it's all about the labour costs. See my post which I have sent
just few minutes ago for details.

Regards,


--
Janusz Kesik
Poland
to reply put my name.surname[at]gazeta.pl
-------------------------------------
See Wroclaw (Breslau) in photography,
The XIX Century, the Festung Breslau, and photos taken today.
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl

U¿ytkownik "Mark James Boyd" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
news:4194f9b2$1@darkstar...
The SZD 50-3 looked to me to be a neat glider on paper, but the
abrupt stall/spin characteristics and accident record seem to betray it.

It's just a glider which was been designed to spin when asked, and not 'to
be afraid' of full acro. Nothing more. It just needs more attention of the
pilot.

Regards,


--
Janusz Kesik
Poland
to reply put my name.surname[at]gazeta.pl
-------------------------------------
See Wroclaw (Breslau) in photography,
The XIX Century, the Festung Breslau, and photos taken today.
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl

U¿ytkownik "smjmitchell" napisa³ w
wiadomo¶ci u...
Minestones in Glider Design:

The point I was trying to make in several earlier posts is that it is time
for a new designer to emerge with ideas that will take gliding in a new
direction. The current gliders designs have matured to an almost uniform
degree of conformity. Think back through history and the names of several
designers loom large that have shaped modern soaring:

Rudolf Kaiser (KA-6/7 and AS-K series)
Karel Dlouhy (Blanik)
Eugen Hanle (Libelle)
Gerhard Waible (AS-W series)
Klaus Holligaus (Cirrus, Nimbus, Janus, Discuss)
and there are others ....

just like Okarmus & Mynarski (Foka 4/5 + Cobra 15/17)
http://www.piotrp.de/SZYBOWCE/pszd24.htm

and Edward Marganski (Swift S-1 & Fox)
http://www.piotrp.de/SZYBOWCE/pszd24.htm

http://www.piotrp.de/SZYBOWCE/ps1.htm

Regards,


--
Janusz Kesik
Poland
to reply put my name.surname[at]gazeta.pl
-------------------------------------
See Wroclaw (Breslau) in photography,
The XIX Century, the Festung Breslau, and photos taken today.
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl

Uzytkownik "Bill Daniels" napisal w wiadomosci
news:50Nld.85500$HA.42160@attbi_s01...

Finding a way to produce a 'cheap' LS4 isn't going to be the result of
re-shuffling the compromises that produced the LS4 in the first place.
Composite gliders are made the way they are because hand labor can produce
a
high performance product in low quantities. There's not a lot a room for
improvement in that process. (Finding cheap labor will be a short term
solution since once they can produce a quality product, they won't be
cheap
anymore.)

Not only cheap, but also qualified enough. If You move the production to
China, then when they reach the moment they will be able to produce a brand
new LS-4 which will be of acceptable quality there may be too late, and the
learining process also costs. Isn't it better to move the production some
500km East to the place where there is a lot of guys which are able to
produce it 'with their eyes closed' and still at 3-4US$ / workhour, huh?

Regards,


--
Janusz Kesik
Poland
to reply put my name.surname[at]gazeta.pl
-------------------------------------
See Wroclaw (Breslau) in photography,
The XIX Century, the Festung Breslau, and photos taken today.
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl

Janusz Kesik wrote:
U=BFytkownik "Mark James Boyd" napisa=B3 w wiado=
mo=B6ci
news:4194f9b2$1@darkstar...
=20
The SZD 50-3 looked to me to be a neat glider on paper, but the
abrupt stall/spin characteristics and accident record seem to betray it=
=2E

=20
It's just a glider which was been designed to spin when asked, and not =
'to
be afraid' of full acro. Nothing more. It just needs more attention of =
the
pilot.
=20
Regards,
=20
=20
--
Janusz Kesik

Hi Janusz

Whilst I must admit limited experience, 200 odd hours, 200 odd flights=20
over 3 years, and thus my opinion might not be worth much, I am truly=20
mystified by the bad reputation the Puchatz has. I think it is one of=20
the nicest gliders to fly. I fly some limited aerobatics (loops,=20
chandelles, stall turns and spins) and it always seem predictable and=20
controllable. Sure it scared the hell out me when my instructor first=20
showed me the spin, the transition from level flight to nose down=20
attitude was rather quick, but once you experience it know what to=20
expect it is not a problem. Our club has a firm rule that all aerobatic =

maneuvers must finish 1500 ft AGL and maybe that improves the safety=20
margins. I am wondering if the higher rate of spin accidents relates to =

the frequency with which it is used for spin training. After all if a=20
glider is not used to spin, it will have a lower rate of spin accidents. =

I have flown some 9 different glider types, from Blaniks to Ventus B=20
and the Puchatz would have to be the easiest glider to fly. The part I=20
found most curious is the fact that very experienced pilots seem to have =

got them selves into trouble.

Paul