Purists are from Pluto, Motorgliderists are from Mars - #2

On 4/24/2021 3:12 PM, Tom BravoMike wrote:
Do you really believe Klaus Ohlmann and Jean-Marie Clément would have set their records in the Andes in a "pure" sailplane?
Instead, they flew each a Nimbus 4DM, I believe. "No safety advantage" - really? Will you say it's a special case?

That is just ludicrous.
Go read Jean-Marie's papers on the failure rate of his 4DM,
and understand the steps he took to maintain a landing option.
A summary of Jean-Marie's 4DM failures is in the OSTIV presentation I
did in 2020 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R--m0NDR0j8)

On 4/27/2021 6:48 PM, waremark wrote:
Well I remember reading an article by Klaus Ohlmann after his first distance record in the Andes. That one was in a Stemme, and I remember he said if he had wanted to use the engine he would have had to land first and give it time to warm up, because it was too cold to use after a long time at altitude.

Right, the oil solidifies in the cold and it will not start...
Don't know why that particular oil was required, but IIRC it wasn't
possible to change.

So a convenience feature, not a safety feature.

Yup.

A common trait among the motorglider haters ("purist" is a misleading word for them, there are plenty of pilots who prefer non motor gliders without the hate for others), is they are absolutely sure of the advantage and mindset in a motorglider without the slightest experience in one. Nearly all motorglider pilots have at least some time (and usually a lot of time) in non motor gliders, and have opinions based on experience in both.

Regarding the oil solidifying, that isn't an issue with a pre-mixed 2-stroke but would be with a frozen Rotax 914 crankcase. Also an issue with the Wankel, and a brief warmup may not do much good as the oil tank is a bit remote from the engine. Schleicher recommends a warm up after flying at high altitudes but it could take many minutes for the oil tank to warm, during which time you may have limited or no lubrication.
On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 6:02:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On 4/23/2021 7:48 PM, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
Bob, repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it true..

Andrej! Apparently you haven't been following USA politics!
He's just emulating, well, you know...

Yep, and wears out quicker.

Dan
5J

On 4/27/21 4:48 PM, waremark wrote:
cold engine develops more power.

On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 11:44:35 AM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
A common trait among the motorglider haters ("purist" is a misleading word for them, there are plenty of pilots who prefer non motor gliders without the hate for others), is they are absolutely sure of the advantage and mindset in a motorglider without the slightest experience in one. Nearly all motorglider pilots have at least some time (and usually a lot of time) in non motor gliders, and have opinions based on experience in both.

Regarding the oil solidifying, that isn't an issue with a pre-mixed 2-stroke but would be with a frozen Rotax 914 crankcase. Also an issue with the Wankel, and a brief warmup may not do much good as the oil tank is a bit remote from the engine. Schleicher recommends a warm up after flying at high altitudes but it could take many minutes for the oil tank to warm, during which time you may have limited or no lubrication.
On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 6:02:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On 4/23/2021 7:48 PM, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
Bob, repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it true.

Andrej! Apparently you haven't been following USA politics!
He's just emulating, well, you know...
Jon, right when I though you were making progress you reverted back to the same old idea of motorglider haters, as Maslow stated you often revert back.. Let me see if I can make this much simpler, I have spoken about the difference in MG paradigms vs the Purist. We need to take a look at the two different approaches to soaring and finally agree that there is a difference. Flight management #1, does the Purist have to manage his flight differently that the MG pilot. I will let you decide? #2 Should MG and Purist flights be scored the same? #3 is risk management different in a MG vs the Purist pilot, again, I await your answer.
At this particular time I am a Purist and have been for 45 years, I may in the future become a MG pilot, and I I stated earlier I have flown a MG, more than once. Now we are both up there in age and trying to make things simpler, but trust me, there is no hatred for MG's, just a realization of the differences. Your friend, Old Bob

On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 3:28:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 11:44:35 AM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
A common trait among the motorglider haters ("purist" is a misleading word for them, there are plenty of pilots who prefer non motor gliders without the hate for others), is they are absolutely sure of the advantage and mindset in a motorglider without the slightest experience in one. Nearly all motorglider pilots have at least some time (and usually a lot of time) in non motor gliders, and have opinions based on experience in both.

Regarding the oil solidifying, that isn't an issue with a pre-mixed 2-stroke but would be with a frozen Rotax 914 crankcase. Also an issue with the Wankel, and a brief warmup may not do much good as the oil tank is a bit remote from the engine. Schleicher recommends a warm up after flying at high altitudes but it could take many minutes for the oil tank to warm, during which time you may have limited or no lubrication.
On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 6:02:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On 4/23/2021 7:48 PM, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
Bob, repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it true.

Andrej! Apparently you haven't been following USA politics!
He's just emulating, well, you know...
Jon, right when I though you were making progress you reverted back to the same old idea of motorglider haters, as Maslow stated you often revert back. Let me see if I can make this much simpler, I have spoken about the difference in MG paradigms vs the Purist. We need to take a look at the two different approaches to soaring and finally agree that there is a difference. Flight management #1, does the Purist have to manage his flight differently that the MG pilot. I will let you decide? #2 Should MG and Purist flights be scored the same? #3 is risk management different in a MG vs the Purist pilot, again, I await your answer.
At this particular time I am a Purist and have been for 45 years, I may in the future become a MG pilot, and I I stated earlier I have flown a MG, more than once. Now we are both up there in age and trying to make things simpler, but trust me, there is no hatred for MG's, just a realization of the differences. Your friend, Old Bob
Sorry to bust your bubble Old Bob, but you are not a true "Purist". You still use an engine to get you airborne. Try this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3qfW3ydZuY check the take off @ 035.

On 4/28/2021 12:28 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 11:44:35 AM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
A common trait among the motorglider haters ("purist" is a misleading word for them, there are plenty of pilots who prefer non motor gliders without the hate for others), is they are absolutely sure of the advantage and mindset in a motorglider without the slightest experience in one. Nearly all motorglider pilots have at least some time (and usually a lot of time) in non motor gliders, and have opinions based on experience in both.

Regarding the oil solidifying, that isn't an issue with a pre-mixed 2-stroke but would be with a frozen Rotax 914 crankcase. Also an issue with the Wankel, and a brief warmup may not do much good as the oil tank is a bit remote from the engine. Schleicher recommends a warm up after flying at high altitudes but it could take many minutes for the oil tank to warm, during which time you may have limited or no lubrication.
On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 6:02:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On 4/23/2021 7:48 PM, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
Bob, repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it true.

Andrej! Apparently you haven't been following USA politics!
He's just emulating, well, you know...
Jon, right when I though you were making progress you reverted back to the same old idea of motorglider haters, as Maslow stated you often revert back. Let me see if I can make this much simpler, I have spoken about the difference in MG paradigms vs the Purist. We need to take a look at the two different approaches to soaring and finally agree that there is a difference. Flight management #1, does the Purist have to manage his flight differently that the MG pilot. I will let you decide? #2 Should MG and Purist flights be scored the same? #3 is risk management different in a MG vs the Purist pilot, again, I await your answer.
At this particular time I am a Purist and have been for 45 years, I may in the future become a MG pilot, and I I stated earlier I have flown a MG, more than once. Now we are both up there in age and trying to make things simpler, but trust me, there is no hatred for MG's, just a realization of the differences. Your friend, Old Bob

1) No, a purist does not have to manage his flight differently than an MG pilot;
in fact, the purist does not even have to manage his flight the same as another
purist does! Pick a safe way that brings you enjoyment.
2) Yes, they should be scored the same unless the pilots want to be scored
differently. Go where you like the scoring, as the rest of us do, or start your
own competition like Henry Combs did.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

On 4/28/2021 10:31 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
Yep, and wears out quicker.

Dan
5J

On 4/27/21 4:48 PM, waremark wrote:
cold engine develops more power.

The typical self-launcher puts maybe 5-10 hours a year on the engine. If it only
lasts 200 hours before a major overall, that's 20 to 40 years! The Stemme is
usual for a self-launcher because it's also a good airplane, and 200 hours might
be only two or three years.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

I've owned my Stemme now for 5 years and have logged around 850 hours
(327 flights) on it. I think I've used around 80 engine hours during
that time which is about 15 minutes per flight (start, taxi, takeoff,
and cool down). I tow the glider from my hangar to the apron before
rigging.

And yes, I fly with a different mind set than I did in my LAK-17a: I
must be within range of a runway suitable to make a normal takeoff at
all times.

Dan
5J

On 4/28/21 3:06 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 4/28/2021 10:31 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
Yep, and wears out quicker.

Dan
5J

On 4/27/21 4:48 PM, waremark wrote:
cold engine develops more power.

The typical self-launcher puts maybe 5-10 hours a year on the engine. If
it only lasts 200 hours before a major overall, that's 20 to 40 years!
The Stemme is usual for a self-launcher because it's also a good
airplane, and 200 hours might be only two or three years.

On Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 5:06:23 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 4/28/2021 10:31 AM, Dan Marotta wrote:
Yep, and wears out quicker.

Dan
5J

On 4/27/21 4:48 PM, waremark wrote:
cold engine develops more power.
The typical self-launcher puts maybe 5-10 hours a year on the engine. If it only
lasts 200 hours before a major overall, that's 20 to 40 years! The Stemme is
usual for a self-launcher because it's also a good airplane, and 200 hours might
be only two or three years.
--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
Eric, are you hitting on the bong? You cannot even admit that you must manage your flight differently. This is beginning to become comical.