[USA] What do you think of the 13.5 Meter Class?

On Jan 25, 10:41*am, Mark Jardini wrote:
I don't see how everyone would win a 13 meter competition.

1-26er's only have one winner and that class has developed some pretty
top pilots.

So what exactly is the problem with owners of 13 meter ships wanting
to hold contests?

Some of you guys are extremely defensive about your wing size.

Mark Jardini

I fly a 13 meter Apis. I really like it and it seems to go XC quite
well. I am considering installing the retractable landing gear option
in it, not only will the LD go up, but it should look a lot nicer w/o
that chunk of rubber sticking out the bottom.

I think the fellow who made the "politically correc" joke about
everyone being a winner is still probably giggling hysterically about
his clever post, we'll just ignore him.................

Brad

On Jan 25, 4:27*pm, Brad wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:41*am, Mark Jardini wrote:

I don't see how everyone would win a 13 meter competition.

1-26er's only have one winner and that class has developed some pretty
top pilots.

So what exactly is the problem with owners of 13 meter ships wanting
to hold contests?

Some of you guys are extremely defensive about your wing size.

Mark Jardini

I fly a 13 meter Apis. I really like it and it seems to go XC quite
well. I am considering installing the retractable landing gear option
in it, not only will the LD go up, but it should look a lot nicer w/o
that chunk of rubber sticking out the bottom.

I think the fellow who made the "politically correc" joke about
everyone being a winner is still probably giggling hysterically about
his clever post, we'll just ignore him.................

Brad

I just think that I should make it my life goal to take the Cherokee
to a world championship someday.

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:54:37 -0800, silentpilot wrote:

So what exactly is the problem with owners of 13 meter ships wanting to
hold contests?

There is a new generation of short wing gliders that are totally
different:
with modern materials is now possible to built light weight sailplanes,
shorter wing span and good L/D ratio that can climb better then the
others,
but at high speed they have no polar, they sink like stones.

How does the speed for best L/D compare with std class gliders?

I think this is a meaningless comparison without knowing that,
particularly as I'd expect a modern section to have a better high speed
polar. I have only an anecdotal data point to add: one of the
Aerovironment guys, who I met briefly at a FF model contest, has a
Sparrowhawk, which is a glider I've yet to see but am very curious about.
During a chat he said he'd flown with a Standard Libelle, which I fly,
and thought their performance was very similar.

Of course they do not go very far because of the very light weight.

An obvious similarity is that both gliders have wing areas that are
smaller than the norm: the Std Libelle is 9.8 m^2 vs around 10.5 m^2 for
most std class gliders. Presumably in both cases this was done to get an
acceptable cruising speed from a light airframe. Libelles go cross
country pretty well, so why are you implying that the new generation of
light 13m gliders won't?


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Martin Gregorie wrote:

How does the speed for best L/D compare with std class gliders?

I think this is a meaningless comparison without knowing that,
particularly as I'd expect a modern section to have a better high speed
polar. I have only an anecdotal data point to add: one of the
Aerovironment guys, who I met briefly at a FF model contest, has a
Sparrowhawk, which is a glider I've yet to see but am very curious about.
During a chat he said he'd flown with a Standard Libelle, which I fly,
and thought their performance was very similar.


Of course they do not go very far because of the very light weight.


An obvious similarity is that both gliders have wing areas that are
smaller than the norm: the Std Libelle is 9.8 m^2 vs around 10.5 m^2 for
most std class gliders. Presumably in both cases this was done to get an
acceptable cruising speed from a light airframe. Libelles go cross
country pretty well, so why are you implying that the new generation of
light 13m gliders won't?

The SparrowHawk has an 11 meter span, so I'd assume a modern 13 meter
glider should be capable of better performance than a Std Libelle.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On Jan 25, 7:58*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
...I'd assume a modern 13 meter glider should be capable
of better performance than a Std Libelle.

I still think that the minimum span for a person-carrying sailplane of
40:1 L/D is 14.3m. I think you could match the Libelle's 38:1 with
about 13.6m.

Thanks, Bob K.

Gliderphud wrote:
We added the Standard class so we would have cheaper gliders than the
15M. Is there a real difference in price between a 15M and a Standard
today?


Your history is backwards. "We" added Standard Class so we would have
cheaper gliders than Open(?) Class (I don't know what it was called
then). One result was the Ka-6e, and yes, it was a lot cheaper than
competitive gliders of the time (early 60s). When the 15 meter span H301
Libelle appeared in the late '60s, it was an OPEN class glider. The 15
Meter class did not appear until the early 70's, as an branch from the
Standard Class. Yep, Standard Class first, 15 M class later.

We added the 18M class because the glider manufacturers weren't
selling enough 15M and Standard class gliders anymore. That way they
could create an elite class that would drive everyone to buy a new
glider.

In fact, it was driven by customer demand. Pilots wanted more
performance, and the 20+ meter Open Class was too expensive, too big,
too heavy to appeal to most pilots, so the manufacturers responded with
wing tip extensions. First came 16 meter tips, then 17 meter, and
finally carbon fiber made 18 M practical (fiberglass made for very heavy
18 meter gliders) about the time people realized self-launching
motorgliders would really benefit from 18 meter span. When I got my 18
meter (and it was ONLY 18 meters) ASH 26 E in 1995, there was no 18
meter class. That came later, after Schleicher was already committed to
it, not before.

How many true 15M or Standards have been sold in the last 7
years? Everything has an 18M option and the cost and empty weights
have gone up exponentially.


Costs, yes, but for many reasons. Weight? Nonsense. Compare the weight
of the 18 M ASG 29 with the 15 M ASW 20, and see if you think the weight
increase was "exponential". It weighs the same, or less than the ASW 20
C I had.

We will create the 13.5M and 20M class soon.

The IGC has never seen a glider class they won't approve. Soon we
will have 20 or more classes. Let's just skip the trouble and make a
class for everyone so we're all winners.

The only three classes we need are Club, 15M and Open (Unlimited)

And what is the definition of "need"? That's the question. If a class
for everyone increased participation and brought new people into
soaring, I'd say we "need" it!

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Someone observed...

Some of you guys are extremely defensive about your wing size.


Heh. And stepping briefly onto a soapbox...

Given the generally-accepted sorry state of soaring and it's 'growth'
around the globe these years, I genuinely cringe upon encountering the
too-commonly expressed statement/implication that anything under 15
meters isn't:
a) capable of XC;
b) somehow 'unworthy' of real gliderpilots.

I cringe not because I disagree with the sentiments (though I do), but
because I think propounding the belief has real potential to be actively
detrimental to the future of the sport, particularly when considering
how a newbie might view the world.

Anything we do or say which actually - or indirectly - raises the
barriers to entry isn't good. IMVHO. So let's not do it? (What a concept!)

Clearly, the facts are 15 meter ships have been - and continue to be -
flown XC 'all the time' in the U.S. - east and west (the U.S. being the
country with which I'm most familiar). As for whether or not these
pilots are 'real pilots,' my vote is to save your opinions for
0'beer-thirty discussions...

I've no problem with loving whatever class of glider one presently
flies, nor with propounding the advantages of it. Nor do I have a
problem with anyone holding factually incorrect views on XC performance
requirements. But please don't put forth your views as facts in arenas
where lower-time/uninformed/wannabe-XC pilots might be (inaccurately)
influenced.

Hops off soabbox...

Regards,
Bob - all soaring/XC is good, regardless of wingspan - W.

Originally Posted by R S

USA glider pilots are encouraged to give their opinions on the
proposed new 13.5 Meter Class.

See http://sites.google.com/site/13meters/home for further
information.

RS

Such a very amazing link!
Thanks you for the post.