If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Motorgliders and gliders in US contests
The rules say you may not exchange aircraft or even major components.
I belive there is an exception that a component may be replaced with an exact replacement if the original compenent has been damaged through no fault of the pilot or crew. Here are the exact rules for regional contests: 6.1 General 6.1.1 The Contest Competition Committee has the authority to reject a sailplane that it considers unsuitable for competition or a sailplane that does not meet the requirements of the class in which it is entered. 6.1.2 The CD has the right to inspect equipment at any time during the contest. 6.1.3 Exchange of components 6.1.3.1 A sailplane's major components include the fuselage, wings (including separable wingtips), empennage, and power unit (in the case of a motorized sailplane). 6.1.3.2 Except as provided in these Rules, the exchange of a sailplane or major component is not allowed. 6.1.3.3 If the CD determines that a sailplane was damaged through no fault of the pilot or crew, exchange is permitted provided the replacement exactly matches the damaged component. 6.1.3.4 In the case of damage to separable wingtips whose span is less than 40 inches, exchange is permitted without considering fault and without the requirement that the replacement be an exact match. The CD must be informed and such an exchange may not be done more than once during a contest. 6.1.4 Official Configuration 6.1.4.1 A sailplane's official configuration is the one used during the first competition takeoff. 6.1.4.2 Except as provided in these Rules, the official configuration may not be altered unless such alteration may be performed in flight. M B wrote in message ... Hmmm...I'm wondering. Can a competition pilot change aircraft in the middle of a contest? Could someone own both a motorglider and a Nimbus 3 and pick which one to fly depending on the conditions and task? Have pilots who have damaged their gliders been allowed to fly in a new/different replacement glider in contests? I'm interested in how this works... Mark Boyd |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Eric wrote...
If you mean contest flying, I'd like to hear about it, too. I've never been in a position where I had a "distinct" advantage for a contest, so I'd like to hear how this happens. I have given several examples where motorgliders have enjoyed a distinct advantage in cotests. Self-launch so they can motor around until finding a thermal, airborn-relight while pure sailplaned must land, attemting a final glide without sufficient altitude. Oh, but JJ's just WHINING again. JJ Sinclair |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Eric wrote,
I've never been in a contest where I've had these advantages, because I didn't do those things. I guess I got to spell it out. Eric, I'm talking about YOU and JN. I tell you about launch inequities and you say, Oh that, we will be getting a waiver and fixing all that next year. We are right now, in the process of amending the rules, so that WAIVERS won't be required next year. Let me add one more advantage you are requesting, Give motorgliders a 25 point (approved airport landing) bonus for NOT LANDING. But it's s SAFETY issue, isn't it? It would be much safer to crank up the old put-put and not congest the airport with all those pure sailplane slobs, down there, fighting for a spot on the runway. I consider that part of the sport. If you want to play, you must accept all the hazards along with the rewards this sport offers. Just JJ, whining again, JJ Sinclair |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I don't need to look at your traces, Eric. I saw it and NK saw it also. Now
lets discuss this self-launch a bit further. For years the US rules allowed self-launching of motorgliders. In about year 2000 the rules were changed to; ALL LAUNCHES WILL BE BY AERO-TOW ONLY. Wonder why that change was made? Could it be because of motorglider abuse of the self-launch privilege? That rule change didn't have any affect on your Regionals though, you just kept right on allowing your motorgliders to self-launch. Your not obeying this rule has produced guys like Tom Siem, who thinks JJ is the guy that wouldn't allow him to self-launch. You didn't discuss your leaving an airport without enough altitude to make it home, at 5:00 PM on a day that had been completely overcast for hours. Your glide was mostly over unlandable terrain, you cranked up the motor, a few miles out and saved an off-field landing. We havent discussed the REAL inequity on days like that. Suppose you did hit a bump and were able to climb 500 feet? You would have been able to make it home and your success would have been a direct result of your back-up (the put-put). This inequity will ALWAYS be there as long as motorgliders are allowed to compete with pure sailplanes. You didn't deny using the IN-FLIGHT RELIGHT, Ever do one of those? JJ Sinclair |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
JJ,
I agree with you regarding motor gliders in contests. Even if there would be no perceived advantage to the motor glider competitor, the fact remains the advantage is there. Example: when most every one is landing out at least three times in five days as in the past Sports Class Nat's and seeing the rested smiles on the faces of the motor glider pilot, it makes it very clear as to who has the advantage. Plus the psychological advantage is indeed very powerful all being equal. I have voted to restrict motor gliders to region sports class only. Regards Udo "JJ Sinclair" wrote in message ... Eric wrote... If you mean contest flying, I'd like to hear about it, too. I've never been in a position where I had a "distinct" advantage for a contest, so I'd like to hear how this happens. I have given several examples where motorgliders have enjoyed a distinct advantage in cotests. Self-launch so they can motor around until finding a thermal, airborn-relight while pure sailplaned must land, attemting a final glide without sufficient altitude. Oh, but JJ's just WHINING again. JJ Sinclair |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry Udo, that's a very bad example. You don't need a motorglider
for this, just a motorhome and a crew willing to drive while you sleep. Tom Serkowski ASH-26E (for the last 2 years, and over 1500 hours in ASW-20B prior) "Udo Rumpf" wrote in message ... JJ, I agree with you regarding motor gliders in contests. Even if there would be no perceived advantage to the motor glider competitor, the fact remains the advantage is there. Example: when most every one is landing out at least three times in five days as in the past Sports Class Nat's and seeing the rested smiles on the faces of the motor glider pilot, it makes it very clear as to who has the advantage. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:13:30 +0000, JJ Sinclair wrote:
I have given several examples where motorgliders have enjoyed a distinct advantage in cotests. Self-launch so they can motor around until finding a thermal, airborn-relight while pure sailplaned must land, attemting a final glide without sufficient altitude. Oh, but JJ's just WHINING again. JJ Sinclair Of course motor gliders have many advantages (and some disadvantages) when compared to pure gliders. A good illustration of this is Klaus Ohlmann's 3000km flight in the Andes. I suspect it would have taken him many more seasons to reach this goal if all of his knowledge and experience had to be gained flying a pure glider. This may explain why most new gliders leaving the factory today, have a motor installed. Perhaps the way to make to make the sport more 'fair' is to revise the definitions of the various FAI classes. We already have Standard, 15m and 18m classes which are not separated by major technical features, performance ability or price. Many gliders can compete competitively in more than one class (given appropriate weather and/or a different set of wing tips). How about using the classes to separate the engine issues? For example: Standard class, no engine permitted. 15m class. Sustainers permitted, but no self launchers. 18m. Self launchers permitted (encouraged?). Open class, no limitations (well it is open class). The guys with sustainers in their standard class ships could disable (or remove) them, or fly 15m class. Same goes for 15m ships with self launchers. Open class pilots have always been faced with the prospect of somebody with more money arriving at the flight line with a significantly better performing glider. You may be safe for a couple of years if you fly an Eta. (Sorry JJ, this won't help make your Nimbus III competitive - but I am sure that you will continue to enjoy flying it safely!) None of these changes would "obsolete" an existing competitive glider but it would definitely help distinguish between the the classes in terms of cost and performance. Ian PS: At the same time maybe vertical winglets and (dump-able) tail ballast tanks should be banned from standard class. They add to the cost and complexity with just a small increase in performance - which was never really the intention of 'standard' class. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|