A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 14th 17, 03:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan St. Cloud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 666
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan


Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.
Ads
  #22  
Old March 14th 17, 05:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
krasw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 268
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 05:24:10 UTC+2, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Not so. Many MG pilots will routinely accept the risk of an outlanding if the
motor doesn't start, because always flying within reach of an airport can often be
very limiting. Occasionally, these pilots land in a field somewhere, and the extra
170 pounds in the fuselage does not ease the retrieve!


That's like saying I routinely take a chance of having flat tire while driving car. Doesn't really stop me driving anywhere I want.
  #23  
Old March 14th 17, 12:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Whisky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 177
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

How about having a separate class for retired guys who don't have to show up for a job on the next day, do not miss a single booming day during the season and have a retrieve crew standing by?

Get yourself a life.

Bert
Ventus cM "TW"

  #24  
Old March 14th 17, 12:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Pete[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

I believe having the ability to self retrieve gives a distinct advantage. Thinking forward to FES where a low altitude save via starting your nose motor offers zero risk to the pilot means that pilot can push significantly harder over less forgiving terrain than the pilot that does not have the option.

I'm surprised people are in denial of this distinct mental advantage.





  #25  
Old March 14th 17, 12:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Eight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 422
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 11:51:24 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan


Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.


Have you somehow missed the fact that modern gliders climb *really* well at high wing loading? An ASG-29 can spot at ASW-20 (itself no slouch, as I try to demonstrate) about 2 # in wing loading and still climb at parity. This is the aspect of modern ships that tries to pry my wallet open.

Since you called me out on the numbers... My "1 psf" came from a guy known for fuzzy numbers (unless a dollar sign was involved). Fair enough, let's check.

So: https://www.alexander-schleicher.de/flugzeuge/asg-29/

For non-electric start version, empty mass according to Schleicher goes up 99 lbs on 113 square feet of wing (18m span) or 99 sq feet (15m). Numbers aren't published on the 29es page, but will obviously be a bit higher. Enough higher to get your caps lock key involved! With a parachute and land out kit, I'd be right around 9# at 15m(!) span. While higher than I would prefer for a survival day, that's a sweet spot wing loading for a moderate day... and what was this thread about, again?

Sorry, Error #404, alibi not found.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman / Dino-man
  #26  
Old March 14th 17, 01:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,520
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 11:51:24 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan


Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.


I'm flying my '29 dry at 8.0 lb/sq ft and I'm not skinny. I don't think Evan is all that far off with his 1 lb ballpark estimate.
My '24E is 1.1 lb/sq ft heavier than my 24 was.
2 data points
UH
  #27  
Old March 14th 17, 02:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Roy B.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

Well it's snowing out and I am bored - so I'll join the fray. Except, Evan has already said what I would say (except the part about "flaccid, low testosterone ******s"). I would have said something more direct.

Let's not conflate the convenience of self launching with the mental confidence of having an engine behind you when you are low or far away and pushing for the last turnpoint with doubts about getting back. They are very different impacts on your gliding. If there was a way to self launch, lock the engine, and throw the key out the vent window, then we would all be doing what Evan does well (and I try to do).

True - the self launch and sustainer people acquire problems that the pure glider pilots don't have (cost, weight, and need to give up earlier) and I have pulled a few sustainer gliders out of farm fields in my time (3 no starts and one taped over fuel tank vent hole) but Pete is right - it's a mental sport and the presence of an engine of any type impacts your mindset. Especially if you fly like Evan and push to use 100% of the day.

But Evan, look on the bright side - The pure gliders are getting cheaper since the ******s don't want them.

ROY (fellow pterosaur)
  #28  
Old March 14th 17, 04:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
jfitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 7:03:45 AM UTC-7, Roy B. wrote:
Well it's snowing out and I am bored - so I'll join the fray. Except, Evan has already said what I would say (except the part about "flaccid, low testosterone ******s"). I would have said something more direct.

Let's not conflate the convenience of self launching with the mental confidence of having an engine behind you when you are low or far away and pushing for the last turnpoint with doubts about getting back. They are very different impacts on your gliding. If there was a way to self launch, lock the engine, and throw the key out the vent window, then we would all be doing what Evan does well (and I try to do).

True - the self launch and sustainer people acquire problems that the pure glider pilots don't have (cost, weight, and need to give up earlier) and I have pulled a few sustainer gliders out of farm fields in my time (3 no starts and one taped over fuel tank vent hole) but Pete is right - it's a mental sport and the presence of an engine of any type impacts your mindset. Especially if you fly like Evan and push to use 100% of the day.

But Evan, look on the bright side - The pure gliders are getting cheaper since the ******s don't want them.

ROY (fellow pterosaur)


Your mental problem is one of your own making. It can be shown that paying someone to chase you for the retrieve is cheaper than purchasing an engine (and yes, I fully understand capital and operating costs, and also that they are interchangeable in this context). Your mental problem is you have chosen not to spend the money to get the best performance out of the day. As in most speed sports, speed is largely a matter of money - how fast can you afford to go?

An engine has drawbacks compared to the traditional crew: it won't bring you are beer after landing and help you take your glider apart, and sex with it is unfulfilling.

I don't know all of you personally, but the local pilots with the same views universally have never owned and flown a motorglider cross country. Nearly all motorglider pilots have owned and flown cross country engineless gliders. So 'fess up - all of you who think there is a performance advantage in having a motor, have you owned and extensively flown cross country in a motorglider? No? Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.....

The idea of flying your FES glider into the ground and then firing it up is simply Russian Roulette. I quote the Schleicher Operation manual: "One must always be prepared for the possibility that the engine will not provide the hoped for propulsion...."
  #29  
Old March 14th 17, 04:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,697
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

You are correct (at least from my viewpoint). Though since becoming a
"self launcher" my land out options have actually decreased (paved
runways only), I find myself pushing further knowing the Rotax 914 is
way more reliable that the chain saw engines on most sustainers. Still,
I never go beyond gliding distance from an actual airport. This is my
self-imposed limit.

On 3/14/2017 8:03 AM, Roy B. wrote:
Well it's snowing out and I am bored - so I'll join the fray. Except, Evan has already said what I would say (except the part about "flaccid, low testosterone ******s"). I would have said something more direct.

Let's not conflate the convenience of self launching with the mental confidence of having an engine behind you when you are low or far away and pushing for the last turnpoint with doubts about getting back. They are very different impacts on your gliding. If there was a way to self launch, lock the engine, and throw the key out the vent window, then we would all be doing what Evan does well (and I try to do).

True - the self launch and sustainer people acquire problems that the pure glider pilots don't have (cost, weight, and need to give up earlier) and I have pulled a few sustainer gliders out of farm fields in my time (3 no starts and one taped over fuel tank vent hole) but Pete is right - it's a mental sport and the presence of an engine of any type impacts your mindset. Especially if you fly like Evan and push to use 100% of the day.

But Evan, look on the bright side - The pure gliders are getting cheaper since the ******s don't want them.

ROY (fellow pterosaur)


--
Dan, 5J
  #30  
Old March 14th 17, 06:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
krasw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 268
Default All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 18:09:05 UTC+2, jfitch wrote:
I don't know all of you personally, but the local pilots with the same views universally have never owned and flown a motorglider cross country. Nearly all motorglider pilots have owned and flown cross country engineless gliders. So 'fess up - all of you who think there is a performance advantage in having a motor, have you owned and extensively flown cross country in a motorglider? No? Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.....


I've flown selflaunchers and sustainers. Having engine is every bit as game-changing as one can imagine. It is totally different sport, arguing about that pretty useless. Of course there is no category for pure glider records anymore as virtually no gliders are made without engine of some sort anymore (excluding 2-seat trainers), they are bound to extinct.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
distance records Ron Gleason Soaring 4 July 6th 12 04:27 AM
Distance records ..... Ron Gleason Soaring 0 July 4th 12 03:02 AM
New Records in Arizona Mike the Strike Soaring 2 June 15th 07 07:50 PM
STC records at FAA [email protected] Owning 6 April 2nd 05 04:01 PM
Updates to my records. Fred Blair Soaring 5 November 7th 04 05:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.