Don't miss New Castle VA R4S - Register Now!

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
Nah. I think watching someone die attempting a self launch from the shortish grass field with an uphill run and a 50 foot high tension line at the end is/was enough of a reason. It's one thing to self-launch on a nice, paved, 5,000 foot runway. Another thing entirely to try it on a fairly constrained field.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

Erik Mann (P3)

Eric, my ASH-31Mi will outclimb any regular tow plane with me in tow. It is actually far more safer for me to self launch than it is to take a tow.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-4, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching. Get with the program.

One out of the current entries is self launch capable.
Possibly you could list the self launching sailplanes that could participate in this event if BRSS allowed self launching.
I know the list- let's see if you do.
UH

Hank, I am sure there could be more than one that can self launch and do it safer than taking a tow.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 7:00:51 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-4, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching. Get with the program.

One out of the current entries is self launch capable.
Possibly you could list the self launching sailplanes that could participate in this event if BRSS allowed self launching.
I know the list- let's see if you do.
UH

Hank, I am sure there could be more than one that can self launch and do it safer than taking a tow.

Andy- Not among the entries listed. There is one self launching glider entered.
Why not join us and make it two.
UH

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 9:12:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 7:00:51 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-4, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching. Get with the program.

One out of the current entries is self launch capable.
Possibly you could list the self launching sailplanes that could participate in this event if BRSS allowed self launching.
I know the list- let's see if you do.
UH

Hank, I am sure there could be more than one that can self launch and do it safer than taking a tow.

Andy- Not among the entries listed. There is one self launching glider entered.
Why not join us and make it two.
UH

I was thinking about it until I saw the note on self launchers.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 12:45:49 PM UTC-5, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch
or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching.
Get with the program.

The above is a spectacularly clueless post, even by RAS standards.

This is not a site safe for most self-launchers.
I had to take the widow to the crash site of the accident leading to this rule.
Gliders such as Antares with extremely fast acceleration and climb are
safe here (and too heavy to tow here), but most self-launchers dubious.

Hence the entirely appropriate rule.

Absolutely idiotic post, really.

Soartech, try to refrain from making an ass of yourself with such posts .
Better yet, don't post as you're usually content free to dangerously wrong.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 3:59:17 PM UTC-7, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
Nah. I think watching someone die attempting a self launch from the shortish grass field with an uphill run and a 50 foot high tension line at the end is/was enough of a reason. It's one thing to self-launch on a nice, paved, 5,000 foot runway. Another thing entirely to try it on a fairly constrained field.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

Erik Mann (P3)

Eric, my ASH-31Mi will outclimb any regular tow plane with me in tow. It is actually far more safer for me to self launch than it is to take a tow.

Might not be the climb rate as much as the initial ground acceleration that gets you on a hot day flying out of a 2500-2800' soft sod field, uphill. According to the NTSB report the calculated distance for a Ventus 2CM to clear a 50' obstacle (on a 10-degree cooler day) was 3000'. I don't remember where the power lines are relative to the end of the runway, but that's not a lot of margin and I recon the calculated performance numbers assume a paved runway - so even more marginal. If you've launched (or self-launched) out of New Castle before I guess you have a reason to make specific claims about your glider or maybe other motor gliders you've flow there, but it sounds like maybe that's not the case. I'd be inclined to defer to the judgement of the people who dealt with the NTSB on the subject - sadly.

Best,

9B

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 10:26:15 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 9:12:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 7:00:51 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-4, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching. Get with the program.

One out of the current entries is self launch capable.
Possibly you could list the self launching sailplanes that could participate in this event if BRSS allowed self launching.
I know the list- let's see if you do.
UH

Hank, I am sure there could be more than one that can self launch and do it safer than taking a tow.

Andy- Not among the entries listed. There is one self launching glider entered.
Why not join us and make it two.
UH

I was thinking about it until I saw the note on self launchers.

Look up VA85 on AirNav, study in GE. You'll see the issues.

There's an honest concern here, but r.a.s. isn't the place to sort it out.

What you do is call (contest manager) Charlie C. and ask who the chief tow pilot is. Then you call him, tell him you are interested in flying but have concerns about launching your heavy self launcher. Your -31Mi isn't very much lighter than Dave's "too heavy to aero tow [out of NCI]" Antares, it's a serious concern imo.

Reasonable people can make reasonable plans from there.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman, New Castle fan

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 12:34:25 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 3:59:17 PM UTC-7, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 3:27:08 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
Nah. I think watching someone die attempting a self launch from the shortish grass field with an uphill run and a 50 foot high tension line at the end is/was enough of a reason. It's one thing to self-launch on a nice, paved, 5,000 foot runway. Another thing entirely to try it on a fairly constrained field.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

Erik Mann (P3)

Eric, my ASH-31Mi will outclimb any regular tow plane with me in tow. It is actually far more safer for me to self launch than it is to take a tow..

Might not be the climb rate as much as the initial ground acceleration that gets you on a hot day flying out of a 2500-2800' soft sod field, uphill. According to the NTSB report the calculated distance for a Ventus 2CM to clear a 50' obstacle (on a 10-degree cooler day) was 3000'. I don't remember where the power lines are relative to the end of the runway, but that's not a lot of margin and I recon the calculated performance numbers assume a paved runway - so even more marginal. If you've launched (or self-launched) out of New Castle before I guess you have a reason to make specific claims about your glider or maybe other motor gliders you've flow there, but it sounds like maybe that's not the case. I'd be inclined to defer to the judgement of the people who dealt with the NTSB on the subject - sadly.

Best,

9B

All tows I took from grass runways behind Pawnees were far worse in terms of distance to clear 50' obstacle and that includes 80-90 degrees days. My ready to fly weight is close to 1200 lb (dry). Also I climb at much lower speed which contributes to better distance to clear 50' obstacle. If it is not safe for me to self launch there it is not safe to take a tow. This is how I see it based on experience.

On Saturday, August 5, 2017 at 8:30:56 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 10:26:15 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 9:12:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 7:00:51 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 1:45:49 PM UTC-4, Soartech wrote:
Due to field conditions we do not permit self-launching.

Huh? What does this mean? Just an effort to collect $55 per launch or something more subtle? 85% of all new gliders are self-launching. Get with the program.

One out of the current entries is self launch capable.
Possibly you could list the self launching sailplanes that could participate in this event if BRSS allowed self launching.
I know the list- let's see if you do.
UH

Hank, I am sure there could be more than one that can self launch and do it safer than taking a tow.

Andy- Not among the entries listed. There is one self launching glider entered.
Why not join us and make it two.
UH

I was thinking about it until I saw the note on self launchers.

Look up VA85 on AirNav, study in GE. You'll see the issues.

There's an honest concern here, but r.a.s. isn't the place to sort it out..

What you do is call (contest manager) Charlie C. and ask who the chief tow pilot is. Then you call him, tell him you are interested in flying but have concerns about launching your heavy self launcher. Your -31Mi isn't very much lighter than Dave's "too heavy to aero tow [out of NCI]" Antares, it's a serious concern imo.

Reasonable people can make reasonable plans from there.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman, New Castle fan

Good points Evan.

On Friday, August 4, 2017 at 11:34:25 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Might not be the climb rate as much as the initial ground acceleration
that gets you on a hot day flying out of a 2500-2800' soft sod field, uphill.

Motorgliders with heavy weight and a single wheel/tire are mightily influenced
by surface condition - PSI under main is huge. For example, ArcusM at Perry
takes a *much* longer ground roll than pavement (Perry has excellent grass
surface but a bit sandy/soft). I've plowed some huge furrows taking off
at Caesar Creek in Antares.

According to the NTSB report the calculated distance for a Ventus 2CM
to clear a 50' obstacle (on a 10-degree cooler day) was 3000'.

The accident AC was a Ventus Cm, not a 2cM. Cm is *Very* under-powered.
Accident report fails to note that take-off attempt was with 15m tips,
which is forbidden in the manual.

I don't remember where the power lines are relative to the end of the
runway, but that's not a lot of margin and I recon the calculated
performance numbers assume a paved runway - so even more marginal.

Power lines are a ways out.

If you've launched (or self-launched) out of New Castle before I guess
you have a reason to make specific claims about your glider or maybe
other motor gliders you've flow there, but it sounds like maybe that's
not the case.

Andy's being rather diplomatic. Poster is clueless.

I'd be inclined to defer to the judgement of the people who dealt with
the NTSB on the subject - sadly.

As I did... And of course they missed some important bits
in the accident report...

Most important part here is for ANY take-off, you need to have picked
an abort point. Should be practiced and tested (tow-pilot applies partial
power). Could save some lives.

In this accident, I was standing by the towplane tavern, watching the
launch, explaining the proceedings to a spectator. Went like this:

Looks like his acceleration is pretty poor.
No problem if he aborts.
If he doesn't abort now, he's going to crash.
He needs to abort NOW.
Oh no, he's going to crash.
Glider staggers into the air.
Clears a few trees, and sinks out of view.
Crash.

Be careful out there,
Best Regards, Dave

PS: Advance planning of abort at different points could have prevented
the crash a few days ago.
- pull the release if not off the ground by...
- land straight ahead (possibly flying into the crash)
- OK to turn around.
Make sure you run through this in your mind before starting a launch!

I had breakfast with the pilot this AM...