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

Short Wings Gliders



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #161  
Old February 2nd 09, 11:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jim Beckman[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 186
Default Short Wings Gliders SW HIGH FUN LOW STRESS CLASS

At 17:03 02 February 2009, Andreas Maurer wrote:

Well... as there are practiucally no World Class gliders flying in
Europe (read: World Class is being ignored by 80 percent of the
world's gliding pilots), you'd better name it "US class"... or

"dwarf
class"...


Can't say that it's overwhelmingly popular in the US, either. The World
Class US Nationals have been running concurrently with the 1-26
Championships, and it seems like there are 4 to 5 times as many 1-26s as
there are PW-5s.

Jim Beckman

  #162  
Old February 3rd 09, 12:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Michel Talon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Feb 2, 2:14*am, (Michel Talon) wrote:

...The glider factories seem to think that glider buyers
are like Ferrari buyers, who will accept to pay any price
for their toys...


Michel, I think that you have hit the nail on the head. The glider
makers are acting just as you say. And the reason they are doing so
seems to be that they are correct in their assessment; that there
continues to be folks who will pay top dollar for high-performance
sailplanes.

What I don't understand is why you seem to take issue with it. Do you
think that it is unjust or unfair for them to want to make a profit?


I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is sustainable.
By the way, how many glider factories went bust? Similarly how many
of these car builders who wanted to produce luxury sports cars are
alive? Bugatti does airplane parts nowadays, similarly Hispano-Suiza,
etc. Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for *small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free, over
all those years. You have only to consider what Andreas Maurer says to
see what small cost means, in the example of his club in Landau.

--

Michel TALON

  #164  
Old February 3rd 09, 01:00 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Silent[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Short Wings Gliders SW HIGH FUN LOW STRESS CLASS

At 22:45 02 February 2009, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 17:03 02 February 2009, Andreas Maurer wrote:

Well... as there are practically no World Class gliders flying in
Europe (read: World Class is being ignored by 80 percent of the
world's gliding pilots), you'd better name it "US class"... or
dwarf class"...


Short Wings Gliders might account for 5 pct of world fleet
if 20 percent of the world's gliding pilots are interested
it will be a great success!!!!!


Can't say that it's overwhelmingly popular in the US, either. The

World
Class US Nationals have been running concurrently with the 1-26
Championships, and it seems like there are 4 to 5 times as many 1-26s as
there are PW-5s.


it makes sense..........
1-26 700 built for usa only
PW-5 200 built for the world

unless Arnold's friend comes around and pull out another
Judas trick like he did here in the last supper:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VnTO...eature=related

and you get bread, fish and PW-5 multiplied ..................





  #165  
Old February 3rd 09, 01:41 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
DRN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 2, 5:14*am, (Michel Talon) wrote:
... But i remark that the cost of gliders has
indeed increased exponentially the last twenty years, for reasons which
have nothing to do with concrete factors, but everything to do with
hourly cost of workers, and total lack of will of controlling the costs.
The glider factories seem to think that glider buyers are like Ferrari
buyers, who will accept to pay any price for their toys.


Nope. Why do you think some mfgs are still using lower-cost
(and lower quality) bearings ? Not using stainless cables ?
I have been told, when I specifically asked, that cost control
was the reason. The factories constantly look for ways to
reduce costs.

A primary cost driver is the FAI class definition, which sets
the market. And when there are too many classes, it just
runs up the per-unit costs. And no, it doesn't get hugely
cheaper when you cut the span...

My two cents anyway,
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"
  #167  
Old February 3rd 09, 02:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ian Cant[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Short Wings Gliders (26) 146

At 01:00 03 February 2009, Dan Silent wrote:
possible names for the new class:

"US class"
"NON EUROPE class"
"20PCT class"
"DWARF class"
"WC class"
"TINS4WS class"

OTHER SUGGESTIONS???


Volksclasse ?


  #168  
Old February 3rd 09, 02:31 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

On Feb 2, 3:27*pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:

I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is sustainable.


Michel, I do agree with you in that as well; in the greater scheme of
things the way sailplane manufacturers have operated cannot continue
indefinitely. However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses. I can, of course, think of ways that they could do
more to benfit the sport and its enthusiasts, but only at the cost of
damage to their profitability. But again, it is their business, not
mine.

Getting back to your point, there is one thing that the 19th century
robber barons got right when they used social darwinism to justify
their avarice and greed: natural selection in the business environment
will force businesses to adapt or to evolve, and those that do neither
can be counted upon to wither and die. So I think that if their
current business model is not sustainable, then the manufacturers will
develop one that is, or will leave the business altogether.

Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for *small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free, over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.

Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.

Thanks again, Bob K.
  #169  
Old February 3rd 09, 02:34 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

Earlier, I wrote:

...However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses....


What I meant to write was:

...However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do **not** think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses....


Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks, Bob K.
  #170  
Old February 3rd 09, 03:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Nyal Williams[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 259
Default Short Wings Gliders (25)

This comes from EAA, IIRC. In the US, about 5% of the homebuilt aircraft
started up ever get finished. Of those that do, many pass through three
owner/builders during the course of the completion, and the process
usually takes about eight years. Of course, gliders are much simpler to
build.

Bill Piper was famous for saying, and I paraphrase, "It costs as much to
build a bad design as a good one. Tell me the weight of an airplane and I
can tell you how much it costs to build it."

This formula would probably be true for any [X]RP structure in any
particular location and with any particular construction method.


At 01:31 03 February 2009, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Feb 2, 3:27=A0pm, (Michel Talon) wrote:

I agree with all you said, but i don't think this model is

sustainable.

Michel, I do agree with you in that as well; in the greater scheme of
things the way sailplane manufacturers have operated cannot continue
indefinitely. However, I don't think that how they are operating is
damaging to the sport of soaring or to the worldwide community of
soaring pilots, so I do think it is my place to tell them how to run
their businesses. I can, of course, think of ways that they could do
more to benfit the sport and its enthusiasts, but only at the cost of
damage to their profitability. But again, it is their business, not
mine.

Getting back to your point, there is one thing that the 19th century
robber barons got right when they used social darwinism to justify
their avarice and greed: natural selection in the business environment
will force businesses to adapt or to evolve, and those that do neither
can be counted upon to wither and die. So I think that if their
current business model is not sustainable, then the manufacturers will
develop one that is, or will leave the business altogether.

Gliding is still living because there has been tens of thousands
of people learning to fly in Germany, Brittany, France, etc. for

*small
cost*, thanks to the dedication of instructors doing that for free,

over
all those years...


If only we could get those tens of thousands of people to spend a few
days each building gliders. If, for example, 10000 people spent three
workdays (24 hours) building gliders, that'd be enough labor to
produce 120 training gliders or about 180 single-seaters.

Of course, you can't do that with a glider factory, the logistics of
transporting and accommodating that many temporary workers at a single
facility would be a nightmare. But if you look closely at the world of
homebuilt aircraft that is very nearly what you see, with thousands of
distributed "manufacturing centers" in tiny workshops all across the
world. Of course, instead of thousands of people spending a few hours
each what we have is hundreds of people spending a thousand hours
each, but I think it can work the other way as well.

Thanks again, Bob K.

 




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
X-Wings and Canard Rotor Wings. Charles Gray Rotorcraft 1 March 22nd 05 01:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.