The old 1-26 sold in sufficient numbers to support a yearly one-design
contest, decades after production stopped. Are there any other glider
designs with fleets big enough for one-design contests?

Johan Larson

Standard Cirrus or Mark 1 Discus perhaps.

Derek Copeland

At 22:54 02 July 2006, Js wrote:
>
>Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
>
>> Don't know about about your side of the pond, but
>>here in Europe, LS4
>> would be the obvious choice.
>
> That was my thought when the idea came up of the
>'World Class
>Sailplane'.
>LS-4: Easy to fly, performs very well, good stall characteristics,
>>
>comfortable even for a tall or wide pilot, easy to
>rig, has a built-in
>mechanical gear-up alarm. It's even good looking.
> There are quite a few LS-4s in the USA, but not as
>many as in Europe.
>Few US clubs and commercial operators bought LS-4 or
>Discus. At home
>right now, AS-W20 is the most common design.
>Another great one-design possibility!
>Jim
>
>

Derek Copeland wrote:
> Standard Cirrus or Mark 1 Discus perhaps.
>
> Derek Copeland
>
> At 22:54 02 July 2006, Js wrote:
> >
> >Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
> >
> >> Don't know about about your side of the pond, but
> >>here in Europe, LS4
> >> would be the obvious choice.
> >
> > That was my thought when the idea came up of the
> >'World Class
> >Sailplane'.
> >LS-4: Easy to fly, performs very well, good stall characteristics,
> >>
> >comfortable even for a tall or wide pilot, easy to
> >rig, has a built-in
> >mechanical gear-up alarm. It's even good looking.
> > There are quite a few LS-4s in the USA, but not as
> >many as in Europe.
> >Few US clubs and commercial operators bought LS-4 or
> >Discus. At home
> >right now, AS-W20 is the most common design.
> >Another great one-design possibility!
> >Jim
> >
> >

There is, gentlemen, one-design class in place already. It is called
the World Class. It is here and it is going to stay. I just don't see
the reason that you can't seem to accept that. Having flown 1-26 and
also the PW-5 I would not hesitate to get into PW-5 and fly it. It is a
good little ship, it was built for a purpose and it is serving that
purpose well. Now, the 1-26 is a good ship as well, but.....it is old,
it is tired and it is difficult to maintain. Well, we can carry this
discussion forever, there will be proponents of PW or the Schweitzer,
but as far as I am concerned one design class is already here and you
are simply trying to reinvent the wheel.

Jacek
Washington State

wrote:
> Derek Copeland wrote:
> > Standard Cirrus or Mark 1 Discus perhaps.
> >
> > Derek Copeland
> >
> > At 22:54 02 July 2006, Js wrote:
> > >
> > >Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
> > >
> > >> Don't know about about your side of the pond, but
> > >>here in Europe, LS4
> > >> would be the obvious choice.
> > >
> > > That was my thought when the idea came up of the
> > >'World Class
> > >Sailplane'.
> > >LS-4: Easy to fly, performs very well, good stall characteristics,
> > >>
> > >comfortable even for a tall or wide pilot, easy to
> > >rig, has a built-in
> > >mechanical gear-up alarm. It's even good looking.
> > > There are quite a few LS-4s in the USA, but not as
> > >many as in Europe.
> > >Few US clubs and commercial operators bought LS-4 or
> > >Discus. At home
> > >right now, AS-W20 is the most common design.
> > >Another great one-design possibility!
> > >Jim
> > >
> > >
>
> There is, gentlemen, one-design class in place already. It is called
> the World Class. It is here and it is going to stay. I just don't see
> the reason that you can't seem to accept that. Having flown 1-26 and
> also the PW-5 I would not hesitate to get into PW-5 and fly it. It is a
> good little ship, it was built for a purpose and it is serving that
> purpose well. Now, the 1-26 is a good ship as well, but.....it is old,
> it is tired and it is difficult to maintain. Well, we can carry this
> discussion forever, there will be proponents of PW or the Schweitzer,
> but as far as I am concerned one design class is already here and you
> are simply trying to reinvent the wheel.
>
> Jacek
> Washington State
One design classes might be a reasonable criteria for the World Class,
aiming at the recurring World Air Games. Perhaps the rides could also
be a moving target. Rather than specify a single design like the
marginally received PW-5, make the class contingent upon a minimum
number built, so access and popularity is virtually assured. For
example, 200 built (or still in service), glider make/model is eligible
for selection. One World Air Games, LS-4 or Std Jantar 2. Next WAG,
maybe ASW-20b, following games, ASW-27 or LS-8 or even Libelle 201B.
Properly approached it could have a positive outcome and possibly serve
soaring better as a segment of the World Air Games. With a few years'
lead time, securing the ride and preparing it would be doable.

If approached properly, there could be many other positive results from
such a strategy.

Frank Whiteley

wrote:
> Frank Whiteley wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Derek Copeland wrote:
> > > > Standard Cirrus or Mark 1 Discus perhaps.
> > > >
> > > > Derek Copeland
> > > >
> > > > At 22:54 02 July 2006, Js wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Don't know about about your side of the pond, but
> > > > >>here in Europe, LS4
> > > > >> would be the obvious choice.
> > > > >
> > > > > That was my thought when the idea came up of the
> > > > >'World Class
> > > > >Sailplane'.
> > > > >LS-4: Easy to fly, performs very well, good stall characteristics,
> > > > >>
> > > > >comfortable even for a tall or wide pilot, easy to
> > > > >rig, has a built-in
> > > > >mechanical gear-up alarm. It's even good looking.
> > > > > There are quite a few LS-4s in the USA, but not as
> > > > >many as in Europe.
> > > > >Few US clubs and commercial operators bought LS-4 or
> > > > >Discus. At home
> > > > >right now, AS-W20 is the most common design.
> > > > >Another great one-design possibility!
> > > > >Jim
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > There is, gentlemen, one-design class in place already. It is called
> > > the World Class. It is here and it is going to stay. I just don't see
> > > the reason that you can't seem to accept that. Having flown 1-26 and
> > > also the PW-5 I would not hesitate to get into PW-5 and fly it. It is a
> > > good little ship, it was built for a purpose and it is serving that
> > > purpose well. Now, the 1-26 is a good ship as well, but.....it is old,
> > > it is tired and it is difficult to maintain. Well, we can carry this
> > > discussion forever, there will be proponents of PW or the Schweitzer,
> > > but as far as I am concerned one design class is already here and you
> > > are simply trying to reinvent the wheel.
> > >
> > > Jacek
> > > Washington State
> > One design classes might be a reasonable criteria for the World Class,
> > aiming at the recurring World Air Games. Perhaps the rides could also
> > be a moving target. Rather than specify a single design like the
> > marginally received PW-5, make the class contingent upon a minimum
> > number built, so access and popularity is virtually assured. For
> > example, 200 built (or still in service), glider make/model is eligible
> > for selection. One World Air Games, LS-4 or Std Jantar 2. Next WAG,
> > maybe ASW-20b, following games, ASW-27 or LS-8 or even Libelle 201B.
> > Properly approached it could have a positive outcome and possibly serve
> > soaring better as a segment of the World Air Games. With a few years'
> > lead time, securing the ride and preparing it would be doable.
> >
> > If approached properly, there could be many other positive results from
> > such a strategy.
>
> I don't think things have to be formalized at such a high level. Just
> organize a regional ASW-20-only contest. That sounds amply doable for a
> single motivated person with a bit of racing experience. And since the
> plane is so common, there should be lots of prospective competitors.
>
> Johan Larson
Hopefully, that would be the grassroots level impact. If the world
class is to be represented at the WGC from 2008 (PW-5) and the
competitors desire is to move away from the PW-5, a top down approach
is warranted without quibbling for a new design. A determination could
be made that the World Class 2010 will be contested with PIK20's, in
2012 with LS-4's, in 2014 with ASW-20's or something similar. Let the
national's follow suit in preparation. First and foremost, most of
these are old enough that the price peak's are past. There were
produced in such numbers that they are widely available and owners may
not be adverse to loaning or renting them out. Many of the trailer
queens might get back in the air. The World Air Games occur less
frequently but could be approached similarly. The cost of entry would
be no more than new contruction and could be considerably less. It
might also bring more pilots into racing.

Frank Whiteley

Discus

At 20:36 02 July 2006, wrote:
>The old 1-26 sold in sufficient numbers to support
>a yearly one-design
>contest, decades after production stopped. Are there
>any other glider
>designs with fleets big enough for one-design contests?
>
>
>Johan Larson
>
>

Yes, but the World Class PW5 is UGLY UGLY UGLY and
has a tiny wingspan. Something like a Puchacz that
has been in contact with a head shrinker.

Derek Copeland

At 15:54 03 July 2006,
wrote:
>There is, gentlemen, one-design class in place already.
>It is called
>the World Class. It is here and it is going to stay.
>I just don't see
>the reason that you can't seem to accept that. Having
>flown 1-26 and
>also the PW-5 I would not hesitate to get into PW-5
>and fly it. It is a
>good little ship, it was built for a purpose and it
>is serving that
>purpose well. Now, the 1-26 is a good ship as well,
>but.....it is old,
>it is tired and it is difficult to maintain. Well,
>we can carry this
>discussion forever, there will be proponents of PW
>or the Schweitzer,
>but as far as I am concerned one design class is already
>here and you
>are simply trying to reinvent the wheel.
>
>Jacek
>Washington State
>
>