On Monday, April 12, 2021 at 4:59:35 PM UTC-5, waremark wrote:
"If anything, a motorglider has a performance disadvantage compared to a motorless, because the ballast choices are limited. It is operationally more complicated during a landout, as everything the "purist" must consider has to be considered, along with deploying and starting an engine. Abandoning further cross country flight has to be done earlier and higher, a disadvantage."
All that is true, and I think in a competition the motorglider therefore has a net disadvantage, and more so for a self-launcher with its higher minimum wing loading. On the other hand, for what I might call the relaxed leisure pilot, motorglider pilots at my club tend to attempt flights further away from home or in more dubious conditions than pilots of pure gliders - because for a relaxed leisure flight pilots are less keen to risk a landout far from home. I accept that there must be pilots with enthusiastic crews who are more bold, but I don't know them!

Most of the pilots at my club who now fly motorgliders were being rude about motorglider pilots 20 years ago. But virtually everyone who has bought a new glider in the last 10 years has bought it with an engine, whether internal combustion, jet or electric.

Both in my club and on the UK BGA Ladder there is a trophy for the best result in a 'non MOP' glider.

Just a sort of relevant anecdote: Was flying a contest at Uvalde where the task area has both flat land and mountains. One day a MAT task was called. It was almost totally blue over the flat ground but cu's were popping in the mountains. The motorgliders pretty much all went into the mountains to fly their extra turns. The non-motors stayed in the flats. Guess who had the better day.