On Wednesday, April 14, 2021 at 12:08:52 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Wallace Berry wrote on 4/13/2021 6:32 PM:
The risk was the high chance of injury or death if the lift did not pan out . The pure gliders had no "Plan B" if they went into the hills and did not find lift. The motorgliders had a "Plan B". Yes, Plan B had risk, but less risk of landing out than the pure gliders. Isn't that a big part of the attraction of motorgliders?
What contest was this, and when? Why are you certain the motorglider pilots were actually
risking a potentially fatal crash if their motor didn't start? Or, could it have been just a
very lengthy retrieve that they avoided if the motor did start?

Crashing if the motor does not start is not part any "plan" of the motorglider pilots I know.
Once again, the attraction of self-launching motorgliders is launching when and where the pilot
chooses, and the greater certainty of getting home if the weather is misjudged.

If the motorglider offers a real competitive advantage, the top ten pilots in National contests
should be flying almost entirely motorgliders. I'm not aware of any study showing that, but
it'd be an interesting one to do, and shouldn't take much time or effort.

Another interesting exercise would be to ask each of the top ten pilots in several contests why
are/aren't they flying a motorglider.
--
Eric, you are making progress, yes, the sustainer and the self start both compensate for misjudgment, I would consider that a pretty big advantage over a purist. The purist cannot compensate for that type of mistake, we must deal with the situation at hand and at times suffer the consequences. The purist flies with a different mindset, reality sets in real quick and making decisions on should or should not has a different price to pay.


Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1