F.L. Whiteley wrote:

Although I'm a purist, I agree with Eric that the effect overall is
beneficial for soaring. However, if you buy used first and second
generation equipment, you will likely spend an equal or greater time
maintaining your equipment to a high standard than actually soaring.

Assuming this means PIK 20 E and DG 400 gliders, it's not what I've
observed. The people I know, and know of, with these types of gliders
spend a lot more time soaring than maintaining. There will be increased
maintenance as the gliders accumulate engine hours, of course, but
nothing approaching the 100-200 hours/year these pilots fly. There may
be a year with particularly high maintenance (engine rebuild, say), but
that's followed by years of lower maintenance.

Regardless, the amount of maintenance of a self-launcher is still much
more than an unpowered glider. A sustainer powered glider will be more
like the unpowered glider than the self-launcher, as it's engine hours
tend to be 2-3 hours/year, compared to the 10 or so for a self-launcher,
and it's systems are less complicated.


It's about a 50/50 split between self-launching pilots I've met that can
soar effectively and have no clue.

Getting these less skilled (in soaring) pilots up to speed can be a
challenge, because the independence of the self-launcher tends to keep
them outside the "support system" that can teach them to soar.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA