Shawn wrote:
Jack wrote:
Tom Smith wrote:
Tom,

I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303
is incomparably better than the rest of the standard class field, and
that any disparity in competition achievement is probably due to the
relative
quality of the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.

Jack,

You’re clearly suffering from a serious case of delusion!

Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in
their respective fields was apt indeed, though the 'turd' reference
was perhaps a little harsh on the competition.

I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what
material does one usually build a glider in your corner of the
universe?

Funny you should ask; the rest of the universe has
been wondering the same thing about your corner. We
had concluded that your glider manufacturers had discovered
how to isolate and work the ugly atom. Perhaps you
could confirm or dispel these rumours.

Many thanks,
Tom


See:

http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/

http://www.glidersport.net/

http://www.continuo.com/marske/

http://www.agcsc.org/sgs_1_34_info.html

http://www.windward-performance.com/

http://www.ssa.org/JohnsonLWBX/Genesis2%202000-03.pdf


The problem is not a lack of appreciation for either aerodynamics or
aesthetics, but a matter of production costs and exchange rates. Those
challenges will be overcome.

We're sure taking care of the exchange rate portion of the problem :-p


Not, obviously, by direct assault. Nanotech might do it, unless you
actually wanted a glider big enough for your body.


Jack