![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've been reading the articles about sailplanes in Olympic Games, some
other postings about PW-5 and I came to conclusion that most people who are posting this articles are afraid of World Class gliders. Why? What is so difficult in understanding the concept of the glider, the cost of building it, its performance, etc. Most of you bashing the concept. Is this because your skill is so limited that you need to have a bird with max. L/D 10,000 (that is minimum) and a best L/D speed Mach 1? Anything which doesn't meet this cryteria needs to be rejected? You are bringing to this equation sailing in Olympic Games as a comparison? Some of you have never even seen, and most of you have never flown this glider. So, what is wrong with this picture. Maybe is time for some of you to take on golfing, for example. I am realy offended by some of the postings on group. You are not beeing constructive, you are distructive. To the sport primarly. Do you suppose that by promoting Discus and Ventus and who know what else you doing justice to this sport? What about those guys or girls who don't have $250,000 to waist on a new bird every summer? Is this making them less qualified or skilled pilots that those of you bashing everything around and flying supersonic, unlimited L/D gliders? Before anyone of you decide to bash something without having slightest idea or concept about what is going on in the small world of gliding, you need to stop and think about it. We all are saying that numbers of glider pilots are declining world wide. Do you know why? That is because of buch of arrogant glider pilots who are acting like the gods; they know everything, they have been everywhere, they've done it all. Yet when we go to the world contest results, we don't see those names of the people who are making this derogatory statements. If you want to help our sport, think first and then act accordingly. It is only good for all of the glider pilots worldwide. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jacek Kobiesa wrote:
I've been reading the articles about sailplanes in Olympic Games, some other postings about PW-5 and I came to conclusion that most people who are posting this articles are afraid of World Class gliders. You've got to be kidding. What is so difficult in understanding the concept of the glider, the cost of building it, its performance, etc. Not difficult at all. Most of you bashing the concept. Is this because your skill is so limited that you need to have a bird with max. L/D 10,000 (that is minimum) and a best L/D speed Mach 1? Anything which doesn't meet this cryteria needs to be rejected? If this were true, you'd see Russia's getting criticized in this forum - not to mention the Silent-in, plus a lot of other ships. You don't see that, do you? IMHO, the PW5 doesn't get criticized for being a PW5, it gets criticized for being chosen as the world class glider - when they could have done so much better. Tony V. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Speaking of Russias,
The BGA site has three problems with the Russia, it seems. One was even a 87 knot limitation (!). I was surprised to see this (apparently the result of an aileron problem on a factory test flight(?) I've flown a Russia (the retract version) and really enjoyed the polar, but the auto-connecting ailerons had just a smidge of click/slop. Our towpilot, who owns a Russia and is an A&P, thinks they are a little underbuilt. He thought the PW-5 we had for two years was a bit more rugged. I personally liked the retract Russia polar so much, and the low weight, and the assembly, that I'd consider buying one, but I'd like to see how the "ruggedness factor" plays out first with the ones at the field. Of course in the meantime I'm aching for the time and opportunity to visit a place with a sparrowhawk. Being 5'6" (when hung from my heels) and maybe 160# soaking wet, I love little short wings and a light glider. Any Russia guys have any "ruggedness" stories? Tony Verhulst wrote: If this were true, you'd see Russia's getting criticized in this forum - not to mention the Silent-in, plus a lot of other ships. You don't see that, do you? IMHO, the PW5 doesn't get criticized for being a PW5, it gets criticized for being chosen as the world class glider - when they could have done so much better. -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I personally liked the retract Russia polar so much, and the low weight,
and the assembly, that I'd consider buying one, but I'd like to see how the "ruggedness factor" plays out first with the ones at the field. Mark, You should look into the Apis line of gliders, www.apisgliders.com. Better engineered and built than the Russia and more bang for the buck than the Sparrowhawk. There is one Apis 13 based in San Diego. Robert Mudd Apis Saiplanes inc. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm a big fan of light aircraft with light wings. So yes, the
Apis is interesting. Unfortunately, there aren't too many around. It's easier for me to research accident reports and prices of the PW-5 and Russia because there are so darned many of them. There are at least 3 Russias at Avenal alone. I'm just not sure there's enough market for the half-dozen or so light gliders designed in the past ten years. Silent and PW-5 and Apis and Russia and Sparrowhawk and L-33 and Junior...hmmm...it will be interesting to see the competition for the next World Class glider. I'm still not decided on side opening canopy or front. The PW-5 was a bit "athletic" to get into, but at least if one left the canopy unlocked, there was no issue with it (ask me how I know). The PW-5 and the Russia also both have inadequate ventilation for 100+ degree heat. If the thermals couldn't get to 4K, it was just a freakin' sauna. I guess most European test pilots fly in the winter, eh? Robertmudd1u wrote: I personally liked the retract Russia polar so much, and the low weight, and the assembly, that I'd consider buying one, but I'd like to see how the "ruggedness factor" plays out first with the ones at the field. Mark, You should look into the Apis line of gliders, www.apisgliders.com. Better engineered and built than the Russia and more bang for the buck than the Sparrowhawk. There is one Apis 13 based in San Diego. -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mark James Boyd" wrote in message news:412874c6$1@darkstar... I'm still not decided on side opening canopy or front. The PW-5 was a bit "athletic" to get into, but at least if one left the canopy unlocked, there was no issue with it (ask me how I know). You just touched on my pet peeve. At least one Russia has come to grief after a typical unlocked canopy incident. Unlocked side-opening, (and front-opening back) canopies represent a continuing source of glider accidents that could easily be "designed away" by manufacturers. We insist on automatic control hookups on new gliders because they prevent accidents, so I don't understand why we tolerate those crappy canopy latches that are so easily left unlocked or accidentally unlocked in flight. The L-13 canopy latch is a better (though far from perfect) example of a side-canopy latch. If properly maintained, it is almost idiot proof because it latches automatically, much like your car door or the hood of your car. Your basic cam-acting door latch was probably invented hundreds of years ago; why can't we have this "space-age" technology in our gliders? Vaughn |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
UK junior nationals. An example of where the future of our sport lies. A full
entry list of 50 gliders ranging from SHK and Astir to Ventus C and DG505. No gliders less than 15m were entered. They were too low performance/ uncompetative/ too expensive/ unavailable. The best and most competative pilots will always try to find the best glider available. In typical weak UK conditions you need something with reasonable penetration to make progress against any wind over 10 knots. That is why you do not see K8s, K6 etc competing any more. Having flown most of the common gliders around including the PW5 I find it rather delicate for club use. It is thus mainly suitable for private owners. They are reluctant to buy something that is less capable of completing the task than the average 15m ship and thus stay away from them. Not afraid of the World class just think that the PW5 is the wrong glider for it |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No gliders less than 15m were entered. They were too low performance/
Not afraid of the World class just think that the PW5 is the wrong glider for it In general, it seems like 15 meters is the shortest span which can give good performance given the fairly wide range of pilot weights and sizes and the need for cockpit comfort. As a lightweight, I'd personally prefer something with less span. Paying for more span and then needing to add lots of water seems silly to me. But the market is what the market is, and manufacturers need to make gliders to fit the bulkier, richer pilots too... The lightweight construction techniques of the Sparrowhawk are really the only things that might make shorter spans competitive. I'm interested in seeing the performance of a retractable Sparrowhawk. For the next World Class glider, I wonder if retract will be allowed. I'd still like to see specifications which keep the cost down, however, and something's gotta give... In any case, I think the PW-5 and the Russia were an excellent start towards the World Class goals, but yes, in the intervening years better technologies have come along and there has been some learning. I hope this will make the next World Class glider manufacturers come up with some interesting designs... -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The discussion about the value of PW-5 is just pointless. Value of the
glider is defined by the market and when nobody buys the glider it has no value. Finito. "Tony Verhulst" wrote in message ... Jacek Kobiesa wrote: I've been reading the articles about sailplanes in Olympic Games, some other postings about PW-5 and I came to conclusion that most people who are posting this articles are afraid of World Class gliders. You've got to be kidding. What is so difficult in understanding the concept of the glider, the cost of building it, its performance, etc. Not difficult at all. Most of you bashing the concept. Is this because your skill is so limited that you need to have a bird with max. L/D 10,000 (that is minimum) and a best L/D speed Mach 1? Anything which doesn't meet this cryteria needs to be rejected? If this were true, you'd see Russia's getting criticized in this forum - not to mention the Silent-in, plus a lot of other ships. You don't see that, do you? IMHO, the PW5 doesn't get criticized for being a PW5, it gets criticized for being chosen as the world class glider - when they could have done so much better. Tony V. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
iPilot wrote:
The discussion about the value of PW-5 is just pointless. Value of the glider is defined by the market and when nobody buys the glider it has no value. Finito. Must be supply siders. ;-) Shawn |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
Germany Lost the War... So What? | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 55 | February 26th 04 08:51 AM |
World War II Flying 'Ace' Salutes Racial Progress, By Gerry J. Gilmore | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 2 | February 22nd 04 03:33 AM |
One Design viability? | Stewart Kissel | Soaring | 41 | December 10th 03 03:27 AM |
PW-5 and NHRA Pro Stock Trucks........ | Scott Correa | Soaring | 1 | November 22nd 03 02:27 AM |