![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Who out in RAS-land is convinced mankind has finished 'discovering' all
the ways sport sailplane pilots can 'usefully extract soaring energy' from the atmosphere? Raise your hands. Had the same question been posed in (say) 1922, and again in (say) 1932, I'm reasonably satisfied a significant proportion of soaring aficionados of those times would've raised their hands. In 1922, because likely few imagined 'useful thermals' (despite plentiful evidence to the observant of convection's commonness and power)... In 1932 because likely few(er) imagined something akin to atmospheric waves (despite air being a fluid, and rocky streams, and several centuries' practice with deductive, scientific thought)... Today, it's generally scientifically accepted some birds (e.g. albatrii) 'usefully dynamically soar.' So what makes us persist in believing that dynamic soaring can 'usefully be done' either: a) only at the bottom of the boundary layer (and then, only over water) and b) (maybe, perhaps, on a good day, and only with the government's blessing & [here insert your favorite skepticisms]) on the fringes of the jet stream? Using the intermountain western U.S. as a deductive point of departure (only because that's the part of the soaring world with which I'm most familiar, and in no way intending to limit others' use of their imaginations as a point of departure from their experiences), the times when 'significant at-soaring-levels wind shear' is NOT present on 'easily convectively soarable days' is probably considerably below 50%. Heavens! In these latitudes and over our bumpy terrain, I'd be shocked if such shear isn't more common than 'usefully convective conditions.' Why not attempt to figure out how to 'use' the energy differences/concentrations rather than curse their (too often negative) disruptive influences on the convection we all know and love? What are we to make of someone of the credibility/experience of (e.g.) an Ingo Renner claiming to have done 'nothing more' than 'sustain over his launch airport' (for 30 minutes) via dynamic soaring over the flats of Australia ~30 years ago? And what about Gary Osoba's Carbon Dragon microlift/dynamic/'lift-line' soaring experiences? Human history has repeatedly shown the absence of a 'thing' (in this case, 'demonstrably useful dynamic soaring conditions') isn't proof of its non-feasibility. I think it's darned cool we have dreamer/creators as Danny Howell and Greg Cole in our soaring world, while also having benefited from generations of earlier counterparts (Wolf Hirth/etc., Phonix folks, Eugen Hanle, Waibel/Holighaus/etc., etc.., etc.) advancing both the state of the hardware art and allowing/encouraging us selfish pilots to advance the state of the 'demonstrated possible' soaring art. There's a place for skepticism of course...for one thing it helps keep some of us alive longer. Happily, sailplane design isn't limited to only those who imagine refining along the path of 'commonly accepted wisdom.' Witness Howell's and Cole's plastic sailplane design efforts. I only wish I could be one of the selfish pilots having their sailplane tools in my hands! Dreamily Yours, Bob W. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Columbia Seat Limitation | Marco Leon | Piloting | 9 | September 7th 07 11:11 AM |
tow hook limitation question | Chris | Soaring | 15 | February 4th 07 08:22 PM |
Weight Limitation for the Front seats of a C172 | Brad Zeigler | Piloting | 3 | August 15th 05 02:43 AM |