70 kg 31:1 glider is here to stay?

"Ian Johnston" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:41:19 UTC, "Bill Daniels"
wrote:

: Where I object to these low performance gliders is that they fly in the
face
: of a century of soaring progress. They seem to say, "since we can't
compete
: with the fast guys, lets change the rules".
:
: If I am to joust with the forces of nature over hostile terrain, I want
all
: the performance I can buy. Mother Nature just won't let you change her
: rules.

On the other hand, traditional soaring is dying all over the world
while hang/paragliding are booming.

Ian

Not according to the HG list I follow. HG/PG are merging in the US, not
without dissension and controversy.

Frank

"Ian Johnston" writes:

On the other hand, traditional soaring is dying all over the world
while hang/paragliding are booming.

Ian


I keep reading this in discussions of soaring dying and it is not true. All
soaring activities are declining. Hang gliding peaked in the '80s and
paragliding peaked in the '90s.

Steve

On the other hand, traditional soaring is dying all over the world
while hang/paragliding are booming.

Full flying membership of the BGA (source Sailplane and Gliding)

1974 9899
1993 9409
1994 9522
1995 9757
1996 9409
1997 9225
1998 9153
1999 8802
2000 8975
2001 8848
2002 9166

That works out roughly a 7% reduction in 25 years. Nothing to get comlacent
about but not as drastic as some of the doom mongers would have us believe.
There has even been an upturn over the last few years

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:03:12 UTC, "Tim Mara"
wrote:

: again.....part of the reasons that many people have been drawn to soaring,
: especially those who have joined the ranks from general aviation, is the
: slick beautiful lines of (most) sailplanes...

And part of the reasons that many people have been put off soaring is
the cost, complexity and infrastructure. It's a classic mistake in
marketing to ask your customers how things could be improved ... you
should be asking everyone else!

That said, of course, has the PW-5 yet sold 5% of the numbers
predicted?

Ian

--

Ian Johnston wrote:

And part of the reasons that many people have been put off soaring is
the cost, complexity and infrastructure.

Yeah, it's hard to overcome the character defects in your customers.

Chris O'Callaghan has it right:

"...there was a day when the 2-33 sufficiently
inspired me. And not long after when the 1-26
was as pretty and nimble as you could want a
glider to be. There were glass gliders on the
field, but they didn't diminish my interest in
those gliders I had access to.

"Let's be clear about something... real pilots
need to fly...."

"...If you are a real pilot, as opposed to someone
who just likes to tell his friends he's a pilot,
you'll fly what you can afford and love it. Or
you'll find a way to afford your dreams."

The cost of my 1-26 is minimal. It flies wonderfully. What more could
I ask? Being retired after a full and diverse aviation career, I can
enjoy flight for its own sake more perfectly now than ever.

My club is very much a mutually supportive environment for my soaring
activities, and there is nothing less complex in aviation that I know
of than flying sailplanes.

If "cost, complexity and infrastructure" are major impediments to
soaring for some people I cannot sympathize with them at all.


Jack

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:20:36 UTC, Jack wrote:

: My club is very much a mutually supportive environment for my soaring
: activities, and there is nothing less complex in aviation that I know
: of than flying sailplanes.

Well, if I want to fly a sailplane in the UK, I have to

a) join a club

b) travel to the club one day on most flyable weekends for a year
until solo, then

c) arrive at the club by 9am or so for a reasonable place on the
flying list

d) depend on a tug pilot/winch driver, and ground crew to get me
airborne

and that's without the additional complications of retrieve crew if I
fly cross country. On the other hand, if I want to fly a paraglider in
the UK I have to

a) take a training course over a few weekends

b) climb up a convenient hll

c) jump off.

OK's a different experience, but it's still flying and if that's the
driving urge, not travelling huge numbers of miles or pole squattng in
wave, but just flying for the love of being off the ground then I am
quite sure that foot launched gliders offer significant reductions in
cost and time required.

: If "cost, complexity and infrastructure" are major impediments to
: soaring for some people I cannot sympathize with them at all.

And that, with all due respect, is the sort of attitude that explains
why gliding is in such trouble. I, on the contrary, have enormous
sympathy for those whose burning desire to fly is thwarted by The
System, and I'm all in favour of making things cheaper and simpler
whenever possible.

Ian

Ian Johnston wrote:

And that, with all due respect, is the sort of attitude that explains
why gliding is in such trouble. I, on the contrary, have enormous
sympathy for those whose burning desire to fly is thwarted by The
System, and I'm all in favour of making things cheaper and simpler
whenever possible.

Cheaper and simpler is good.

But Hang Gliding is not Para Gliding is not Soaring.

Going first class always costs a little more. Your argument that the
best experience should be available for a price and a degree of effort
commensurate with the most basic experience flies in the face of all
human history, Ian.

Those who whine or "whinge" (UK), about the cost of fast glass, and
yet find a 1-26 or a PW-5 beneath them, those who complain that the
air field is too far away but can't be bothered to move their tent,
and those who can't abide a bit of study and compliance sound a
similar note to yours. Fortunately, the rest of us are too busy flying
to be very concerned about the background noise.


Jack

----------
Dans l'article
, "Ian
Johnston" a écrit :

...
On the other hand, if I want to fly a paraglider in
the UK I have to

a) take a training course over a few weekends

b) climb up a convenient hll

c) jump off.
...`

You forgot:

a1) buy a paraglider;

c1) have somebody who takes me back from my landing place to
the place where I started and left my car, or make the way
with my feet.

a) may be also much longer than the drive to the next glider
field if you are in very flat land and the next convenient hill
is far away.

Perfect example of miscommunication! Neither wrong.
Bill said 'over hostile terrain,' and he said all
he could buy. Charlie said one can have as much enjoyment
in other circumstances. This wasn't even a discussion;
it was a drive-by.

At 19:18 19 November 2004, Charles Yeates wrote:
Depends on pocketbook, eh? Some can afford a PW-5
and some ASH25M
Enjoyment of each can be equal.

Bill Daniels wrote:

If I am to joust with the forces of nature over hostile
terrain, I want all
the performance I can buy. Mother Nature just won't
let you change her
rules.

Bill Daniels

Gee...that sure explains how a 1-26 won the OLC...with
a lot of very long flights.




At 23:06 19 November 2004, wrote:
One guy buys a PW5. Another guy buys a Libelle or
Std Cirrus, flys
circles around the PW5, and has $10K or so left over
to spend on booze
or hookers or whatever. Who has got more enjoyment
for his money?