All US Records are Now Motor Glider Records

On 3/13/2017 8:55 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 10:46:52 AM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Sort of hard to self launch if the motor is disabled.

Records should be about the soaring performance not the launch method.
Records should showcase the greatest possible achievement period, not the
greatest possible achievement from an airport with a towplane.

Does it make sense for a Silent or a Russia AC-5M to be competing in the
same record category as an EB-29?

World Records must first be certified as National Records. Under the old
system it was very possible to fly a world record performance in a
motorglider and not be able to claim it, thanks to our rules not aligning
with the FAI's.

You guys are missing the point.

Us pure glider guys don't give a darned what records are kept for motor
gliders. Knock yourselves out, have as many MG classes as you want. It's
a ***different game***. If you can't see that, please just take my word
for it (I am not alone). We want the sailplane records to remain sailplane
records, that is all.

best regards, Evan Ludeman / T8


"What Evan just explicitly said."

Dinosaurs still roam the earth, despite - if this isn't an early April 1 joke
or fake news - IGC's alleged stance. Failing to recognize their presence seems
a pretty good way of helping extinguish them.

Pretending there aren't fundamental (*significant* - e.g.
out-of-pocket/maintenance/etc.) cost(s) to the purchaser, and acting as if all
the other differences between unpowered dinosaurs, and powered and potentially
just-as-endangered soaring-capable dinosaurs - and the nuts holding their
sticks! - is: dismissive; arguably disrespectful to a goodly proportion of
people who make the IGC even possible; a bureaucratic way of "solving" a
self-generated "problem."

IGC needs to reconsider this issue, IMO.

Respectfully,
Bob W.

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 6:49:05 AM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
Winter isn't quite over yet, so...

The excerpt quoted below is from an email I received from my state record keeper (who owns two motor gliders). It is an extract from a communication to state record keepers from Bob Faris (who has been collecting records with his motor glider), US B&R Committee Chair.

Our IGC rep (who owns a motor glider -- anyone see a pattern here?) has so far ignored my email on the subject. Thanks a ton, Rick. For the moment, I'll presume that my information is legitimate, however distasteful it might be. 711, can you please go get your scorer a propeller beanie and humiliate him publicly?

Extract follows.

"The new record rules have been posted to the website. Even though the rules date is December 15, 2016, the effective date is March 5, 2017. Any record claimed for a flight prior to March 5 should be processed under the old rules. The record matrices have not been updated yet to reflect the rule changes and the link on those pages is to the old rules. I don't have an estimate of when the matrices will be able to be modified. There are two primary changes to the rules:


1. The term "Youth" has been changed to "Junior" to align with the Sporting Code.

2. The big change is the removal of the separate motorglider classes. These classes are no longer recognized by the Sporting Code. Claims made by a glider carrying a motor can now be made in any applicable class. Note that motorgliders must have a MoP recorder or seals that detect if the engine is used, unless the motor is disabled or removed. The FAI Form D is still required for those claims."

Extract ends.

Motor glider pilots have always had the option of flying for sailplane records. You simply had to disable the propulsion system to do it. Was this really so much to ask? After all, any motor glider pilot will tell you the motor is only about "convenience".

A pox upon the IGC. What a bunch of flaccid, low testosterone ******s. Screw Europe, we should go our own way.

Either that or donate heavily to my ASH-31 fund and I'll show you just how much difference it really makes. I'm prepared to be reasonable about this.

Evan Ludeman / T8

I note that people complaining about the advantage of motorgliders are typically people who have not owned one and flown it cross country a lot, and who perceive all advantages and no disadvantages. However, I will go with the sentiment. We also need:

A separate class for tasks flown truly solo (no ground crew).

A separate class for tasks flown with paper maps charts only, no GPS.

A separate class for tasks flown with electronic variometers vs. pellet variometers.

A separate class for tasks flown with no relief tube.

These are after all only expensive conveniences which some claim improve performance. Wing loading makes FAR more difference than any of the above (engine included), yet the record rules are silent on the matter. If a change it warranted, they should speak to this first, before the trivia is addressed.

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 12:06:13 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 6:49:05 AM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
Winter isn't quite over yet, so...

The excerpt quoted below is from an email I received from my state record keeper (who owns two motor gliders). It is an extract from a communication to state record keepers from Bob Faris (who has been collecting records with his motor glider), US B&R Committee Chair.

Our IGC rep (who owns a motor glider -- anyone see a pattern here?) has so far ignored my email on the subject. Thanks a ton, Rick. For the moment, I'll presume that my information is legitimate, however distasteful it might be. 711, can you please go get your scorer a propeller beanie and humiliate him publicly?

Extract follows.

"The new record rules have been posted to the website. Even though the rules date is December 15, 2016, the effective date is March 5, 2017. Any record claimed for a flight prior to March 5 should be processed under the old rules. The record matrices have not been updated yet to reflect the rule changes and the link on those pages is to the old rules. I don't have an estimate of when the matrices will be able to be modified. There are two primary changes to the rules:


1. The term "Youth" has been changed to "Junior" to align with the Sporting Code.

2. The big change is the removal of the separate motorglider classes. These classes are no longer recognized by the Sporting Code. Claims made by a glider carrying a motor can now be made in any applicable class. Note that motorgliders must have a MoP recorder or seals that detect if the engine is used, unless the motor is disabled or removed. The FAI Form D is still required for those claims."

Extract ends.

Motor glider pilots have always had the option of flying for sailplane records. You simply had to disable the propulsion system to do it. Was this really so much to ask? After all, any motor glider pilot will tell you the motor is only about "convenience".

A pox upon the IGC. What a bunch of flaccid, low testosterone ******s. Screw Europe, we should go our own way.

Either that or donate heavily to my ASH-31 fund and I'll show you just how much difference it really makes. I'm prepared to be reasonable about this.

Evan Ludeman / T8

I note that people complaining about the advantage of motorgliders are typically people who have not owned one and flown it cross country a lot, and who perceive all advantages and no disadvantages. However, I will go with the sentiment. We also need:

A separate class for tasks flown truly solo (no ground crew).

A separate class for tasks flown with paper maps charts only, no GPS.

A separate class for tasks flown with electronic variometers vs. pellet variometers.

A separate class for tasks flown with no relief tube.

These are after all only expensive conveniences which some claim improve performance. Wing loading makes FAR more difference than any of the above (engine included), yet the record rules are silent on the matter. If a change it warranted, they should speak to this first, before the trivia is addressed.

lol. Thanks for proving one of my points.

best,
Evan

A distinct disadvantage motor gliders have is the motor. What I mean is, you are flying a ballasted ship all the time. When the weather is strong, you do not need the engine, but it doesn't hurt, when the weather is weak, the motor glider pilot is on the ground sooner as flying with a wing loading somewhere between ½ and full ballast is not an advantage. Six of one half a dozen of the other each has their own advantages and disadvantages.. Having owned and flown gliders, Motor gliders, and sustainer gliders generally the pure glider has more flexibility of conditions and can fly longer into the dying day. Also, the motor glider even if they push safety, needs to stop soaring much higher and try to get the smoke pot lit. In Europe ⅔ of the new gliders sold have at least a sustainer so the momentum is heading toward more of the fleet to have an engine.

As for the records motor glider vs. pure glider records, I have no contributions in either direction.

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:14:50 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
A distinct disadvantage motor gliders have is the motor.

This is about rules, not any specific technology.

Could be Jets.

Could be FES.

Could be Electro-gravitics some day! (I'm from New Boston, lol: http://www.newbostonhistoricalsociety.com/gravity.html)

Think ahead a little.

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan

Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 11:51:24 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan

Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.

Have you somehow missed the fact that modern gliders climb *really* well at high wing loading? An ASG-29 can spot at ASW-20 (itself no slouch, as I try to demonstrate) about 2 # in wing loading and still climb at parity. This is the aspect of modern ships that tries to pry my wallet open.

Since you called me out on the numbers... My "1 psf" came from a guy known for fuzzy numbers (unless a dollar sign was involved). Fair enough, let's check.

So: https://www.alexander-schleicher.de/flugzeuge/asg-29/

For non-electric start version, empty mass according to Schleicher goes up 99 lbs on 113 square feet of wing (18m span) or 99 sq feet (15m). Numbers aren't published on the 29es page, but will obviously be a bit higher. Enough higher to get your caps lock key involved! With a parachute and land out kit, I'd be right around 9# at 15m(!) span. While higher than I would prefer for a survival day, that's a sweet spot wing loading for a moderate day... and what was this thread about, again?

Sorry, Error #404, alibi not found.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman / Dino-man

On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 11:51:24 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Monday, March 13, 2017 at 5:42:20 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:

But even with current technology, an ASG-29es is only about 1 lb / sq ft heavier than a dry ASG-29 and the difference in climb (if you can see it at all) just isn't going to be a factor on a record day.

best,
Evan

Your information on the ASG-29Es is just plain and simply WRONG! The ASG-29Es's I am familiar with are flying with min wing loading around 8.8 pounds.

I'm flying my '29 dry at 8.0 lb/sq ft and I'm not skinny. I don't think Evan is all that far off with his 1 lb ballpark estimate.
My '24E is 1.1 lb/sq ft heavier than my 24 was.
2 data points
UH

Well it's snowing out and I am bored - so I'll join the fray. Except, Evan has already said what I would say (except the part about "flaccid, low testosterone ******s"). I would have said something more direct.

Let's not conflate the convenience of self launching with the mental confidence of having an engine behind you when you are low or far away and pushing for the last turnpoint with doubts about getting back. They are very different impacts on your gliding. If there was a way to self launch, lock the engine, and throw the key out the vent window, then we would all be doing what Evan does well (and I try to do).

True - the self launch and sustainer people acquire problems that the pure glider pilots don't have (cost, weight, and need to give up earlier) and I have pulled a few sustainer gliders out of farm fields in my time (3 no starts and one taped over fuel tank vent hole) but Pete is right - it's a mental sport and the presence of an engine of any type impacts your mindset. Especially if you fly like Evan and push to use 100% of the day.

But Evan, look on the bright side - The pure gliders are getting cheaper since the ******s don't want them.

ROY (fellow pterosaur)

On Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 7:03:45 AM UTC-7, Roy B. wrote:
Well it's snowing out and I am bored - so I'll join the fray. Except, Evan has already said what I would say (except the part about "flaccid, low testosterone ******s"). I would have said something more direct.

Let's not conflate the convenience of self launching with the mental confidence of having an engine behind you when you are low or far away and pushing for the last turnpoint with doubts about getting back. They are very different impacts on your gliding. If there was a way to self launch, lock the engine, and throw the key out the vent window, then we would all be doing what Evan does well (and I try to do).

True - the self launch and sustainer people acquire problems that the pure glider pilots don't have (cost, weight, and need to give up earlier) and I have pulled a few sustainer gliders out of farm fields in my time (3 no starts and one taped over fuel tank vent hole) but Pete is right - it's a mental sport and the presence of an engine of any type impacts your mindset. Especially if you fly like Evan and push to use 100% of the day.

But Evan, look on the bright side - The pure gliders are getting cheaper since the ******s don't want them.

ROY (fellow pterosaur)

Your mental problem is one of your own making. It can be shown that paying someone to chase you for the retrieve is cheaper than purchasing an engine (and yes, I fully understand capital and operating costs, and also that they are interchangeable in this context). Your mental problem is you have chosen not to spend the money to get the best performance out of the day. As in most speed sports, speed is largely a matter of money - how fast can you afford to go?

An engine has drawbacks compared to the traditional crew: it won't bring you are beer after landing and help you take your glider apart, and sex with it is unfulfilling.

I don't know all of you personally, but the local pilots with the same views universally have never owned and flown a motorglider cross country. Nearly all motorglider pilots have owned and flown cross country engineless gliders. So 'fess up - all of you who think there is a performance advantage in having a motor, have you owned and extensively flown cross country in a motorglider? No? Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.....

The idea of flying your FES glider into the ground and then firing it up is simply Russian Roulette. I quote the Schleicher Operation manual: "One must always be prepared for the possibility that the engine will not provide the hoped for propulsion...."