Motorgliders (long)

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message ...
Tom wrote
I entered that contest ONLY after being assured that I could
self-launch. If the contest organizers were not following the rules
that was not my fault.

Tom,
When you entered that contest, you signed the entry form which says, among
other things, "I have read and understand the rules".

JJ,
This, simply, doesn't make any sense.

You think you have a god given right to use your engine, any time, any place,
and NO set of rules is going to change that.

Actually I prefer to use my engine as little as possible. But I do
want to do self retrieves, especially since I had a knee operation. I
recognize that there are those few that want to drive motorgliders out
of contests, which is what your recommendations would do. The bottom
line is can regionals exist without the support of MGs. If so, then
you have a chance of getting your proposals thru (I think that is a
long shot because, frankly, your viewpoint is in the minority).
Otherwise you will jepardize some regional contests. Either way, I can
take it or leave it. Contest flying is not my reason for living, and
if they told me to stay home I wouldn't skip a beat. In fact, I could
go to the contest and fun fly and be perfectly happy.

Tom

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
.. .
In article e9Lab.525378$uu5.87796@sccrnsc04,
says...


These are good questions, and our idea of "fairness" continues to
evolve. The change to aerotow retrieves about 10-15 years ago is an
illustration of that.

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

Like I stated in my first post, I am just asking questions.

When I used the term "pure sailplane" contest I was using the term in the
"purest sense". The rules for Std, 15-M, & Open started as rules for FAI
class sailplanes. The FAI class definitions did not include engines. Motor
gliders were/are a separate class. But through evolution, definitions are
becoming confused.

As to the aerotow retrieve, I disagree with it. I think that we should
still have the rule that "all retrieves will be by trailer". Besides the
rest issue, sometimes aerotow retrieves are available only to the pilots
with extra spending funds. It is not fair to the pilots trying to compete
on a budget.

Duane

In article XT9bb.530734$YN5.354624@sccrnsc01,
says...

Like I stated in my first post, I am just asking questions.

And I'm pleased to see them. I hope my answers are useful.

When I used the term "pure sailplane" contest I was using the term in the
"purest sense". The rules for Std, 15-M, & Open started as rules for FAI
class sailplanes. The FAI class definitions did not include engines. Motor
gliders were/are a separate class.

They were a separate class, but no longer, at least internationally.
From the Sporting code:

7.6.2 Motor gliders
Motor gliders are integrated into the other championship classes
(except the World Class which is a one-design class) under
championship rules for motor gliders (see Annex A).

So, FAI class definitions now include motor gliders. As an example of
the integration, here is this from Appendix A 7.3 Launching
Procedures:

7.3.2 Motor Gliders Motor gliders may self launch or launch by aero
tow. The Organisers shall describe the launch procedures in the Local
Procedures.
a. If they self launch their MoP must be shut down in the designated
release area below the maximum release altitude.
b. If they require a second launch for a start, they must land prior
to taking the new launch, otherwise they will be scored to the
position at which they started their MoP.

These procedures are what I think we should be using in our contests.

The motorglider class was also removed from the International records
a few years ago, but is retained in the USA for state and national
records. There is a motorglider contest

But through evolution, definitions are
becoming confused.



--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

Life's not fair! Not all of us can afford a brand new ASW 22 BL but we're
still forced to fly in competitions that allow them to enter. Sailplane
racing is largely a cheque book sport. If you can't take the heat, stay out
of the kitchen! If nothing else the guy who pitches up in a brand new ship
has a psychological edge on you if your attitude is 'It's not fair' rather
than 'New ship? Hmmm I'm still going to thrash you'.

If in the next world championship the top 10 places were all taken by a new
aircraft that cost twice as much as it's nearest competitor then it would be
the one to own and the winners would go out and get one - *engine equipped
or not*

The amount of whinging going on in this thread about perceived advantages is
quite sickening. I suspect the real winners are ROTFLAO knowing that your
cockpit decisions are clouded by your distraction from the task at hand. Go
out, fly the ship, beat the competition!

Ian

"Duane Eisenbeiss" wrote in message
news:XT9bb.530734$YN5.354624@sccrnsc01...

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
.. .
In article e9Lab.525378$uu5.87796@sccrnsc04,
says...


These are good questions, and our idea of "fairness" continues to
evolve. The change to aerotow retrieves about 10-15 years ago is an
illustration of that.

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

Like I stated in my first post, I am just asking questions.

When I used the term "pure sailplane" contest I was using the term in the
"purest sense". The rules for Std, 15-M, & Open started as rules for FAI
class sailplanes. The FAI class definitions did not include engines.
Motor
gliders were/are a separate class. But through evolution, definitions are
becoming confused.

As to the aerotow retrieve, I disagree with it. I think that we should
still have the rule that "all retrieves will be by trailer". Besides the
rest issue, sometimes aerotow retrieves are available only to the pilots
with extra spending funds. It is not fair to the pilots trying to compete
on a budget.

Duane

Ian, Wrote
The amount of whinging going on in this thread about perceived advantages is
quite sickening.

Ian, Don't confuse *Whining* with those of us who wish to make racing ,*Fair*
for all who enter a contest and wish to play on a level field again.

I just had a good idea, lets start a list of RAS, SYNONYMS
1. Fair-------------------Whining
2. Safety---------Restricting my options
3. Enhance Safety--Dumbing up the rules
4. Task setters------Idiots


JJ Sinclair

How about this question, instead: "Did the presence of the engine
cause you to place higher or lower than you would've without it?" I
think I finished lower; JJ thinks I finished higher. My philosophy is
I've flown a lot of contests, my wife has made a lot of retrieves, and
we're both happier if I accept some competitive disadvantage and we
don't have to do that anymore.

It's not surprising that a motor glider pilot would want to claim that
of course he has a competative disadvantage.

This might be true for Motor glider pilots that religiously fly
conservatively.
But to claim that all motor glider pilots fly that way, and especially
in competition. Is a bunch of Bull!

A typical example would be two pilots on a ridge, in the next valley
are landable fields. Failing to find lift at the next ridge will mean
landing in those fields. Although quite safe it will will mean that
the non motorized glider pilot will be getting back in the middle of
the night. But the motor glider pilot will just start his motor and
be back for evening dinner.

If you think that doesn't give the motor glider an advantage, then
there are
alot of people selling swamp land in florida that would like to talk
to you.

It sure would be a breath of fresh air, for some of the motor glider
pilots to
actually publish some of the instances where having a motor gave them
a distinct advantage compared to if they had been a non motorized
gliders in xc.

Soarin

In the never-ending pursuit of fairness how about a
totally new approach to contests. Competition results
are determined by pilot skill, glider performance and
uncontrolled conditions (luck). Each factor has variables,
which can provide unfair advantages so they all need
to be standardized. The following format is therefore
proposed for consideration.

Contests would be conducted on simulators with a standard
aircraft computer model constructed from all existing
gliders so no one will have an advantage. For example
it may turn left like a 1-26, right like an LS-8, dive
like a Miller Tern, climb like a Czech made Discus
and land like a DG800 with the mast extended. The contestants
will be permitted to select an on-board engine but
it will only start ever 4th time and the mast will
extend at random during left turns.

Competitors will have 1 hour to practice, no more no
less and will have Novocain injected into their arms
so any genetic differences in eye/hand coordination
are nullified.

All competitors’ eyesight will be fitted with corrective
lenses & blinders to standardize sight and peripheral
vision. Masks will be worn to ensure even air consumption
during the event, which will prevent nose size from
giving an unfair edge and of course ear plugs.

I realized that even this format may have some inequities
but it’s a start!

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
.. .
In article XT9bb.530734$YN5.354624@sccrnsc01,
says...

They were a separate class, but no longer, at least internationally.
From the Sporting code:

I am aware of that. That is sort of what I meant when I stated
But through evolution, definitions are becoming confused.

I was just trying to say that that is where our current rules grew from.
From when the sailplane types were separate.
The rule are allwas evolving. That is why discussion is valuable. I do not
fly motorgliders, so I admit that I have a prejudicial viewpoint. But,
sometimes I know that I am right! (That is supposed to be a joke.)

Duane

"tango4" wrote in message
...
Life's not fair!

Do not confuse "observations" as "complaints".
We all know that life is not fair. By discussing inequalities we can make
decisions as to which inequalities we judge to be acceptable (for whatever
reasons) and which are not.

Duane

In article ,
says...
How about this question, instead: "Did the presence of the engine
cause you to place higher or lower than you would've without it?" I
think I finished lower; JJ thinks I finished higher. My philosophy is
I've flown a lot of contests, my wife has made a lot of retrieves, and
we're both happier if I accept some competitive disadvantage and we
don't have to do that anymore.

It's not surprising that a motor glider pilot would want to claim that
of course he has a competative disadvantage.

I flew unpowered gliders for 3000 hours before I began flying a
motorglider, which I've now flown for 1500 hours. I suggest this
experience gives me a good basis to understand the competitive
differences of the two types. To the best of my knowledge, the pilots
who think motorgliders have such big advantages have little or no
experience in them, and this why the claims of motorglider pilots are
often dismissed as self-serving.
--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)