Future Club Training Gliders

On Nov 6, 4:35*pm, Bob Whelan wrote:


OK, I'm convinced. Having as many as possible intro gliders into soaring is
better than having fewer...regardless of WHAT the intro gliders look like!


Just as a side note, the Greater Boston Soaring Club (GBSC) will be
putting our three L-23s and our Puchacz to bed for the season in a
couple of weeks, but the club's 2-33 will be flown all winter for
instructional flights whenever the weekend weather allows. Our
students may fly the Blaniks all Summer, but from November to March
the 2-33 is the only 2-place glider flying in New England. If it broke
tomorrow, we'd be scrambling to find another one the day after that.
Of course we also put our single-place L-33, B-4, and 1-34 gliders in
storage and fly our 1-26 all winter, but god forbid we open THAT can
of worms!

Scott

Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't
seem valid to me, but that's just me.

This isn't about us - we became glider pilots in spite of difficulties
and discouragements. For us, It really didn't matter much what
trainer was used because we really, really wanted to fly. We need to
look less at why we became glider pilots and more at why vast numbers
DIDN'T become glider pilots. I'd guess that for every one of us there
are many more who just walked away. Those missing pilots are why the
number of glider pilots are decreasing.

To use skiing as an example again, that sport existed for decades with
hard-core enthusiasts using wooden ski's and rope tows but didn't make
the big time until equipment and facilities were drastically
improved. Clever marketers who concentrated on improving the
"customer experience" made it a multi-billion dollar sport. Soaring
has the same potential.

This discussion should be about the thousands, perhaps tens of
thousands, who didn't become glider pilots because they were put off
by unattractive gliders, trashy operations etc...

Yesterday I gave 6 young people their first rides in an ASK-21 - they
all wanted more. However, at lunch break, I couldn't help noticing
the picnic table was 6 feet from an overflowing garbage can. We can
do better.

On Nov 7, 10:13*am, bildan wrote:
Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't
seem valid to me, but that's just me.
This discussion should be about the thousands, perhaps tens of
thousands, who didn't become glider pilots because they were put off
by unattractive gliders, trashy operations etc...

Yesterday I gave 6 young people their first rides in an ASK-21 - they
all wanted more. *However, at lunch break, I couldn't help noticing
the picnic table was 6 feet from an overflowing garbage can. *We can
do better.

There is a tendency around soaring to mistake what we want, and what
we think people should want, with what they actually do want.
The world has changed. People have more money, less time, and higher
expectations. And many more choices. We can tell them they should want
something different, but they vote with their feet.

The real question should be, what about self launch. My ideal trainer
is the ASK21 with motor. It's much more economical on time, the thing
we are all short of. Alas our airport is too short.

John Cochrane

On Nov 7, 10:42*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:13*am, bildan wrote:

Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't
seem valid to me, but that's just me.
This discussion should be about the thousands, perhaps tens of
thousands, who didn't become glider pilots because they were put off
by unattractive gliders, trashy operations etc...

Yesterday I gave 6 young people their first rides in an ASK-21 - they
all wanted more. *However, at lunch break, I couldn't help noticing
the picnic table was 6 feet from an overflowing garbage can. *We can
do better.

There is a tendency around soaring to mistake what we want, and what
we think people should want, with what they actually do want.
The world has changed. People have more money, less time, and higher
expectations. And many more choices. We can tell them they should want
something different, but they vote with their feet.

The real question should be, what about self launch. My ideal trainer
is the ASK21 with motor. It's much more economical on time, the thing
we are all short of. Alas our airport is too short.

John Cochrane

Agreed, John.

Aero tow corresponds to skiing's rope tow - it's slow and requires
skill. Self launch corresponds to helicopter skiing - fast, exclusive
and expensive. For those of us with less money, more time and room,
there's winch launch which might be said as corresponding to a chair
lift.

To this I would add instructor supervised simulator training. This is
a proven adjunct to pilot training which can be done anywhere, anytime
with no weather or equipment restrictions. With the loss of 50% of
our training fleet due to the L-13 grounding, I'd think this would be
an attractive option for a lot of people. With a data projector
(beamer) it lends itself to classroom sessions with a number of
student pilots in attendance. The use of simulators can
significantly reduce the demands on scarce training gliders.

Bill Daniels

On 11/7/2010 8:06 AM, Scott Lamont wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:35 pm, Bob wrote:


Just as a side note, the Greater Boston Soaring Club (GBSC) will be
putting our three L-23s and our Puchacz to bed for the season in a
couple of weeks, but the club's 2-33 will be flown all winter for
instructional flights whenever the weekend weather allows. Our
students may fly the Blaniks all Summer, but from November to March
the 2-33 is the only 2-place glider flying in New England.

Why don't you fly the Blaniks in the Winter?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)

On Nov 7, 9:42*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:13*am, bildan wrote:

Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't
seem valid to me, but that's just me.
This discussion should be about the thousands, perhaps tens of
thousands, who didn't become glider pilots because they were put off
by unattractive gliders, trashy operations etc...

Yesterday I gave 6 young people their first rides in an ASK-21 - they
all wanted more. *However, at lunch break, I couldn't help noticing
the picnic table was 6 feet from an overflowing garbage can. *We can
do better.

There is a tendency around soaring to mistake what we want, and what
we think people should want, with what they actually do want.
The world has changed. People have more money, less time, and higher
expectations. And many more choices. We can tell them they should want
something different, but they vote with their feet.

The real question should be, what about self launch. My ideal trainer
is the ASK21 with motor. It's much more economical on time, the thing
we are all short of. Alas our airport is too short.

John Cochrane

I think that as an ab-initio trainer (up until you work on XC) the
ASK-21 is hard to beat, like all round really hard to beat. But as an
an owner of a beautiful ASH-26E self-launch glider I'd be careful
about thinking of an ASK-21Mi as a club/FBO instructional glider. And
I'm not sure exactly is meant by using a self-launch glider for
instruction... For primary instruction I'm very dubious and for XC/
advanced stuff you really want something with more legs than the
ASK-21 (and remember the ASK-21Mi is effectively fully ballasted with
water you cannot dump), and even then I think new XC pilots are better
off in a conventional glider (and landing out a few times...).

The motors in typical retracting mast motoglider are just not anywhere
near the same durability as you'll find in a typical C150 or Pawnee or
other towplane. Many of these gliders with engines with 100 hours on
them would be considered "high time". Tasking these specialized
gliders and using them for high-duty trainers would be the last thing
I would want to do for many reasons. A taste....

- Slight cross winds especially quartering tailwinds will give you
handling problem that you'd never expedience with a tow plane to
follow.

- You'll need an intercom for safe communications and reducing the
potential of hearing damage - another hassle to deal with.

- Mast retraction and engine cooldown proceedures are additional
workload for many motorgliders and will cramp some high cycle training
flights.

- I'd also have concerns about climb performance of a two-seater with
two "American weight" folks on board especially at high density
altitudes.

- For folks at the higher end of that "American normal" weight you are
going to run up against W&B limits.

- Incorrect cooldown, or forgetting to check the oil (or forgetting to
secure the oil cap after that check) or forgetting to adding the oil
premix (for the two stroke engines) to the fuel and you might be
answering the other question about what a new engine or rebuild costs
(want a guess... $10k-$30k depending on type and how much damage and
what ancillary systems also need replacing). Clubs/FBOS have to
maintain towplanes and they are more complex than conventional gliders
but they get exposed a lot less to students and others making
mistakes.

- Motorgliders also tend to be maintenance fussy, require some
detailed knowledge, good access to other experienced owners and the
factory and occasionally special tools, engine test/run stands etc.
There are very few service centers in the USA who can work on typical
motorgliders (that I'd trust) -- and often engine rebuilds are needed
to/best done at the engine factory.

---

None of this is specific to Schleicher - other self launchers,
especially retracting mast ones, will have may similar and likely
other operations issues -- including electrics, jets etc. A good old
towplane with relatively understandable ownership costs and utility
would be my first choice. I'd also not be rushing to do primary glider
training in a touring motorglider (unless that pilot was dead set on
buying and flying that type. Us of winches to lower costs are a
separate topic. Oh and add in commercial operators need a certified
two seat motorglider which for them will thin the field a bit. Current
insurance under the SSA plan for a private motorglider owner is pretty
easy to get but as a policy owner who will be affected by rising
prices, I really hope underwriters would look at what I expect are
increased risks involved in doing primary glider instruction
especially in a retracting mast glider.

The ASK-21Mi on the other hand should be an excellent trainer platform
(with dual seat engine controls) for self launch endorsements, self-
launch proficiency training etc. But that is a pretty small market.
Its a worry that many of us who needed self-launch endorsements end up
doing them in touring motorgliders which have significant different
operation, handling and saftey issues.

Now I'm sure there will be some folks out there that we'll hear from
here that are doing instruction in an ASK-21Mi or similar today, I
could see it might sense more for very small clubs with memberships
with high equity ownership and high amounts of supervision, especially
if members want to move up to other motorgliders but in general I
think a bad idea.

Darryl

On Nov 7, 1:30*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
A good old
towplane with relatively understandable ownership costs and utility
would be my first choice.

I wouldn't strongly disagree but there are significantly less than 200
- perhaps as few as 160 - tow planes in the US and little chance of
increasing that number in the short term. If the sport were to
suddenly expand, we may find ourselves waiting a long time for tows.
The last 1800' tow I bought from a commercial operator cost $55 which
is absolutely reducing flying.

Moving training to winches makes sense especially since the ASK-21 is
arguably the worlds best winch glider. (The 2-33 is arguably the
worst.)

On Nov 7, 1:26*pm, bildan wrote:
On Nov 7, 1:30*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:

A good old
towplane with relatively understandable ownership costs and utility
would be my first choice.

I wouldn't strongly disagree but there are significantly less than 200
- perhaps as few as 160 - tow planes in the US and little chance of
increasing that number in the short term. *If the sport were to
suddenly expand, we may find ourselves waiting a long time for tows.
The last 1800' tow I bought from a commercial operator cost $55 which
is absolutely reducing flying.

Moving training to winches makes sense especially since the ASK-21 is
arguably the worlds best winch glider. *(The 2-33 is arguably the
worst.)

I agree, but by "first choice" meant within the current ecosystem.
Going to self launch motorgliders for training to me is going the
reverse direction than needed. Not that I don't think a newish
training fleet is important - I absolutely believe (and have seen
first hand) people with alternate things bidding for their time, and
with money in their pocket, are turned off but older training gliders.
I suspect soaring in the USA needs to make a larger systemic move
towards winch launching to lower costs and I'm not sure how that
happens. The largest issue I see is suitability of launch sites and
that often correlates with ownership or exclusive access to suitably
sized areas of land close to population centers. Several of my
favorite glider locations you also would not get far XC on winch
launches, coastal effects and valley inversions often dictate long
tows, so they are just sited poorly for winch use even if it was
otherwise possible.

While there are some concerns about towplane supply you should be able
to buy a quite serviceable starting at ~2x the price of a full rebuild
on a modern motorglider engine :-)


Darryl

How are the Scheibe touring motorgliders as basic trainers (not the ones
with the smaller engines)? Back around 2000, when the dollar was counted
as real money, I seriously considered buying an SF-25 out of Europe.
They were many being sold dirt cheap. Of course, they pretty much all
needed recovering and/or engine rebuilds.

On 11/7/2010 2:15 PM, bildan wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:42 am, John
wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:13 am, wrote:

Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't
seem valid to me, but that's just me.
This discussion should be about the thousands, perhaps tens of
thousands, who didn't become glider pilots because they were put off
by unattractive gliders, trashy operations etc...

Yesterday I gave 6 young people their first rides in an ASK-21 - they
all wanted more. However, at lunch break, I couldn't help noticing
the picnic table was 6 feet from an overflowing garbage can. We can
do better.

There is a tendency around soaring to mistake what we want, and what
we think people should want, with what they actually do want.
The world has changed. People have more money, less time, and higher
expectations. And many more choices. We can tell them they should want
something different, but they vote with their feet.

The real question should be, what about self launch. My ideal trainer
is the ASK21 with motor. It's much more economical on time, the thing
we are all short of. Alas our airport is too short.

John Cochrane

Agreed, John.

Aero tow corresponds to skiing's rope tow - it's slow and requires
skill. Self launch corresponds to helicopter skiing - fast, exclusive
and expensive. For those of us with less money, more time and room,
there's winch launch which might be said as corresponding to a chair
lift.

To this I would add instructor supervised simulator training. This is
a proven adjunct to pilot training which can be done anywhere, anytime
with no weather or equipment restrictions. With the loss of 50% of
our training fleet due to the L-13 grounding, I'd think this would be
an attractive option for a lot of people. With a data projector
(beamer) it lends itself to classroom sessions with a number of
student pilots in attendance. The use of simulators can
significantly reduce the demands on scarce training gliders.

Bill Daniels

If you look at a Motorglider like the Phoenix, you can also keep it in a
regular T-Hanger at your local urban airport. Now you don't have to
drive 45 miles to get to a glider port. That's another huge plus for
both established glider pilots as well as new prospects.

--
Mike Schumann