Motorgliders (long)

In article ,
says...

4. This in not normally a *biggie*, but MG's that self-launch are allowed to
take off, right after the tow plane before their turn, has taken off. The rest
of us must wait 10 minutes for our tow plane to return. That's 10 minutes they
can use to get away on a day that's dying (overcast moving in, etc.)

It certainly isn't a biggie; I'd say it isn't even a "smallie". In 25+
contests, I've never seen a delay of even 5 minutes. Most of the time,
the towplane is already there, or shows up in less than a minute.

Here's how I analyze this:

1) The motorglider gets a timely launch - that's what is _supposed_ to
happen!

2) The gliders behind him are now delayed by about 9 minutes, since the
motorglider uses about 30 seconds waiting for the tow ahead to proceed
safely and there has to be a 30 second wait after him for the same
reason.

3) All the gliders behind the self-launcher must wait, including any
motorgliders.

4) This wait was caused by poor contest management, some unforeseen
problem with a tow plane, etc., but _not_ by the motorglider that got a
launch at the proper time.

Basically, JJ is saying it's "unfair" for the motorglider to be treated
"fairly" (get a launch when he was supposed to get a launch)! I think
the problem that needs correcting is the launch delay that results in
all those gliders that are being treated "unfairly" (not getting launch
when they are supposed to get one). JJ's "fairness" solution is to have
one _additional_ glider treated unfairly.

We could address this "problem" (insufficient gliders being treated
unfairly) by holding the self-launcher until a towplane shows up for the
glider behind him. I won't be suggesting this "solution" to Region 8
contest management.

Consider this: the more self-launchers in a contest, the less likely it
is to have a delay like this, and the quicker a class can be launched. I
think the quicker a class is launched, the fairer it is.

--
-------
Eric Greenwell USA

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
t...
In article ,
says...

Basically, JJ is saying it's "unfair" for the motorglider to be treated
"fairly" --
-------
Eric Greenwell USA


I suspect JJ "has it in" for motorgliders. Correct one of his "inequities"
and I bet he finds another. (No offense JJ - that's just the way I see it
from this thread.)

The only way to solve this is for a group of us MG pilots to catch that
sucker on the ramp, hold him down while the rest of us cut a hole in his
tail and shove a motor in there. Yeah, that's it! Oh, and while that's going
on, I'll fly high speed passes to make sure the purists don't mount a rescue
effort. (g)
--
bumper
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/24/2003

Yo John,
I had one of those suckers (Motor) in my ASH-25, took it out, couldn't stand
the smell of gas in the cockpit. Actually we couldn't make the 750 kg weight
with it in there and 2 of us in the cockpit. So there, but for the grace of a
few kg's, old JJ could have been a motorpuke.

The only way to solve this is for a group of us MG pilots to catch that
sucker on the ramp, hold him down while the rest of us cut a hole in his
tail and shove a motor in there. Yeah, that's it! Oh, and while that's going
on, I'll fly high speed passes to make sure the purists don't mount a rescue
effort.
JJ Sinclair

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message ...
You really got to read those rules, Tom.
They say, all sailplanes in EACH CLASS should be launched in 1 hour, not he
whole contest in 1 hour.

You motorglidres launch 1 minute after the guy in front of you, Us un-powered
slobs MUST wait for a Pawnee (Big ships) that took an average of 10 minutes to
come back from their last (big ship) delivery to the designated release area.
Do you know where that is? Anyway, How can you add in 10 motorgliders that
self-launched, into your total time between aero-tows? As usual, you MG's want
it both ways. Why don't you just fly a MG class? You can make up your own
rules, as you go along, Go anywhere, do anything, No need to worry about those
stupid FAI rules. You can be free-at -last, free-at-last.
JJ Sinclair

JJ,

I suspect that you've been in the CA sun a bit too long. I didn't add
in 10 MGs (there were about 3 of us that self launched), I SUBTRACTED
the self launching MGs from the total (25-3 = 22). I didn't fly in the
MG class because, simply, there wasn't one. If there were, I would
consider it strongly.

Your waiting for a particular tow plane was your choice. And,
probably, it was a prudent one. But IT WAS YOUR CHOICE. So don't throw
in your waiting time as a "disadvantange"; it was self imposed.

Just my mis-guided thoughts,

Tom

In article ,
says...
in article , Eric Greenwell at
wrote on 2003/09/28 17:54:

Sure, having a motor is a great training tool. But once you've learned
enough that you think you are competitive as a _glider_, not a powered ship,
then enter competitions for _gliders_ and leave the training wheels at home.

And then there is Ron Tabery, who flew his ASW 22 BLE, with the engine,
in the Open Class nationals this year. Even though he is a five time
member of the US Team, including the 2003 team, we look forward to the
day he learns how to do it, and discards his "training wheels".

And your point is what?

That even really experienced and competent pilots fly motorgliders in
contests. I was hoping the original poster would reconsider his concept
that a motor was equivalent to "training wheels".

Why put motor Gliders up against real Gliders in competition?

Because motor gliders are real gliders, at least according to the SSA,
the FAA, and the IGC. For example, my ASH 26 E meets the requirements of
the Sports class, the 18 Meter class, and the Open class.

Do we really
need yet another layer of rules just to make that possible?

The "layer" is already in the rules. In total, the portions related to
motorized sailplanes (the term used in the rules) is about one page of
the 44 making up the Regional rules. I assume it is about the same for
the Sports Class and the National rules, but haven't measured it. About
1/3 of this amount basically says "disable it, seal it, or use a flight
recorder with engine monitoring". The rest are mostly one line
parenthetical additions scattered throughout the rules. Take a look at
the rules - the motorized sailplane parts aren't the confusing or
difficult parts, and you can ignore them if you are flying a motorless
glider.

I hear that motor gliders are all the rage these days, so why not organize
Motor Glider only events and avoid adding to the complication?

The Auxiliary-powered Sailplane Association (www.motorglider.org) does
hold a motorglider Nationals every year, but for many pilots, it isn't
convenient to attend it, not everyone likes the handicapped format, many
of us enjoy racing with the friends we flew with before we owned a
motorglider, and doesn't it lead to a place on the US Team (like Ron
Tabery wants). There aren't enough motorglider pilots interested in
contests to justify having a separate contest in each region.
Motorgliders have been included in US competitions for many years, so it
appears the "complication" is quite manageable.


No wonder soaring is not attracting and holding the number of participants
that it should.

I am baffled by this statement. How does having motorized sailplanes
flying in our contests _reduce_ the number of participants?

--
-------
Eric Greenwell USA

Eric wrote

There aren't enough motorglider pilots interested in
contests to justify having a separate contest in each region.

There IS enough at Ephrata to have a regional MG class. Didn't you say you had
10? That's bigger than any other class in region 8, isn't it? :)

JJ Sinclair

"JJ Sinclair" wrote in message

"Jack" wrote in message

all manner of complaining snipped

Once the motor is tucked away, my 26e or S10-VT look every bit as pretty in
the sky as most other gliders. Hawks and eagles still fly close in thermals
and don't think of diving away as they do when I try to snuggle up close in
the Champ. It matters not what you say about "training wheels", MGs are
sailplanes too, just with the ability to go places and explore where an
engineless glider could never go without great difficulty. Not because I can
start the engine and save myself over unlandable terrain (most MG pilots
don't fly that way), but rather because I need no tow plane at remote
airports.

It is apparent that despite the cost, complexity and weight disadvantages of
motorgliders, most purchasers of new sailplanes feel the advantages are
compelling. And so the majority buy new ships with motors. Will there be a
day when engineless gliders are the minority? I must admit that I'm not
looking forward to that as I love most all gliders and power planes too!

Soaring in the US is shrinking. We can take the path espoused by some, "keep
'em separate", or we can we can take the more logical approach, embrace
change and do what's needed to stay as one. The old concept "In unity
there's strength" still applies. Fighting amongst ourselves is really dumb.
--
bumper - ZZ
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/25/2003

"In unity
there's strength" still applies. Fighting amongst ourselves is really dumb.

John,
I agree, completely.I only wish to make the rules we follow in competition,
fair to all who enter the contest. We need MG's in our sport, the only question
is, what's fair?
:)
JJ Sinclair

Soaring in the US is shrinking. We can take the path espoused by some, "keep
'em separate", or we can we can take the more logical approach, embrace
change and do what's needed to stay as one. The old concept "In unity
there's strength" still applies. Fighting amongst ourselves is really dumb.

Interesting that you have viewed these discussionas on RAS as fighting
amongst ourselves. I'm sure some of us have viewed it as a means of
trying to assure that those pilots voting in the SRA poll can have the
benefit of knowing both sides of the story. The motor glider pilots
wish to give the impression that the rule changes they would like are
quite reasonable and fair. On the other hand, some of the more
knowledgeable non-motorized pilots believe that granting further
concessions to motor gliders, through new rule changes, would unjustifiably
give the motor gliders an even bigger advantage in competiton.

Soarin

I still feel that your argument of a MG pilot heading off into the
boonies with no landing options is exactly on par with the non-MG
pilot doing the same -- stupid.

As for this proposal, it looks good on the outside, but there's a
major flaw regarding risk avoidance here.

What do I tell my insurance company after picking a fantastic looking
field, landing, and hitting a single hidden obstacle that damages the
glider? What do I tell my fellow pilots as their insurance premiums
go up?

The engine is a tool to be used during field selection to attempt to
avoid validating that selection.

A couple weeks ago, my engine battery was flat when I arrived at the
airport. So I took a tow and flew a nice XC, knowing that I had no
engine to back me up. The day got weak, and I got low. On two
occasions, I would have popped the engine due to my height over a
landing site. In both cases, at least a minute after I would have
been climbing away under power, I found that low save and got away.
So I would have gotten distance not speed points had this been a
contest flight.

If you really think there's a *problem* with the MG pilot having an
unfair advantage by flying over unlandable terrain, I have a solution.
Let's all agree that a contestant may ask the CD to examine the trace
of another competitor due to a percieved 'unsafe' action. A panel of
judges will play back the trace and the pilot will justify any
questionable actions. Procedures here could be similar to how we
currently lodge a formal protest.

This could even be turned into a learning experience with both parties
being required to give a 2 minute talk at the next day's plot's
meeting about the incident, no matter which way the outcome was. I'm
sure one or both parties may have learned something worth sharing with
all the contestants, and this would have as positive an effect as our
current 'safety talk'.

Tom Serkowski
ASH-26E (5Z)

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message ...

Under my proposal, the MG would face the exact SAME decision that un-powered
sailplane pilots must make. i.e, "If I start this shaky glide, I may be forced
to land in a field, or worse." He would be in the same situation that the rest
of us are facing, " I may try a shaky glide, but if I don't find something, I
MUST land to get my distance points. I can land at a designated airfield and
get distance points + 25 bonus points OR I can start this shaky glide, but if
it doesn't work, I will have to find a place to land. If I crank up the
Put-Put, I will get ZERO points for all my work today."
The penalty for engine use could be a percentage of the daily winners score,
say 30%, but I think it must be substantial, or taking a chance and pulling it
off, with the engine as a back-up will continue to be an attractive option in
the minds of some MG pilots.

JJ Sinclair