Best Overall Motorglider available today?

At 17:01 03 October 2020, kinsell wrote:
On 10/3/20 7:07 AM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Paul T wrote on 10/3/2020 12:56 AM:
Is there a rec.aviation.mortorglider for all these boys that don't fly
sailplanes???

You are asking about what we call "touring motorgliders". The best
place
to start is the Touring Motorglider Association forums:

https://www.motorgliders.org


I believe he was saying that motorgliders aren't really sailplanes and
would like discussions on such to move elsewhere.

Maybe if he doesn't want to read about motorgliders, he could avoid
clicking on threads mentioning motorgliders?


Such a cynic - but no, anything with an engine in it is not a sailplane -
its a
different game - maybe better, maybe worse, but definitely different - but

personally I'd have a JS2/5 if I win the lottery.

Paul T wrote on 10/3/2020 2:43 PM:
At 17:01 03 October 2020, kinsell wrote:
On 10/3/20 7:07 AM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Paul T wrote on 10/3/2020 12:56 AM:
Is there a rec.aviation.mortorglider for all these boys that don't fly
sailplanes???

You are asking about what we call "touring motorgliders". The best
place
to start is the Touring Motorglider Association forums:

https://www.motorgliders.org


I believe he was saying that motorgliders aren't really sailplanes and
would like discussions on such to move elsewhere.

Maybe if he doesn't want to read about motorgliders, he could avoid
clicking on threads mentioning motorgliders?


Such a cynic - but no, anything with an engine in it is not a sailplane -
its a
different game - maybe better, maybe worse, but definitely different - but

personally I'd have a JS2/5 if I win the lottery.

Equipment does change the game: 1-26 vs Nimbus 4 is a different game.

The area also changes the game: Appalachian ridges vs Argentina wave is a
different game.

The launch availability changes the game: Daily access to a tow vs weekend only is
a different game.

Retrieve ease changes the game: a very dedicated (or paid) crew vs the unassisted
pilot is a different game.

My point: The common factor is we are all flying sailplanes, and there are many
factors affecting the "game". To argue a Nimbus 4 is a sailplane and a Nimbus 4M
isn't ignores what happens between the start and finish of the soaring.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to em"l me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:33:33 AM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:00:01 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
Dave, there was no good reason to do it. The E engine was running fine, had 45 hours on it, and it still running today in another glider. A number of 26E owners over the years have expressed interest in this conversion. We had the engine and were curious about AS claim that this was not a trivial endeavor. Also, I was going to need to replace the Technoflug prop at some point, and the Mi engine already had that prop. It turned into a bit more work than we (Rex and I) had imagined - perhaps AS was right - but the result is a nice upgrade. The alternative way to get an Mi engine is to spend the $1/4M dollar bill for a 31.

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 5:41:57 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
While the Mi engine is better, the E engine is certainly adequate
Thanks Jfitch for showing us your beautiful 26mi at the convention.
Can you remind us why you decided to do the conversion from original engine?

Thanks,
Best Regards, Dave
I think if you factored in the cost of the engine and the cost of the labor you would be better off selling your 26e and buying a new 31Mi. You definitely can't get your money back when you sell your converted 26Mi (which really doesn't exist as it is not an AS model).

Tom
The cost of the parts wasn't that high and the labor was free. Certainly far less than the $100K or so difference. I considered a 31 but prefer the one piece wings, leaving the only advantage (for me) of the 31 the higher wing loading on rare occasions when I could be bothered with water. Nevertheless, it isn't wise to look too closely at the cost of soaring, it is phenomenally expensive at this level. Everyone makes their own decisions, and I made mine with full knowledge.

Regarding auxiliary motors, this prejudice will die away eventually. Sailboats with auxiliaries are now universal and are thought of as sailboats, but it took about 50 years to get there. With motorgliders currently outselling non-engined gliders by about 5:1, it may not take that long.

Obviously it wasn't trivial, but look at what they did with the '25.
Sold as a straight glider, a sustainer with a Solo engine, and a
self-launch with a carbureted Wankel, an injected Wankel, and a twin
jet. So much re-engineering went into that ship, but not the '26.




On 10/3/20 9:59 AM, jfitch wrote:
Dave, there was no good reason to do it. The E engine was running fine, had 45 hours on it, and it still running today in another glider. A number of 26E owners over the years have expressed interest in this conversion. We had the engine and were curious about AS claim that this was not a trivial endeavor. Also, I was going to need to replace the Technoflug prop at some point, and the Mi engine already had that prop. It turned into a bit more work than we (Rex and I) had imagined - perhaps AS was right - but the result is a nice upgrade. The alternative way to get an Mi engine is to spend the $1/4M dollar bill for a 31.

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 5:41:57 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
While the Mi engine is better, the E engine is certainly adequate
Thanks Jfitch for showing us your beautiful 26mi at the convention.
Can you remind us why you decided to do the conversion from original engine?

Thanks,
Best Regards, Dave

I don't believe the '25 was ever sold as a twin jet, but there was one converted by the owner. (in Australia, I believe)

On Sunday, October 4, 2020 at 10:01:09 PM UTC+2, wrote:
I don't believe the '25 was ever sold as a twin jet, but there was one converted by the owner. (in Australia, I believe)
Which subsequently ended in tragedy

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...r/ao-2018-009/

The 26 was re-engineered into the 31. The fuselage is the same, the Mi motor drops in and bolts up to the 26 fuselage without any structural or mechanical changes at all. Only the wiring and fuel system has to be upgraded to match the induction system. To fit an engine into the originally engineless 25 was, I'm sure, a much larger job. I don't think converting an engineless 25 into a 25Mi is practical, without purchasing a new fuselage. I believe it has been tried on a 22, the cost is prohibitive.

On Sunday, October 4, 2020 at 8:39:22 AM UTC-7, kinsell wrote:
Obviously it wasn't trivial, but look at what they did with the '25.
Sold as a straight glider, a sustainer with a Solo engine, and a
self-launch with a carbureted Wankel, an injected Wankel, and a twin
jet. So much re-engineering went into that ship, but not the '26.
On 10/3/20 9:59 AM, jfitch wrote:
Dave, there was no good reason to do it. The E engine was running fine, had 45 hours on it, and it still running today in another glider. A number of 26E owners over the years have expressed interest in this conversion. We had the engine and were curious about AS claim that this was not a trivial endeavor. Also, I was going to need to replace the Technoflug prop at some point, and the Mi engine already had that prop. It turned into a bit more work than we (Rex and I) had imagined - perhaps AS was right - but the result is a nice upgrade. The alternative way to get an Mi engine is to spend the $1/4M dollar bill for a 31.

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 5:41:57 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
While the Mi engine is better, the E engine is certainly adequate
Thanks Jfitch for showing us your beautiful 26mi at the convention.
Can you remind us why you decided to do the conversion from original engine?

Thanks,
Best Regards, Dave

On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 6:58:32 PM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:33:33 AM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:00:01 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
Dave, there was no good reason to do it. The E engine was running fine, had 45 hours on it, and it still running today in another glider. A number of 26E owners over the years have expressed interest in this conversion. We had the engine and were curious about AS claim that this was not a trivial endeavor. Also, I was going to need to replace the Technoflug prop at some point, and the Mi engine already had that prop. It turned into a bit more work than we (Rex and I) had imagined - perhaps AS was right - but the result is a nice upgrade. The alternative way to get an Mi engine is to spend the $1/4M dollar bill for a 31.

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 5:41:57 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
While the Mi engine is better, the E engine is certainly adequate
Thanks Jfitch for showing us your beautiful 26mi at the convention.
Can you remind us why you decided to do the conversion from original engine?

Thanks,
Best Regards, Dave
I think if you factored in the cost of the engine and the cost of the labor you would be better off selling your 26e and buying a new 31Mi. You definitely can't get your money back when you sell your converted 26Mi (which really doesn't exist as it is not an AS model).

Tom
The cost of the parts wasn't that high and the labor was free. Certainly far less than the $100K or so difference. I considered a 31 but prefer the one piece wings, leaving the only advantage (for me) of the 31 the higher wing loading on rare occasions when I could be bothered with water. Nevertheless, it isn't wise to look too closely at the cost of soaring, it is phenomenally expensive at this level. Everyone makes their own decisions, and I made mine with full knowledge.

Regarding auxiliary motors, this prejudice will die away eventually. Sailboats with auxiliaries are now universal and are thought of as sailboats, but it took about 50 years to get there. With motorgliders currently outselling non-engined gliders by about 5:1, it may not take that long.

The telling difference for was when I did a 30nm glide at Ely in my 26e with an ASG29; I ended up 3,000ft below him! I was down below ridge height scratching and he easily connected with a thermal and was gone. The better glide of the 31 is really substantial as is the engine performance at high-density altitudes.

Valuing your labor at zero doesn't make sense as you can always work at your profession and pay someone else to do the work. If you make less than what it will cost in labor, then do it yourself, but set the labor cost at your deferred labor rate. Even worse, when it is time to sell potential buyers will consider it to be a 26e, not a 26Mi (which doesn't exist).

I've stopped worrying about the obscene cost of these toys a long time ago. If it bothered me, I could just play golf at zero additional cost (I have an annual membership at the course I play whether I fly or not).

Tom

On Sunday, October 4, 2020 at 8:04:18 PM UTC-4, 2G wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 6:58:32 PM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:33:33 AM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 9:00:01 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
Dave, there was no good reason to do it. The E engine was running fine, had 45 hours on it, and it still running today in another glider. A number of 26E owners over the years have expressed interest in this conversion. We had the engine and were curious about AS claim that this was not a trivial endeavor. Also, I was going to need to replace the Technoflug prop at some point, and the Mi engine already had that prop. It turned into a bit more work than we (Rex and I) had imagined - perhaps AS was right - but the result is a nice upgrade. The alternative way to get an Mi engine is to spend the $1/4M dollar bill for a 31.

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 5:41:57 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
While the Mi engine is better, the E engine is certainly adequate
Thanks Jfitch for showing us your beautiful 26mi at the convention.
Can you remind us why you decided to do the conversion from original engine?

Thanks,
Best Regards, Dave
I think if you factored in the cost of the engine and the cost of the labor you would be better off selling your 26e and buying a new 31Mi. You definitely can't get your money back when you sell your converted 26Mi (which really doesn't exist as it is not an AS model).

Tom
The cost of the parts wasn't that high and the labor was free. Certainly far less than the $100K or so difference. I considered a 31 but prefer the one piece wings, leaving the only advantage (for me) of the 31 the higher wing loading on rare occasions when I could be bothered with water. Nevertheless, it isn't wise to look too closely at the cost of soaring, it is phenomenally expensive at this level. Everyone makes their own decisions, and I made mine with full knowledge.

Regarding auxiliary motors, this prejudice will die away eventually. Sailboats with auxiliaries are now universal and are thought of as sailboats, but it took about 50 years to get there. With motorgliders currently outselling non-engined gliders by about 5:1, it may not take that long.
The telling difference for was when I did a 30nm glide at Ely in my 26e with an ASG29; I ended up 3,000ft below him! I was down below ridge height scratching and he easily connected with a thermal and was gone. The better glide of the 31 is really substantial as is the engine performance at high-density altitudes.

Valuing your labor at zero doesn't make sense as you can always work at your profession and pay someone else to do the work. If you make less than what it will cost in labor, then do it yourself, but set the labor cost at your deferred labor rate. Even worse, when it is time to sell potential buyers will consider it to be a 26e, not a 26Mi (which doesn't exist).

I've stopped worrying about the obscene cost of these toys a long time ago. If it bothered me, I could just play golf at zero additional cost (I have an annual membership at the course I play whether I fly or not).

Tom
Tom,
Energy line is not big highway.
Your friend read a line a bit better.
We all trying the best, but we sometimes miss.
Its not a glider !
Ryszard

2G wrote on 10/4/2020 5:04 PM:
ling non-engined gliders by about 5:1, it may not take that long.

The telling difference for was when I did a 30nm glide at Ely in my 26e with an ASG29; I ended up 3,000ft below him! I was down below ridge height scratching and he easily connected with a thermal and was gone. The better glide of the 31 is really substantial as is the engine performance at high-density altitudes.

If he was getting 50:1, that suggests you were only getting 27:1. What speed were
you flying? What were the respective wing loadings? Did you follow closely behind?
Did you have a lot of bugs?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1