If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Greenblatt wrote in message ...
At the risk of encouraging him, Lennie's recent post to this thread is the most logical and reasoned of any of his (and most everyone else's) that I have read recently. Thanks Leninie, good points. Welcome. But I still see people blaming lack of instructors or the 2-33 as core of the problem. I don't really care, until common sense and a change in the higher mucky-mucks attitude happen, it'll continue to decline. FInancially block most of the middle class, which is also declining, and all you're going to see is called "death spiral." For those that can afford the "hi price glass", it's fine, but there's nothing for the average guy. Even if there was, it would get so much badmouth from the eggspurts that it would never sell enough to be successful. IT's what happens when the competitors take control of the entire activity. Top of the line, or nothing. Nothing is more often the better choice. Ignoring the eggspurts is always better. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
At the risk of encouraging him, Lennie's recent post to this thread is the
most logical and reasoned of any of his (and most everyone else's) that I have read recently. Thanks Leninie, good points. I agree with you, Bob. I had almost replied in kind, but thought I might have been under the influence (I wasnt'). What many people don't get is the concept of fun in this sport. Pretty sad. But I still see people blaming lack of instructor Not in my club...the instruction committee kicks them out all the time. Jim Vincent CFIG N483SZ illspam |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Lennie the Lurker wrote:
At the risk of encouraging him, Lennie's recent post to this thread is the most logical and reasoned of any of his (and most everyone else's) that I have read recently. Thanks Leninie, good points. Welcome. But I still see people blaming lack of instructors or the 2-33 as core of the problem. I don't really care, until common sense and a change in the higher mucky-mucks attitude happen, it'll continue to decline. FInancially block most of the middle class, which is also declining, and all you're going to see is called "death spiral." For those that can afford the "hi price glass", it's fine, but there's nothing for the average guy. Even if there was, it would get so much badmouth from the eggspurts that it would never sell enough to be successful. IT's what happens when the competitors take control of the entire activity. Top of the line, or nothing. Nothing is more often the better choice. Ignoring the eggspurts is always better. Man, I had a helluva great flight in that $10,000 Blanik L-13 two seater recently. And personally I prefer flying with two instead of one anyway. The L-13 seems like the closest thing the sport has to a glider for the "average guy." I taped the things tail up lovingly, and gave it an average wash, and had a blast with a fellow licensed glider pilot. We flew slow, we flew fast, we practiced retracting gear, we went to 9000 ft, we had a great view, the cockpit was big, and it was $37 for the two of us. I thought "why don't I get other people to come with me?" and then the reality set in. It really would have been too much for their tummies. I mean it. Really that was it. I've taken maybe 100 people on first flights, probably half are close friends and relatives, and none of them would have enjoyed the 3 hour flight, because of nothing other than the bumps and circling. Does this explain declining numbers? No. But I'd like to point out that getting folks into soaring is more than just getting them a ride in a glider... -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
ISoar wrote:
.... that may mean putting the financial survival of the firm on the line. Maybe it will happen when a company has to choose between inovatation of bankruptcy. Yes. Very much like Boeing when it "bet the farm" to develop the 747. Tony V. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Tony Verhulst" wrote in message ... ISoar wrote: .... that may mean putting the financial survival of the firm on the line. Maybe it will happen when a company has to choose between inovatation of bankruptcy. Yes. Very much like Boeing when it "bet the farm" to develop the 747. Tony V. IIRC, Boeing bet the farm on the B-17 (for which they received the German swept wing research post-WWII which was immediately applied to the B-47), the 707 (for which they eventually sacrificed winning military contracts for decades), and the 727 (which really brought new innovations to aircraft computer design and construction methods, not to mention lower service and turnaround costs and a 40-year service life). The 747 was the first new innovative airframe that Boeing didn't bet the farm on. What was really incredible were the cottage industries that popped up as fourth level subcontractors in the back of plumbing, electrical, and machine shops around the area. When I was young, we raised funds for our church group by selling 'snack' trays which were the window punch outs from the 707 lines. They already had the interior vinyl attached and were fairly attractive, plus the process created a raised lip. For many years, Boeing had one of the most fantastic surplus yards going. It's still pretty good, but not like it was. Frank Whiteley |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Lennie the Lurker wrote:
Almost every sailplane made today is made with the competitor in mind, and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. There is some truth to this claim, but it's more complicated than the manufacturers "not listening". They know their gliders must do well in competition (at least the major factories), because potential buyers think this is important, even though the majority of buyers aren't serious competitors (note that the majority of the German sailplane production is now motorized). There are some "second-tier" gliders, like the reintroduction of the Glasflugel 304, the Russia AC-4, Apis, and Silent; however, any new glider that isn't a top-of-the-line glider has some serious competition in the market: used gliders. Glider last a long time, and the performance improvements have been slow, so a new glider that isn't better, just cheaper, has to compete with equal performance, even cheaper used gliders. This situation is quite different from the hang glider market, where the gliders wear out much sooner, and the improvements from year to year are much greater than they are for sailplanes. and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. Just join a thread ripping apart the PW5 to see how something "more pedestrian" might sell. The PW5 actually has sold OK, as did the Russia, and so that may be why we now have the Apis and Silent (at least in part). Attitudes are slowly changing, and "moderate" performance is becoming more acceptable. The manufacturers would probably build more intermediate gliders if the sport was growing fast enough to drive up the price of the used gliders, thus making a new glider of similar performance profitable enough to be worthwhile. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Eric presents a reasonable picture of the glider market. In fact, I think
the present glider market is about right. There is a market for state-of-the-art gliders for competition and a flourishing market in used gliders. A person of modest means can buy a 20 year old glass glider with spectacular performance. That 20 year old glider wouldn't be such a bargain on the used market if some competition pilot hadn't bought it for an astronomical sum when it was new. We need to stop knocking competition, it creates a market of really neat used gliders. When I started, if you wanted a high performance glider, you had to build it. By comparison, this market is nirvana. The availability and cost of gliders isn't the real problem. One of the many problems that does need attention is training costs. Rental and airtow make getting a glider rating cost more than a private power certificate in many locations. It's also a LOT more hassle to get glider training because of the short flights and long waits. For anyone interested in aviation but who hasn't chosen whether to go for soaring or another aviation related activity, this is a problem. Glider training costs, particularly the overall hourly rates, just don't look reasonable by comparison. Now, I'm NOT suggesting that anyone is overcharging for rentals or air tows. It costs what is does for very good reasons. It's just that those reasons are not apparent to the newcomer. I think it might be a good idea to take a long hard look at the training "experience" from the students point of view to see if there isn't something that could be done to make it more attractive. The first thing I would suggest is to look at winch launch for training. Bill Daniels "Eric Greenwell" wrote in message ... Lennie the Lurker wrote: Almost every sailplane made today is made with the competitor in mind, and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. There is some truth to this claim, but it's more complicated than the manufacturers "not listening". They know their gliders must do well in competition (at least the major factories), because potential buyers think this is important, even though the majority of buyers aren't serious competitors (note that the majority of the German sailplane production is now motorized). There are some "second-tier" gliders, like the reintroduction of the Glasflugel 304, the Russia AC-4, Apis, and Silent; however, any new glider that isn't a top-of-the-line glider has some serious competition in the market: used gliders. Glider last a long time, and the performance improvements have been slow, so a new glider that isn't better, just cheaper, has to compete with equal performance, even cheaper used gliders. This situation is quite different from the hang glider market, where the gliders wear out much sooner, and the improvements from year to year are much greater than they are for sailplanes. and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. Just join a thread ripping apart the PW5 to see how something "more pedestrian" might sell. The PW5 actually has sold OK, as did the Russia, and so that may be why we now have the Apis and Silent (at least in part). Attitudes are slowly changing, and "moderate" performance is becoming more acceptable. The manufacturers would probably build more intermediate gliders if the sport was growing fast enough to drive up the price of the used gliders, thus making a new glider of similar performance profitable enough to be worthwhile. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The high performance market will not make Soaring grow.
I am betting on the new generation of very light gliders, that you can stick together alone and take home and are self launchers! Those have to be improved for taxiing abillity. Then there should be very similar 2 place trainers, same make, that Operators can train in and present a package. Looks like those setups are coming. If those selflaunchers can go down to $ 30 000 I think we have something. People have to be trained to be able to fly off of most any airport, with good radio procedures and skills to fit into that traffic. This will enable folks to fly a little after work, on weekends without a crew, do flights in a hiking fashion. (Wandersegelflug) in German. Also they may have some time left over for Golf or Tennis........maybe bas fishing? Think Up Dieter B "Bill Daniels" wrote in message news:LCmfc.39108$wP1.153715@attbi_s54... Eric presents a reasonable picture of the glider market. In fact, I think the present glider market is about right. There is a market for state-of-the-art gliders for competition and a flourishing market in used gliders. A person of modest means can buy a 20 year old glass glider with spectacular performance. That 20 year old glider wouldn't be such a bargain on the used market if some competition pilot hadn't bought it for an astronomical sum when it was new. We need to stop knocking competition, it creates a market of really neat used gliders. When I started, if you wanted a high performance glider, you had to build it. By comparison, this market is nirvana. The availability and cost of gliders isn't the real problem. One of the many problems that does need attention is training costs. Rental and airtow make getting a glider rating cost more than a private power certificate in many locations. It's also a LOT more hassle to get glider training because of the short flights and long waits. For anyone interested in aviation but who hasn't chosen whether to go for soaring or another aviation related activity, this is a problem. Glider training costs, particularly the overall hourly rates, just don't look reasonable by comparison. Now, I'm NOT suggesting that anyone is overcharging for rentals or air tows. It costs what is does for very good reasons. It's just that those reasons are not apparent to the newcomer. I think it might be a good idea to take a long hard look at the training "experience" from the students point of view to see if there isn't something that could be done to make it more attractive. The first thing I would suggest is to look at winch launch for training. Bill Daniels "Eric Greenwell" wrote in message ... Lennie the Lurker wrote: Almost every sailplane made today is made with the competitor in mind, and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. There is some truth to this claim, but it's more complicated than the manufacturers "not listening". They know their gliders must do well in competition (at least the major factories), because potential buyers think this is important, even though the majority of buyers aren't serious competitors (note that the majority of the German sailplane production is now motorized). There are some "second-tier" gliders, like the reintroduction of the Glasflugel 304, the Russia AC-4, Apis, and Silent; however, any new glider that isn't a top-of-the-line glider has some serious competition in the market: used gliders. Glider last a long time, and the performance improvements have been slow, so a new glider that isn't better, just cheaper, has to compete with equal performance, even cheaper used gliders. This situation is quite different from the hang glider market, where the gliders wear out much sooner, and the improvements from year to year are much greater than they are for sailplanes. and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. Just join a thread ripping apart the PW5 to see how something "more pedestrian" might sell. The PW5 actually has sold OK, as did the Russia, and so that may be why we now have the Apis and Silent (at least in part). Attitudes are slowly changing, and "moderate" performance is becoming more acceptable. The manufacturers would probably build more intermediate gliders if the sport was growing fast enough to drive up the price of the used gliders, thus making a new glider of similar performance profitable enough to be worthwhile. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Daniels wrote:
Eric presents a reasonable picture of the glider market. In fact, I think the present glider market is about right. There is a market for state-of-the-art gliders for competition and a flourishing market in used gliders. A person of modest means can buy a 20 year old glass glider with spectacular performance. That 20 year old glider wouldn't be such a bargain on the used market if some competition pilot hadn't bought it for an astronomical sum when it was new. We need to stop knocking competition, it creates a market of really neat used gliders. When I started, if you wanted a high performance glider, you had to build it. By comparison, this market is nirvana. The availability and cost of gliders isn't the real problem. One of the many problems that does need attention is training costs. Rental and airtow make getting a glider rating cost more than a private power certificate in many locations. It's also a LOT more hassle to get glider training because of the short flights and long waits. For anyone interested in aviation but who hasn't chosen whether to go for soaring or another aviation related activity, this is a problem. Glider training costs, particularly the overall hourly rates, just don't look reasonable by comparison. Now, I'm NOT suggesting that anyone is overcharging for rentals or air tows. It costs what is does for very good reasons. It's just that those reasons are not apparent to the newcomer. I think it might be a good idea to take a long hard look at the training "experience" from the students point of view to see if there isn't something that could be done to make it more attractive. The first thing I would suggest is to look at winch launch for training. Bill Daniels "Eric Greenwell" wrote in message ... Lennie the Lurker wrote: Almost every sailplane made today is made with the competitor in mind, and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. There is some truth to this claim, but it's more complicated than the manufacturers "not listening". They know their gliders must do well in competition (at least the major factories), because potential buyers think this is important, even though the majority of buyers aren't serious competitors (note that the majority of the German sailplane production is now motorized). There are some "second-tier" gliders, like the reintroduction of the Glasflugel 304, the Russia AC-4, Apis, and Silent; however, any new glider that isn't a top-of-the-line glider has some serious competition in the market: used gliders. Glider last a long time, and the performance improvements have been slow, so a new glider that isn't better, just cheaper, has to compete with equal performance, even cheaper used gliders. This situation is quite different from the hang glider market, where the gliders wear out much sooner, and the improvements from year to year are much greater than they are for sailplanes. and the manufacturers aren't going to listen to any suggestion that maybe something more pedestrian might sell. Just join a thread ripping apart the PW5 to see how something "more pedestrian" might sell. The PW5 actually has sold OK, as did the Russia, and so that may be why we now have the Apis and Silent (at least in part). Attitudes are slowly changing, and "moderate" performance is becoming more acceptable. The manufacturers would probably build more intermediate gliders if the sport was growing fast enough to drive up the price of the used gliders, thus making a new glider of similar performance profitable enough to be worthwhile. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA Hi Eric Got to second that. I really can't understand why winch is not used more, it is cheaper, faster and in some ways safer than aerotow. There is no comparison in terms of profitability for the club. A good winch is a license to print money in most clubs, and a fraction of the cost for the pilots. Even our old lump can throw 30 launches a day to 1500"+ at a cost of under $4 per launch - and make a profit doing it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA | B Lacovara | Home Built | 0 | February 9th 04 01:55 AM |
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA | B Lacovara | Soaring | 0 | January 26th 04 07:55 PM |
Soaring Safety Seminar - SSA Convention | Burt Compton | Soaring | 0 | January 26th 04 03:57 PM |
Soaring Safety Seminar Wednesday - Atlanta | Burt Compton | Soaring | 0 | January 19th 04 02:51 AM |
January/February 2004 issue of Southern California Soaring is on-line | [email protected] | Soaring | 8 | January 4th 04 09:37 PM |