Medium performance gliders

On Mar 13, 3:56*pm, vontresc wrote:
On Mar 13, 3:46*pm, wrote:





On Mar 13, 2:27*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:

toad wrote:
On Mar 13, 2:08 pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
...
What does "low performance" mean these days: 1-26, Ka-6, Std cirrus? I
see some posters referring to 40:1 gliders as "medium performance",
which are still "high performance" to me, so I suspect everybody is
using widely varying definitions of low, medium, and high.

Low: *1-26, Ka-6, Pw-5, L33, etc

OK, just as I thought. I don't put the Ka-6, Pw-5, L33, in the low
performance category, but "medium". So, maybe low, medium, high aren't
useful categories without defining them.

Mid: *Grob 102, Std Cirrus, 1-34, similar, ASW-19, Libelle

High: ASW-20, ASW-24, Discus, or better

OK, I'm sure JJ didn't mean that literally, but "buy all you can afford"
recommendation has been seen several times in this thread as a top
priority, and I don't think that's good.

Ok, how about buy the most you can easily afford that doesn't have any
bad qualities in the safety or convenience areas.

What I think I said, mostly, but without the specifics; however, I think
the specifics are important. "Bad qualities" has many definitions; e.g..,
there are pilots that think the Std Cirrus would meet your criteria,
while I think it definitely does not.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes"http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* * * New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" atwww.motorglider.org

Why don't you define performance in terms of LD ranges. Then it would
apply to any ship, not just the ones named.

30 = Low, *30-40 = Medium, 40 = High * (these numbers are just my
examples)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well as a soon to be owner of a Ka-6 I will have to report my
experiences as the aforementioned FNG later this season :-).

The price was right, it comes with a descent trailer, and from all I
have read it is rather nice flying ship. I don't expect to be able to
fly a diamond distance in it on a weak day, but I do fully intend to
start exploring away from the field. I also expect to be landing out,
although this is somewhat easier in WI than it would be in the rocky
mountains.

I know it isn't a 40:1 ship, but it's gonna be way better than a
2-33 :-)

Pete- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Pete,

Congrats. I'm looking forward to seeing it at the field. Should be
fun!


Dave

Well as a soon to be owner of a Ka-6 I will have to report my
experiences as the aforementioned FNG later this season :-).

The price was right, it comes with a descent trailer, and from all I
have read it is rather nice flying ship. I don't expect to be able to
fly a diamond distance in it on a weak day, but I do fully intend to
start exploring away from the field. I also expect to be landing out,
although this is somewhat easier in WI than it would be in the rocky
mountains.

I know it isn't a 40:1 ship, but it's gonna be way better than a
2-33 :-)

Pete

The K6, K8 or 1-26 all seem like fun gliders to fly, and the price is
right.
The other "low" performance gliders just seem a little over priced.

Anyway, welcome to the club (of owners) and have fun with it.

Todd

vontresc wrote:

Well as a soon to be owner of a Ka-6 I will have to report my
experiences as the aforementioned FNG later this season :-).

The price was right, it comes with a descent trailer, and from all I
have read it is rather nice flying ship. I don't expect to be able to
fly a diamond distance in it on a weak day, but I do fully intend to
start exploring away from the field. I also expect to be landing out,
although this is somewhat easier in WI than it would be in the rocky
mountains.

A Ka-6e was the first glider I owned, and it is lovely glider to fly. I
completed Diamond distance on a day 20 other gliders didn't (contest
task) because I could stay up in the very weak weather at the end of the
day, unlike the the 15 or so glass gliders that landed at the airport
about 15 miles out from the finish. I think you'll find it well suited
to WI.

It's also very easy to land safely in a field, because the airbrakes are
powerful, it lands slowly, and stops quickly. Carrying the root of the
wing out isn't as much fun, but the tip is light, and so is the fuselage.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Eric Greenwell wrote:

Doug Hoffman wrote:

So you don't recall if Derek said that (or something very
similar) either?

No, I don't. I do suspect whoever said it, the context was
"for a given
length task"; i.e., the pilot has made the choice to accept a
high(er)
landout risk to complete the task.

Found it. Gliding Magazine, Dec ‘92/Jan ’93,
Some More Types For the Logbook (context was an assessment of a
LAK-12).

“I have always held that when considering buying a machine or
joining a syndicate,
you should go for the best performance you can afford.
Particularly if you are
not very skilled, a good gliding angle gives you a far better
chance of
finding each thermal, and greatly increases your chances of
staying up in weak conditions.”

Derek Piggott’s words, not mine. Though I agree with him.

Clearly there could be overriding factors such as if you want
to fly with all of your buddies who are in 1-26’s, or PW-5’s, or
whatever.

--
Regards,
Doug\0

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Eric Greenwell wrote:

Doug Hoffman wrote:

So you don't recall if Derek said that (or something very
similar) either?

No, I don't. I do suspect whoever said it, the context was
"for a given
length task"; i.e., the pilot has made the choice to accept a
high(er)
landout risk to complete the task.


Found it. Gliding Magazine, Dec ‘92/Jan ’93,
Some More Types For the Logbook (context was an assessment of a
LAK-12).

Begin Quote
I have always held that when considering buying a machine or
joining a syndicate,
you should go for the best performance you can afford.
Particularly if you are
not very skilled, a good gliding angle gives you a far better
chance of
finding each thermal, and greatly increases your chances of
staying up in weak conditions.
End Quote

Derek Piggott’s words, not mine. Though I agree with him.

Clearly there could be overriding factors such as if you want
to fly with your buddies who are all in 1-26’s, or PW-5’s, or
whatever.

--
Regards,
Doug


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mar 13, 8:46*pm, wrote:
snip

Why don't you define performance in terms of LD ranges. Then it would
apply to any ship, not just the ones named.

30 = Low, *30-40 = Medium, 40 = High * (these numbers are just my
examples)

How flat or otherwise the polar is also comes into it. The difficulty
flying a lot of low-performance gliders is that penetrating into wind
is nigh on impossible on many days.

On Mar 14, 3:02*am, Cats wrote:
On Mar 13, 8:46*pm, wrote:
snip



Why don't you define performance in terms of LD ranges. Then it would
apply to any ship, not just the ones named.

30 = Low, *30-40 = Medium, 40 = High * (these numbers are just my
examples)

How flat or otherwise the polar is also comes into it. *The difficulty
flying a lot of low-performance gliders is that penetrating into wind
is nigh on impossible on many days.

Then it makes sense that they would be considered "low performance",
no?

Maybe it could be defined as L/D at a given minimum speed? I guess it
depends on if we're talking about basic performance, or cross-country
performance.

"Cats" wrote in message
...
On Mar 13, 8:46 pm, wrote:
snip

Why don't you define performance in terms of LD ranges. Then it would
apply to any ship, not just the ones named.

30 = Low, 30-40 = Medium, 40 = High (these numbers are just my
examples)

How flat or otherwise the polar is also comes into it. The difficulty
flying a lot of low-performance gliders is that penetrating into wind
is nigh on impossible on many days.


Weeellll--maybe!
Day 1, Region 5 North, Perry--17 Apr 2006.

Terribly windy day (20 kt IIRC)---Start cylinder 5 mi radius, and start
point 5 mi upwind from airport, so you must make 10 mi into the wind just to
start. Blue, again IIRC.

I am flying a DG800B with water and 18m tips. Dave Stevenson is flying a K6.
We were in the same thermal for a while, prestart. I am far from talented as
a comps pilot. I lost sight of him in a short while.

Bottom line--Dave wins the day, and I can't even make it through the start
gate. The landout rate for all classes is well over 50%. The whole
point---talent and skill and experience is a winning combo. Skill and
experience is gained by flying, often, and in all sorts of conditions. So
get what you can afford to fly, and fly it a lot!

Hartley Falbaum
USA "KF"

the low performance glider wont penetrate in to the wind?

Dont fly into the wind! thats what i do and its FUN!

On Mar 16, 3:42*am, wrote:
the low performance glider wont penetrate in to the wind?

Dont fly into the wind! *thats what i do and its FUN!

A bit tricky when going downwind has miles of open sea for a landout...