World Class: Recent Great News

Some revisionist history going on he I was on SSA Board of Directors
when the World Class was proposed, and these NEVER were the goals. NO
ONE, at the time, espoused the idea that everyone, or even a large
minority, would want to fly the World Class Glider.

Now that really makes sense!!!!
Invent a class and a glider no-one really wants to fly in/with!

And you actually succeeded. Congratulations.

Finally I understand what goes on at the IGC meetings and in the
various sub-comissions: they actually try to do things nobody wants
and see if they can get it through the plenary voting. The Toilet
Class (WC) is not the only such thing. Many rules and task definitions
seem to have come in to being just like that.

Ben Flewett wrote:

Mark,

So am I! That's my whole point! I would like to see
the World Class concept take off but we need a better
glider as the PW5 is too many steps backwards (over
40 years) for most pilots to accept.

You talk about the Sparrowhawk or AC4 as candidates
for the next World class glider. I haven't flown either
of these (and never will). But why would you change
the PW5 for some other piece of rubbish when history
has shown that pilots will not accept such a regression
in performance? In fact, why bother making the change
at all - it's just a giant leap sideways.

The LS4 or Discus 1 would be ideal in my opinion.

A lot of the excitement over having the LS4 as the World Class glider
seems to revolve around the idea it would cost about as much as a PW5
and have the build quality of the LS4. I think that is a hopelessly
naive idea, based on these facts:

$35,000 PW5, IN THE USA, with standard instruments, radio, and trailer

$43,000 304C (standard class), IN EUROPE, no radio or trailer
$13,000 trailer, shipping, radio
-------
$56,000 in the USA

Basically, the 304C is an LS4. Now, maybe there are pilots that think
it's still the better value, even at $21,000 more, but it's not a cheap
glider. If a goal of the World Class is low cost gliders, pilots will
have to accept it must be a smaller, lighter glider that won't glisten
like a polished mirror. Size, weight, and finish do matter when you are
manufacturing something.

I hope someone with glider manufacturing experience will tell us why I
am right/wrong about this.

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Earlier, "tango4" wrote:

With the demise and DG's aquisition of LS...

I don't understand. Their latest newsletter says that the deal is on,
and that new LS8 will be available soon. Did I miss something?

Could LS4's be produced to a world
class price?

Sure. And they'd likely have world-class aging issues. In my
experience, most of the things that can be done to make gliders
cheaper to manufacture have a definite impact on what they look like
in ten years.

Perhaps supplied unpainted or almost ready
to fly. Instruments not fitted etc.

Sounds like an HP-24 kit to me.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

Shaking in my boots about competing against John Byrd on an EQUAL BASIS this
summer.

Judging by recent levels of World Class participation, you may even
get to compete against him one-on-one!

Marcel Duenner wrote:

I reckon it will be more like 52 + 54 + about 10.
At least this class combination won't ever have the problem of
exceeding the 120 pilots per event limit.

....which don't exist any longer!


--
Denis

R. Parce que ça rompt le cours normal de la conversation !!!
Q. Pourquoi ne faut-il pas répondre au-dessus de la question ?

On 11 Mar 2004 08:59:39 -0800, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:

I don't think you have any problem with the PW-5 or Sparrowhawk or
Russia. I think you want a retract gear glider. You don't like this
specification in the World Class. I think this is the crux of
the "steps backwards" you allude to...

The problem is the performance.
In Germany nearly any student pilot with 50 hrs is flying a 1:40 plus
ship... and judging from my student pilots they simply have no fun
flying a far inferior glider once they tasted DG-300 or LS-4
performance.


Bye
Andreas

Why pick the LS4? Not that the 4 isn't a wonderful ship, but the LS8
is newer, better performance, and would probably not cost much more to
build (isn't cost to build more a matter of materials and size?). And
since there are already a lot of LS8s out there, you have an immediate
"World Class" base of gliders to race.

Build even more LS8s, and cost should go down more (but probably not
much).

If the idea is to have identical ships to fly, that might work. If
the idea is to have low performance inexpensive identical ships to
fly, it obviously won't.

So why not try an LS8 "worlds cup" contest, to see if the idea floats?

Kirk

Eric Greenwell wrote in message ...
A lot of the excitement over having the LS4 as the World Class glider
seems to revolve around the idea it would cost about as much as a PW5
and have the build quality of the LS4. I think that is a hopelessly
naive idea, based on these facts:

$35,000 PW5, IN THE USA, with standard instruments, radio, and trailer

$43,000 304C (standard class), IN EUROPE, no radio or trailer
$13,000 trailer, shipping, radio
-------
$56,000 in the USA


Compared to, say $80K for a new D2 or ASW28 or LS8. It would probably
still attract significant participation were it a real competetive
racing class, as opposed to a circus sideshow.

"Kirk Stant" wrote in message
om...
Why pick the LS4?

For a whole bunch of reasons. Because the LS8 is still in production. If you
pick an aircraft still in production you have to make the choice open to
everyone from HP through to PZL

Ian

I was involved in sailplane coat replacement and I think it's a serious
part of the whole production cost (it took several months for us!!).
Recently I saw gliders painted with the usual car finishing technology
and I think the quality isn't far from what we achieved with the long
sanding and polishing work. How does it effect the real performance and
production cost?

/Janos


Bob Kuykendall wrote:

Perhaps supplied unpainted or almost ready
to fly. Instruments not fitted etc.

Sounds like an HP-24 kit to me.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com