Expanded World Class

If you refer to

http://www.fai.org/gliding/bureau2006_2

minutes of the FAI Gliding Commission Bureau meeting,
you will find:

'A2.8 Discussion on Class structure in the “light-end”
RS explained the problem we have at the light end,
where a fairly limited number of aircraft are divided
into 3 categories.

It was decided to work towards a solution where the
existing World Class was extended to include the other
gliders after 2009. This could e.g. be with a max take
off weight of 300 kg, including motor gliders, and
possibly with max. 13 meter wingspan. The PW-5 should
be allowed under grandfather rules.
Action: RS and AR to develop year-2 proposal for extension
of the World Class after 2009.
Action: BH to check the FAI rules about changing a
class definition.

It was not considered worth creating a competition
class for the “less than 80 kg” class.'

This seems to indicate that from 2009 aircraft other
than PW-5s will be eligible to compete in a new World
Class. Heads up for Sparrowhawks and Russias, among
others.

Ian

On Sep 29, 3:22 pm, Ian Cant
wrote:
If you refer to

http://www.fai.org/gliding/bureau2006_2

minutes of the FAI Gliding Commission Bureau meeting,
you will find:

'A2.8 Discussion on Class structure in the "light-end"
RS explained the problem we have at the light end,
where a fairly limited number of aircraft are divided
into 3 categories.

It was decided to work towards a solution where the
existing World Class was extended to include the other
gliders after 2009. This could e.g. be with a max take
off weight of 300 kg, including motor gliders, and
possibly with max. 13 meter wingspan. The PW-5 should
be allowed under grandfather rules.
Action: RS and AR to develop year-2 proposal for extension
of the World Class after 2009.
Action: BH to check the FAI rules about changing a
class definition.

It was not considered worth creating a competition
class for the "less than 80 kg" class.'

This seems to indicate that from 2009 aircraft other
than PW-5s will be eligible to compete in a new World
Class. Heads up for Sparrowhawks and Russias, among
others.

Ian


Soon we will see a very good 13m glider ....for $120,000.-only.
And the happy owner will be a World Class Champion.
Was that an original idea behind the World Class?

On Oct 3, 3:52 pm, wrote:
Soon we will see a very good 13m glider ....for $120,000.-only.
And the happy owner will be a World Class Champion.
Was that an original idea behind the World Class?

Richard,

The original idea behind the World Class has been a failure. That much
is obvious (to me) and should be acknowledged. We need to try a new
and different idea. I can see opening the PW5 only contests to
similar designs to increase the number of gliders. More gliders would
mean a better competition.

I personally would propose the following criteria:

a) Fairly strict 1 design.
b) Decent performance for the cheapest cost.

For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower
performance is just frustrating when trying XC.

I would not "dumb down" the design to accommodate early solo pilots,
but aim for entry level comp pilots.

Todd Smith
Grob 102 "3S"

On Oct 3, 5:10 pm, toad wrote:
On Oct 3, 3:52 pm, wrote:

Soon we will see a very good 13m glider ....for $120,000.-only.
And the happy owner will be a World Class Champion.
Was that an original idea behind the World Class?

Richard,

The original idea behind the World Class has been a failure. That much
is obvious (to me) and should be acknowledged. We need to try a new
and different idea. I can see opening the PW5 only contests to
similar designs to increase the number of gliders. More gliders would
mean a better competition.

I personally would propose the following criteria:

a) Fairly strict 1 design.
b) Decent performance for the cheapest cost.

For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower
performance is just frustrating when trying XC.

I would not "dumb down" the design to accommodate early solo pilots,
but aim for entry level comp pilots.

Todd Smith
Grob 102 "3S"

Todd,
OK, some of the aspects of original idea had to be a failure and the
whole undertaking simply didn't work.
But, can you tell which specs were wrong?

* substantially lower costs than then-current new gliders
* easy & safe handling in the air and on the ground
* a single design, stabilized for a period of years
* performance sufficient for badges & challenging competition
* simple construction
* suitable for clubs, private owners & early solo pilots.

What would be your new World Class glider ?
Try to stay below $ 60,000.-please.
Richard/ PW-5/N153PW

On Oct 3, 7:12 pm, wrote:
On Oct 3, 5:10 pm, toad wrote:



On Oct 3, 3:52 pm, wrote:

Soon we will see a very good 13m glider ....for $120,000.-only.
And the happy owner will be a World Class Champion.
Was that an original idea behind the World Class?

Richard,

The original idea behind the World Class has been a failure. That much
is obvious (to me) and should be acknowledged. We need to try a new
and different idea. I can see opening the PW5 only contests to
similar designs to increase the number of gliders. More gliders would
mean a better competition.

I personally would propose the following criteria:

a) Fairly strict 1 design.
b) Decent performance for the cheapest cost.

For decent performance I think 35/1 would be good enough. Lower
performance is just frustrating when trying XC.

I would not "dumb down" the design to accommodate early solo pilots,
but aim for entry level comp pilots.

Todd Smith
Grob 102 "3S"

Todd,
OK, some of the aspects of original idea had to be a failure and the
whole undertaking simply didn't work.
But, can you tell which specs were wrong?

* substantially lower costs than then-current new gliders

Great.

* easy & safe handling in the air and on the ground

Great

* a single design, stabilized for a period of years

Great

* performance sufficient for badges & challenging competition

Great idea, but the PW5 performance is not enough.

* simple construction

Great

* suitable for clubs, private owners & early solo pilots.

Bad idea to require suitability for early solo pilot. This led to
unneeded "dumbing down" of the design. Specific features such as the
nose wheel and non-retractable landing gear. It also leads to
sacrificing performance for easier handling.

I think that the design point to aim for is a glider that a newly
licensed pilot, who has done some XC in a club glider and wants a
glider to fly, would find roughly comparable to a Grob 102, Std
Cirrus, LS4. The possiblilty of one design competition would be a
good additional incentive to buy the "2nd generation" world class
glider. But the glider would have to be similar in performance to
other gliders that the new XC pilot might also want.


What would be your new World Class glider ?
Try to stay below $ 60,000.-please.
Richard/ PW-5/N153PW


Maybe the new Sparrowhawk or Silent has enough performance for cheap
enough ? Maybe build Std Cirrus's or LS4's. Simplify the
construction if needed. But if a design can not be found that has
sufficiently good performance for a low enough price, then the world
class idea will never work.

It doesn't have to be 50/1, but it does have to be good enough that
weak days are not so painful.

Todd
3S

On Oct 4, 12:40 am, toad wrote:
On Oct 3, 7:12 pm, wrote:
snip

* suitable for clubs, private owners & early solo pilots.

Bad idea to require suitability for early solo pilot. This led to
unneeded "dumbing down" of the design. Specific features such as the
nose wheel and non-retractable landing gear. It also leads to
sacrificing performance for easier handling.

That would suggest to me also ruling out it being suitable for clubs,
though the SZD Junior has the fixed wheel but doesn't have a nose
wheel.


I think that the design point to aim for is a glider that a newly
licensed pilot, who has done some XC in a club glider and wants a
glider to fly, would find roughly comparable to a Grob 102, Std
Cirrus, LS4.

Mention of a Grob reminds me that being easy to rig is a very useful
attribute as well. What I mean is that it doesn't require people with
the size & strength of a gorilla - it should be a reasonably easy rig
for two average women, without any fancy rigging aids.

snip

toad wrote:

Bad idea to require suitability for early solo pilot. This led to
unneeded "dumbing down" of the design. Specific features such as the
nose wheel and non-retractable landing gear. It also leads to
sacrificing performance for easier handling.

Time to update your knowledge to at least the 1980s, when the LS4,
Discus, and other gliders showed you don't have to sacrifice performance
to have a glider with wonderful, forgiving handling.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

But, can you tell which specs were wrong?

* substantially lower costs than then-current new gliders
* easy & safe handling in the air and on the ground
* a single design, stabilized for a period of years
* performance sufficient for badges & challenging competition
* simple construction
* suitable for clubs, private owners & early solo pilots.


Replace bullet #4 with:
* Minimum performance on par with 20+ year old std class ships.

That would do it, I think.

Tony V.

On Oct 4, 6:28 pm, Tony Verhulst wrote:
But, can you tell which specs were wrong?

* substantially lower costs than then-current new gliders
* easy & safe handling in the air and on the ground
* a single design, stabilized for a period of years
* performance sufficient for badges & challenging competition
* simple construction
* suitable for clubs, private owners & early solo pilots.

Replace bullet #4 with:
* Minimum performance on par with 20+ year old std class ships.

That would do it, I think.

Tony V.

A World Class glider should have the performance to do 300K flights in
coastal areas where the lift usually starts at 2,500 AGL by noon and
rises to 4-5,000' later in the day. It should do 500K flights with
higher ceilings and/or ridge lift. It should win some Sports Class
regional contests, even over roughed terrain and weak conditions.

In other words, it should be a PW 5.

Someone asked what I would consider "a long task" for a PW 5.
Currently, along the Gulf Coast, where cloud base rarely gets over
5,000', we do lots of 300K flights in PW 5s. Here a long task would
have to be at least 300K. Out West, 500K would be called a long task.
US records show that you would have to fly quite a bit further than
that for a record.

As for contests, PW 5's have won Sports Class Regionals. Look at Bill
Snead's flights in this year's Region 10 contest. His flights were
over rough terrain and in challenging conditions.

You may have heard the excuse, "I flew as far as I could; after all, I
was flying a PW 5 ( or another short-winged ship)." But it's often
our skills, not the ship that limits us.

None of us should accept arbitrary limits. Isn't soaring a sport that
breaks limits and preconceptions?

Plenty of interesting stuff in this lengthening thread.
Assuming (big assume I know) that the concept of one-design
racing, at the lower end of the performance range,
could be a good idea, could work like dinghy racing
classes, and could attract 'new' people to sporting
gliding, can we arrive at some king of concensus about
the spec. No, don't just say why not the LS4 or the
S-H D(a) because there are almost certainly liability
issues that would preclude an open and widespread re-start
manufacture of those, and they are anyway 'old-technology'
now. Consider also that the 'one-type' could be a
homebuild (a kit) and in the microlight class (see
Euro rules for this), or generally de-regulated or
lightly regulated. The comments about how to minimise
cost are correct for sure, so we are looking at a 'small'
glider, and a simple one, so that it can become numerous
rapidly, both as a multi-manufacturer ready-to-fly,
and as a kit. That's not to say it cannot be sexy
or, in the eyes of the oh so conservative existing
glider pilot community, just look cool - whatever that
is!

Generally, it seems that L/D around 38 would be enough
- that would be better than an old Std Cirrus, not
quite as good as a Discus A, but close to the LS4.
Can we agree on that?

And the cost? What would folks be prepared to pay
for this one-class 'new' glider - ready-to-fly bare
hull? Or as a kit?

Club Class, or Sport Class is fine, but the great leveller
is everybody in exactly the same type, and flying at
the same weight. One of the reasons the idea of one-design
got rubbished was that some of the pilots could not
hack it at that level (of performance) and just blamed
the tool.

So, be constructive, iron out the spec, and maybe there
will be interest in designing the glider, and in producing
it quickly enough, in enough places, and in sufficient
quantity to make the one-design concept fly again.
Who knows, maybe more than one one-design will emerge
- just like dinghy racing. And that would be cool.

Roger H




At 16:36 06 October 2007, Marc Ramsey wrote:
Ian wrote:
There was a condition, wasn't there, that the plans
had to be
available to multiple manufacturers? I suppose that
would have put S-H
off a bit. But then, how many manufacturers ever made
PW-5's?

Two, actually, PZL Swidnik and PZL Bielsko which, despite
the similarity
in names, are competing companies. There is also a
third set of molds
from which one glider was built, the builder was killed
in an off-field
landing accident...

Marc