|
Chris, I read aus-soaring
but rarely write simply because it has usually all been said before in one form
or another over the last 30 years. The world class might have been a reasonable
idea but right from after the idea it all went wrong. The idea of it being
cheap and affordable just did not run and neither does the idea that worthwhile
gliding is out of range of the wage earner. To wit, top price for a Libelle or
Std Cirrus, Hornet etc with the best GPS and instruments still isn't going to
cost you any more than $26,000. Even then with two sharing it you can still not
properly utilize the aircraft, and that is only $13,000 each. Whilst most
people drive cars that cost a lot more than that. And further do you really
believe that the number of times Tom Gilbert has represented the country,
having earned the place in a Libelle, is meaningless?? Or that the efforts of
Hayden Dunn, Toby Gieger, Rob Beulter, etc etc and the new guys Nick Gilbert,
Scott Lennon, etc etc etc etc is meaningless?? The Club class is the world
class now and that is that. I spent 17 years driving a
Falcon XT that cost me $800 to buy---17 years!!! It is a matter of applying
priorities and most people who complain about the affordability of any kind of
competitive gliding actually just don’t want to do it. GOOD gliding with your own
aeroplane is EASILY affordable. Sanders -----Original Message----- From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Christopher Mc Donnell Sent: Wednesday, 6 April
2005 4:52 PM To: Discussion of issues
relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring]
World Class Glider I had considered a longer
more complex rejoinder to Mike's reply below, but on reflection it simply boils
down to, in my opinion, the fact that a well chosen World Class Glider was the
last opportunity for wage earners and youth to participate in the sport at a
meaningful level. Chris McDonnell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike
Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Discussion of
issues relating to Soaring inAustralia." Sent: Wednesday, 6 April
2005 8:57 AM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring]
World Class Glider > At 07:15 PM 5/04/05
+0930, you wrote: > >Mike, before I
weigh into this issue, when you said: > > > >"The PW5 was a
really dumb idea that saw the light of day because not enough > > IGC delegates
were smart enough to vote against it." > > > >Did you mean the
"World Class Glider" concept was a dumb idea or the PW5 was > >a dumb selection? > > > >Regards > > > >Chris McDonnell > > > Both. > > 1. The trailer,
instruments, launches, time off, travel, etc cost about the > same regardless of the airframe
type. There may be small savings in weight > towed and a smaller car
might be possible but against a 15m/Standard glider > we are talking less
than 100Kg empty sailplane weight. So any cost savings > are largely illusory. > > 2.The premise was that
there was a large pent up demand for contest gliding > which could be realised
by providing a "cheaper" glider that would not > rapidly become
obsolete. The estimate was that they would sell 3000 in the > first 5 years. They
sold about 200 or a few more. Obviously something was > wrong. > > 3.The PW5 is *ugly*. It
doesn't even look much like a modern glider. If > they had put the same
wings on say an SZD55 fuselage they might have been > on to something. The
PW6 two seater looks much nicer. > > 4. The PW5 wasn't
particularly cheap. It was far more expensive than an > older glider with 30%
better performance. > > 5.Choosing to go with
performance that was typical of production gliders 30 > years before the
selection is inexplicable. In that thirty years the > fiberglass revolution
occurred. More performance = fewer > outlandings(outlandings
are not fun) and more days that can be contest > days.(wind etc).
Performance is also *fun* in itself. The selection > guidelines were faulty. > > 6.The "club"
class is the "world class". It allows use of gliders that are > obsolete for current
FAI class contests.(Why "sports class" got renamed has > to do with political
correctness and more flogging of dead horses I > suspect). There may be
a need for an A and B club class as time goes on. > Handicapping is easier
and fairer if the performance disparity is too great. > > 7. The IGC only
promised to freeze the World class rules for 10 years I > think. Currently and
for some time before, the life of a top FAI contest > glider has been at
least that long. > > 8. Choosing a winner in
a contest structured like the World Class selection > is guaranteed to result
in production of a prototype. Most machines benefit > from engineering
improvements. If you are going to do this select a short > list and tell them to
go away for 12 months and improve their products. > Then make a selection. > > 9. Given what showed up
the committee could have said none of the machines > are suitable. It has
been done before in design contests sponsored by the > BGA and GFA. There may
be other instances. > > 10. This kind of
contest is like governments "picking winners". That works > out well usually
doesn't it? Private citizens vote with their wallets > and/or feet. > > 11. Much(but not all -
the advent of carbon fiber and custom designed wing > sections in that 1970's
was another small revolution - the last one so far) > of the
"obsolescence" of gliders during the 70's 80's and 90's was simply > due to ever increasing
wing loadings. We now have 600Kg 18m missiles. > The simple way to guard
against this would have been to limit the max > flying weight in
contests of limited span classes. It happened in open > class for a while but
the IGC seems intent on stuffing that up too by > upping the max weight
limit. Wing loading won't do it as the next > generation simply gets
more chord. Limit the span and the weight and you > are then free to do the
best aerodynamic design. You will find there has > been very little
improvement in that for the last 25 years. > I cannot think why in
contests the glider weight should not be limited to > the heaviest
glider/pilot combination flying in that contest. Others > ballast to that weight. > > That's just a random
selection of thoughts. > > Mike > > > > > > Borgelt Instruments -
manufacturers of quality soaring instruments > phone Int'l + 61 746
355784 > fax Int'l + 61 746
358796 > cellphone Int'l + 61
428 355784 > Int'l + 61
429 355784 > email:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > website: www.borgeltinstruments.com > >
_______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing
list > To check or change
subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list To check or change
subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring |
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
