Gary,

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 10:46 PM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] pause for thought

 

Steve,

Without checking the Flytec site, please tell me what/why the size of the
market has to do with anything?

In the gliding world the majority of pilots learn to fly, join a club and
fly club aircraft.  In the PG/HG world the pilots learn to fly and if they
want to continue, they purchase their own equipment.  Each pilot owns their
own glider or canopy along with a Vario.  As opposed to each glider having a
vario (or 2).  From this the PG/HG market is significantly bigger.  Given
the size it's easier to spread the development cost and lower the
manufacturing cost with volume.

 

I would appreciate you explaining in simple terms why you endorse the
viewpoint expressed in the Soaring Australia article that Emilis refers to.

Having said this I don't endorse the viewpoint, but can see how someone with
a limited view of the gliding world may come to such a conclusion.  It could
have been the club the instructor , age of aircraft any number of things.
There are not may of us who will put in the hard yards pushing gliders
around all day for a couple of flights.  People are looking for instant
gratification.

 

Are the HG/PG instruments directly usable by GFA pilots? You seem to suggest
that they are at least as good, and maybe better for our use? 

The PG/HG instruments can be used in sailplanes but need to be plumbed to
the TE tube. Otherwise they are a little hard to use.  I flew with a HG
instrument for a number of years  when I purchased my first glider.  There a
number of HG pilots that use there HG instruments when they fly sailplanes.
They would be a bit hard to install in a panel, but there are a few
sailplane instruments that also require a bit of work to fit.

 

Are GFA pilots missing out on something here? If so what and why? Surely if
they are usable in GFA type sailplanes, there are pressing commercial
reasons why the manufacturers of these instruments should be promoting them
to GFA type pilots. If all factors are equal then we are/could/should be
part of that sizable market. This does not seem to be the case - can you
also please explain this. 

I don't think the GFA type market is large enough to offset the development
cost to convert them to std panel housings.  In the HG world the size /shape
is not as critical. 5-10 years ago saw a few manufactures purchasing screen,
box and processors ready made and packaged.   They wrote there own SW and
painted it another color.  This ready made equipment was build for some
other purpose.  They leveraged it to lower the development cost.  

 

If I wash cash strapped I would consider a low end HG/PG instrument.

 

I would appreciate a detailed explanation here! 

Gary

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Trone
CIO
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 9:33 PM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] pause for thought

 

Hi Gary,

 

The HG PG instruments are years ahead of sailplane equipment due to the size
of the market.  

 

Check this http://www.flytec.com/

 

Cheers

Steve

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 8:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in
Australia.'
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] pause for thought

 

Emilis,

I picked up on these same points.

I would be interested to have your thoughts here.

Once upon a time hang glider varios had no TE compensation, due to the
totally different dynamics of HG flight, as opposed to that of sailplanes -
even if such sailplanes  were 25 years (or more), old. I wonder if this is
still the case?

John Wharington (as one of several/many people involved in modern soaring
instrument design), might care to elucidate on at least the "retro
instruments" comment.

 

Gary Stevenson

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emilis
Prelgauskas
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 5:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Aus-soaring] pause for thought

 

The current (September 2007) Soaring Australia contains the following
comments by hang glider pilot John Clark (Ps. 6 - 8)

offered (somewhat truncated), without editorial, for thought :

 

 

 

 

There were 6 of us on the first few days of the (sailplane) course.

But by the end of the week there were just 2 of us.

For some, gliding didn't come easy enough. Their lack of immediate success
was a problem.

For the young, reared on computer games, with mates back home doing
something else, the commitment was too much and the goal too far away.

They expected to book, turn up & fly.

 

A difference between gliding clubs & hang gliding is, the average age of
sailplanes is 25 years, many much older. I don't think I'd be prepared to
fly a 25 year old hang glider.

For pilots used to low cost modern varios with LCDs, integrated GPS,
loggers, glide computers, sailplane instruments are very retro.

 

 

 

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 31/08/2007
5:21 PM

 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 31/08/2007
5:21 PM

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 31/08/2007
5:21 PM

 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: 31/08/2007
5:21 PM

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Reply via email to