On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 10:59:47 AM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:40:26 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:24:33 AM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:39:51 PM UTC-4, Ramy wrote:
> > > > Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi,
> > > > only a convenient...
> > >
> > > But, lots of us fly from multiple airports where we must taxi.
> > > For us the steerable tailwheel is a requirement...
> > Both a self launching motor and a steerable tailwheel are convenience items in a glider. If you've never flown with a steerable tailwheel, you do not appreciate it. For me, if I had to choose one or the other, I'm not sure I wouldn't pick the tailwheel over the motor.
> I think a steerable tail is also a safety feature, especially in cross winds or unassisted launches (towed or motored). It's so much easier to keep the glider going straight at the start, and much easier to turn off the runway safely on landing. If had to fly a towed glider, I'd still want steerable tailwheel.
Owning a self-launch glider is all about being independent and being able to fly at any suitable field by yourself. Not having a steerable tailwheel limits when and where you can fly.

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi, only a convenient. Between steerable tail wheel and portable batteries I’ll pick portable batteries.
>
> Ramy
> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> > > Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
> > > I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
> > > But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
> > > Batteries in wings.
> > > Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
> > > This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
> > > But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
> > Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
Ramy, you are probably right. Using the OLC data for 2022, USA, ASH26E/30Mi/31Mi18-12/DG400/DG800 (all these gliders have steerable tailwheels) I counted the flights from airports that I thought didn't have a soaring operation. That came to 145 flights out of 824 (total), or 17%.

There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider): the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible. That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be interested in airports without a soaring operation. It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.

All true. There are many advantages to self launchers such as being able to fly wherever and whenever, but the reality is, that at least all over the west where I fly, most motorglider pilots limit themselves to gliderports and as such do not really take advantage of their steerable tailwheel beyond convenient. I can think of more airports than I can ever fly that will not require having steerable tailwheel. To me, to be independent means that I can easily recharge the batteries, which means portable charger too.

Ramy

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 10:55:39 AM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 10:59:47 AM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:40:26 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:24:33 AM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:39:51 PM UTC-4, Ramy wrote:
> > > > > Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi,
> > > > > only a convenient...
> > > >
> > > > But, lots of us fly from multiple airports where we must taxi.
> > > > For us the steerable tailwheel is a requirement...
> > > Both a self launching motor and a steerable tailwheel are convenience items in a glider. If you've never flown with a steerable tailwheel, you do not appreciate it. For me, if I had to choose one or the other, I'm not sure I wouldn't pick the tailwheel over the motor.
> > I think a steerable tail is also a safety feature, especially in cross winds or unassisted launches (towed or motored). It's so much easier to keep the glider going straight at the start, and much easier to turn off the runway safely on landing. If had to fly a towed glider, I'd still want steerable tailwheel.
> Owning a self-launch glider is all about being independent and being able to fly at any suitable field by yourself. Not having a steerable tailwheel limits when and where you can fly.

Eric, I replied the same time as you, with the same conclusion. Thanks for the stats confirming my observation.
If I’ll owe a JS3, I’ll probably fly occasionally from non glider ports which do not require taxing, there are many I can think of. But I would want to be able to take a charger with me so I can land somewhere else and relaunch. This will be more important to me than steerable tailwheel.

Ramy

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:06:54 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> > Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi, only a convenient. Between steerable tail wheel and portable batteries I’ll pick portable batteries.
> >
> > Ramy
> > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> > > > Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
> > > > I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
> > > > But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
> > > > Batteries in wings.
> > > > Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
> > > > This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
> > > > But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
> > > Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
> Ramy, you are probably right. Using the OLC data for 2022, USA, ASH26E/30Mi/31Mi18-12/DG400/DG800 (all these gliders have steerable tailwheels) I counted the flights from airports that I thought didn't have a soaring operation. That came to 145 flights out of 824 (total), or 17%.
>
> There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider): the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible. That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be interested in airports without a soaring operation. It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> > Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
> > I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
> > But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
> > Batteries in wings.
> > Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
> > This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
> > But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
> Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
I'm pretty sure I checked the "steerable and retractable" box on the order form - we'll see when it shows up...

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:58:47 PM UTC-7, Doug Bailey wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> > > Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
> > > I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
> > > But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
> > > Batteries in wings.
> > > Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
> > > This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
> > > But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
> > Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
> I'm pretty sure I checked the "steerable and retractable" box on the order form - we'll see when it shows up...
My guess is the order form is more current than the website, which does not mention "steerable". And why wouldn't Jonkers make one available? It's not new technology: all the other self-launchers have one (my 28 year old ASH26E has one), and it adds very little weight.

Ramy how long do you expect a charge to take? Will you get airborne
again the same day or spend the night? The fact that you landed might
mean that you won't be able to soar home until the next day. With a gas
powered self launcher, you'd have better options.
As a side story, I was once flying a friend's ASW-24E out of Black
Forest in Colorado and on the other side of Pike's Peak some 60 miles
away. I got low over Canyon City but, not to worry, I simply started
the engine... And promptly ran out of gas! So I landed and the special
fuel pump was in the owner's car so I had to call for a retrieve.
We boxed the glider up and I bought dinner. Another adventure for the
books!
Dan
5J
On 10/18/23 13:17, Ramy wrote:
> Eric, I replied the same time as you, with the same conclusion. Thanks for the stats confirming my observation.
> If I’ll owe a JS3, I’ll probably fly occasionally from non glider ports which do not require taxing, there are many I can think of. But I would want to be able to take a charger with me so I can land somewhere else and relaunch. This will be more important to me than steerable tailwheel.
>
> Ramy
>
> On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:06:54 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
>>> Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi, only a convenient. Between steerable tail wheel and portable batteries I’ll pick portable batteries.
>>>
>>> Ramy
>>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
>>>>> Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
>>>>> I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
>>>>> But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
>>>>> Batteries in wings.
>>>>> Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
>>>>> This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
>>>>> But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
>>>> Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
>> Ramy, you are probably right. Using the OLC data for 2022, USA, ASH26E/30Mi/31Mi18-12/DG400/DG800 (all these gliders have steerable tailwheels) I counted the flights from airports that I thought didn't have a soaring operation. That came to 145 flights out of 824 (total), or 17%.
>>
>> There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider): the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible. That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be interested in airports without a soaring operation. It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.

fyi Jonker dealer Leo just confirmed to me there is no steerable tail wheel on the JS3 RES, nor is there likely to be due to limited space.

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 3:20:06 PM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Ramy how long do you expect a charge to take? Will you get airborne
> again the same day or spend the night? The fact that you landed might
> mean that you won't be able to soar home until the next day. With a gas
> powered self launcher, you'd have better options.
>
> As a side story, I was once flying a friend's ASW-24E out of Black
> Forest in Colorado and on the other side of Pike's Peak some 60 miles
> away. I got low over Canyon City but, not to worry, I simply started
> the engine... And promptly ran out of gas! So I landed and the special
> fuel pump was in the owner's car so I had to call for a retrieve.
>
> We boxed the glider up and I bought dinner. Another adventure for the
> books!
>
> Dan
> 5J
> On 10/18/23 13:17, Ramy wrote:
> > Eric, I replied the same time as you, with the same conclusion. Thanks for the stats confirming my observation.
> > If I’ll owe a JS3, I’ll probably fly occasionally from non glider ports which do not require taxing, there are many I can think of.. But I would want to be able to take a charger with me so I can land somewhere else and relaunch. This will be more important to me than steerable tailwheel.
> >
> > Ramy
> >
> > On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:06:54 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> >>> Most motorglider pilots in the US fly from gliderports where it is not necessary to taxi, only a convenient. Between steerable tail wheel and portable batteries I’ll pick portable batteries.
> >>>
> >>> Ramy
> >>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7:10:48 PM UTC-7, Terry Edmonds wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:24:47 PM UTC-5, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> >>>>> Maybe i am one of a few who did cancel an order for a MG…
> >>>>> I had ordered an avionic Diana 4ER, but they seemed to not be making much forward progress on the design and provided almost zero updates, so I lost confidence.
> >>>>> But the main reason I cancelled is for one simple reason:
> >>>>> Batteries in wings.
> >>>>> Unfortunately almost all electric gliders being developed have batteries in wings.
> >>>>> This is great if you have a hangar with a power outlet, and you never go on road trips to other sites.
> >>>>> But it is really impractical if you keep your glider in a trailer at the airport. Also in the hot CA weather you do not want batteries getting hot under the sun waiting to launch. One of the main Battery fire hazards occur during charging - now your entire glider is a fire hazard instead of just the battery. But i think this is a much smaller risk these days. Much better to have fuselage mounted batteries that dont require disassembly of the glider to install/remove - and that you can take back to a hotel room to charge, or back home and charge in a fire-safe location. Also I suspect easier future upgradeability to the expected double-capacity semi solid-state batteries in the coming years. Now sure, the glider needs stronger wings to handle the g-loading due to the central mass. The only company in my mind that is making a practical-to-use electric self-launcher is Jonker’s JS3 RES. And it seems they are killing it in the market. Really not sure why the other big-name manufacturers all went with batteries in the wings, other than ‘it was the easiest route’. So I likely will order the JS3 RES when finances allow.
> >>>> Are you aware the JS3 RES does not have a steerable tailwheel nor is the manufacture planning to add it. This is not going to sell well in the US as most self-launch pilots fly out of airports where it is necessary to taxi.
> >> Ramy, you are probably right. Using the OLC data for 2022, USA, ASH26E/30Mi/31Mi18-12/DG400/DG800 (all these gliders have steerable tailwheels) I counted the flights from airports that I thought didn't have a soaring operation. That came to 145 flights out of 824 (total), or 17%.
> >>
> >> There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider): the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible. That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be interested in airports without a soaring operation. It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.
An onboard charger will charge at about 1-1.5 kwh, or about 12-18%%/hour. How soon you can take off depends how much more you need to get home: best case you are back in the air in time to make dinner, worst you wait till morning. But it also lets you do an unassisted safari, where you fly from airport to airport, charge overnight while you sleep, and continue the next day.. And, if it's good soaring, you may not need to charge every day.

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 3:06:54 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider):
> the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible.
> That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that
> capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to
> take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be
> interested in airports without a soaring operation.
> It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.

No. It takes very little energy to taxi, after all you could push the thing..
Taxied my electric every time I flew it.

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 4:05:09 PM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 3:06:54 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > There's another factor to consider with the JS3 (or any electric glider):
> > the pilots are likely to avoid taxiing as much as possible.
> > That's to preserve their powered climb capacity for a self-retrieve, since that
> > capacity is significantly less than a gasoline glider. They may even want to
> > take tows for the same reason, which means even fewer that 17% will be
> > interested in airports without a soaring operation.
> > It will be interesting to see the OLC for the electric gliders in a couple of years.
> No. It takes very little energy to taxi, after all you could push the thing.
> Taxied my electric every time I flew it.
I could push the thing, but how can I push a
How much battery capacity did it take to taxi, say, 1000' on a level airport? 2%?

On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 3:53:08 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 6:38:44 PM UTC-4, Jonathan Audy wrote:
> > fyi Jonker dealer Leo just confirmed to me there is no steerable tail wheel on the JS3 RES, nor is there likely to be due to limited space.
> Purist do not need steerable tail wheels, we know how to use the rudders. OBTP

Yeah, we see them tying up the runway ALL THE TIME at Ely.

Tom 2G

I couldn't imagine having a motorglider without a steerable tailwheel, it would be such a pain in the ass!
What - every time you need to make a turn you shut down get out and pick up the tailboom? Those MG tailbooms are heavy.
Or would you just tow it out with your car and dollies like a gravity ship?
And put it away with your car and dollies?

With a steerable tailwheel it is SO easy.

Untie your ship
Do your preflight checks.
Get in and start up
Taxi out to the take off point like a normal airplane, no assistance needed.
This will likely mean you need to to make several 90 degree turns
Take off.
Land
Taxi back to your tiedown spot via at least a couple of turns.
Your done- no assistance needed.
The JS3 is such a modern ship, It's hard to believe it doesn't have a steerable tailwheel IMHO
Nick
T

Need to charge your electric JS3 or some other electric glider? Pick one.
https://powerequipment.honda.com/generators/recreational-generators

Assuming there's an electrical outlet AND it's within reach. You would
need to plan your airports for that to work rather than simply flying
"thataway".

The beauty of a partner with a trailer (alternating flying days) and
ground launching means that you can land anywhere that you're
comfortable with the ground launch options. Same for a gas powered self
launcher if you have the range.

With about 8 hours worth of fuel, I'd bet the Stemme is capable of
running the length of the Rockies or Sierras without looking for gas. I
add around 10 gallons of car gas once or twice per year.

Dan
5J

On 10/18/23 17:00, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> charge overnight while you sleep, and continue the next day

On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:09:33 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail..com wrote:
> On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:17:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 8:15:30 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > > Assuming there's an electrical outlet AND it's within reach. You would
> > > need to plan your airports for that to work rather than simply flying
> > > "thataway".
> > >
> > > The beauty of a partner with a trailer (alternating flying days) and
> > > ground launching means that you can land anywhere that you're
> > > comfortable with the ground launch options. Same for a gas powered self
> > > launcher if you have the range.
> > >
> > > With about 8 hours worth of fuel, I'd bet the Stemme is capable of
> > > running the length of the Rockies or Sierras without looking for gas. I
> > > add around 10 gallons of car gas once or twice per year.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > > 5J
> > > On 10/18/23 17:00, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > charge overnight while you sleep, and continue the next day
> > I tried to change the subject line, since the original one had no relation to the discussions we are now having.
> >
> > Actually, an assisted safari is more flexible than you describe, as you can land anywhere, even a farmer's field, put the glider in the trailer, and take it to a suitable launch site. Even better would be to have an FES glider, which you could self-launch or ground launch as desired (the ground launch could be to only 200' or so - no need for a long runway). The FES would make it more likely you'd end up at a desirable location, and the FES batteries could removed and charged at the airport, at your motel, from an inverter while driving the car, or a small 1kw-2kw camping generator.
> >
> > Eric
> Eric, pay close attention, I will try once more to explain why being a PURIST is the ultimate in soaring. Flying nice triangles through hazardous terrain and always relying on the next thermal is the most exciting part of cross country soaring. Sure, I could easily go out and buy one of those fancy tailwheel oriented motorgliders but us PURIST always enjoy the challenge of the last thermal getting us home instead of some propeller swinging queer looking contraption that pops up to make me look good, so I can sit around the campfire and gloat about how much battery or fuel that I used. That is, during the process of ignoring the airplane by paying more attention to the GMHB that ends up in killing the MG pilot. Now, all you motorglider whack jobs want to talk about is a steerable tail wheel, next you motorglider guys will be wanting AC in the cockpit of your motorglider's. OBTP
Cooling the pilot may be much more practical than I first thought, particularly in an electric glider that could easily run a pump. Check it out: https://www.thewarmingstore.com/compcooler.html

Cooling vests would've been VERY welcome at the Hobbs contest I flew years ago, and the last time I flew from Bishop.
Eric

I've had my ASH 31 for a bit over a year now: 60 flts, 300hrs, 24,000km. I love it (nothing has broke yet so there's that). I started with a lot of trepidation regarding complexity, costs, safety, etc thinking the negatives might outweigh the positives and I'd regret the decision. Instead, freedom of self-launch, much reduced retrieval anxiety, and great soaring performance have made this a wonderful step up from my DG300 (which I really enjoyed as well). I just flew on Tuesday (when my club is normally closed), self-launched, made a mistake and had to motor up for a few miles to the next thermal, shutdown the motor and then flew a really nice 500km flight after that. In that single flight, my 31 delivered on every promise I hoped for when I bought it.

I've mostly self-launched just because I like doing it and it guarantees my target launch time. I've had 4-5 restarts out on course and I can say this: I hate giving up on a flight - landing out or restarting on course just sucks! I work my butt off to avoid them but my rate seems steady between my prior DG300's flights and now the 31's. But, wow, avoiding the retrieve hassle is a soothing salve to my wounded ambition. The independence to go soaring whenever the sky is calling can't be understated. At most, I just make sure my wife and maybe a friend are tracking the flight to make sure it concludes safely.

So now I'm looking at electrics with the idea that I'm not getting any younger, lead times are an issue, and I want to enjoy it while I can. I love the concept of electric simplicity but the current offerings reveal troubling compromises.

Neither the AS33 or JS3 have steerable tailwheels. After flying with one, I just don't want to go backwards. It's hard to believe they are not an option on these gliders but the manufacturers opted for retractable performance points instead. I fly from a gravel gliderport 99% of time - I still want the steerable tailwheel. I've been to Moriarty a few times and plan to fly from a few northern AZ and Utah airports next season. Can't imagine the hassle a fixed tailwheel taxi would be in those places.

I pretty much would have to insist on removable batteries. My current glider's avionic and motor start batteries are a real hassle to remove and replace - about an hour at least. My field has no electrical utilities so charging them in-situ requires a solar panel, charge controller, donor storage battery, and other off-grid charging HW. It works fine but I can't imagine scaling that to a 8kWhr solution. Lugging a gas generator on a safari trip is a no-go for me.

I heard a rumor that, for one of these electric gliders, max battery temperature to initiate self-launch is limited to 100degF (I have not confirmed this). Another issue is the motor controller/inverter temperature limits. My gliderport went the entire summer (and even today) over 100degF at launch time.

I also worry about battery fires (mostly during charging). I'd like to see newer chemistries that alleviate this issue but that is not going to happen anytime soon.

I'd probably jump on an electric with removable batteries, broad temperature range margin, reasonable battery max power out margin, steerable tailwheel, and competitive soaring performance (all while accepting the risks of an inflight battery fire). It's hard to see a reason to move on from the 31 but if the right solution emerges (SH?) ... I'm not getting any younger.

JJ

On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:05:15 AM UTC+10, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:09:33 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:17:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 8:15:30 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > > > Assuming there's an electrical outlet AND it's within reach. You would
> > > > need to plan your airports for that to work rather than simply flying
> > > > "thataway".
> > > >
> > > > The beauty of a partner with a trailer (alternating flying days) and
> > > > ground launching means that you can land anywhere that you're
> > > > comfortable with the ground launch options. Same for a gas powered self
> > > > launcher if you have the range.
> > > >
> > > > With about 8 hours worth of fuel, I'd bet the Stemme is capable of
> > > > running the length of the Rockies or Sierras without looking for gas. I
> > > > add around 10 gallons of car gas once or twice per year.
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > > 5J
> > > > On 10/18/23 17:00, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > > charge overnight while you sleep, and continue the next day
> > > I tried to change the subject line, since the original one had no relation to the discussions we are now having.
> > >
> > > Actually, an assisted safari is more flexible than you describe, as you can land anywhere, even a farmer's field, put the glider in the trailer, and take it to a suitable launch site. Even better would be to have an FES glider, which you could self-launch or ground launch as desired (the ground launch could be to only 200' or so - no need for a long runway). The FES would make it more likely you'd end up at a desirable location, and the FES batteries could removed and charged at the airport, at your motel, from an inverter while driving the car, or a small 1kw-2kw camping generator.
> > >
> > > Eric
> > Eric, pay close attention, I will try once more to explain why being a PURIST is the ultimate in soaring. Flying nice triangles through hazardous terrain and always relying on the next thermal is the most exciting part of cross country soaring. Sure, I could easily go out and buy one of those fancy tailwheel oriented motorgliders but us PURIST always enjoy the challenge of the last thermal getting us home instead of some propeller swinging queer looking contraption that pops up to make me look good, so I can sit around the campfire and gloat about how much battery or fuel that I used. That is, during the process of ignoring the airplane by paying more attention to the GMHB that ends up in killing the MG pilot. Now, all you motorglider whack jobs want to talk about is a steerable tail wheel, next you motorglider guys will be wanting AC in the cockpit of your motorglider's. OBTP
> Cooling the pilot may be much more practical than I first thought, particularly in an electric glider that could easily run a pump. Check it out: https://www.thewarmingstore.com/compcooler.html
>
> Cooling vests would've been VERY welcome at the Hobbs contest I flew years ago, and the last time I flew from Bishop.
> Eric

I have that exact system and have used it in my glider - no good for tasks longer than 2 hours even with a 3L icebag. I do wonder if a flush 'radiator' system could be mounted to cool the pilot to at least outside air temperature with less drag/noise than a vent though. Someone better at heat transfer calculations can tell me if that's a dumb idea.

On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:58:32 AM UTC+10, John Johnson wrote:
> I've had my ASH 31 for a bit over a year now: 60 flts, 300hrs, 24,000km. I love it (nothing has broke yet so there's that). I started with a lot of trepidation regarding complexity, costs, safety, etc thinking the negatives might outweigh the positives and I'd regret the decision. Instead, freedom of self-launch, much reduced retrieval anxiety, and great soaring performance have made this a wonderful step up from my DG300 (which I really enjoyed as well). I just flew on Tuesday (when my club is normally closed), self-launched, made a mistake and had to motor up for a few miles to the next thermal, shutdown the motor and then flew a really nice 500km flight after that. In that single flight, my 31 delivered on every promise I hoped for when I bought it.
>
> I've mostly self-launched just because I like doing it and it guarantees my target launch time. I've had 4-5 restarts out on course and I can say this: I hate giving up on a flight - landing out or restarting on course just sucks! I work my butt off to avoid them but my rate seems steady between my prior DG300's flights and now the 31's. But, wow, avoiding the retrieve hassle is a soothing salve to my wounded ambition. The independence to go soaring whenever the sky is calling can't be understated. At most, I just make sure my wife and maybe a friend are tracking the flight to make sure it concludes safely.
>
> So now I'm looking at electrics with the idea that I'm not getting any younger, lead times are an issue, and I want to enjoy it while I can. I love the concept of electric simplicity but the current offerings reveal troubling compromises.
>
> Neither the AS33 or JS3 have steerable tailwheels. After flying with one, I just don't want to go backwards. It's hard to believe they are not an option on these gliders but the manufacturers opted for retractable performance points instead. I fly from a gravel gliderport 99% of time - I still want the steerable tailwheel. I've been to Moriarty a few times and plan to fly from a few northern AZ and Utah airports next season. Can't imagine the hassle a fixed tailwheel taxi would be in those places.
>
> I pretty much would have to insist on removable batteries. My current glider's avionic and motor start batteries are a real hassle to remove and replace - about an hour at least. My field has no electrical utilities so charging them in-situ requires a solar panel, charge controller, donor storage battery, and other off-grid charging HW. It works fine but I can't imagine scaling that to a 8kWhr solution. Lugging a gas generator on a safari trip is a no-go for me.
>
> I heard a rumor that, for one of these electric gliders, max battery temperature to initiate self-launch is limited to 100degF (I have not confirmed this). Another issue is the motor controller/inverter temperature limits. My gliderport went the entire summer (and even today) over 100degF at launch time.
>
> I also worry about battery fires (mostly during charging). I'd like to see newer chemistries that alleviate this issue but that is not going to happen anytime soon.
>
> I'd probably jump on an electric with removable batteries, broad temperature range margin, reasonable battery max power out margin, steerable tailwheel, and competitive soaring performance (all while accepting the risks of an inflight battery fire). It's hard to see a reason to move on from the 31 but if the right solution emerges (SH?) ... I'm not getting any younger.
>
> JJ

>What - every time you need to make a turn you shut down get out and pick up the tailboom? Those MG tailbooms are heavy.
I'm not an aircraft designer but I think they're heavy *because* they're steerable, or rather being heavy is a desirable characteristic of a steerable tailwheel. On fixed wheel gliders it's quite manageable, at least on the Diana I can pick it up with one hand (or even one finger via the tail dolly handle)

> I heard a rumor that, for one of these electric gliders, max battery temperature to initiate self-launch is limited to 100degF (I have not confirmed this). Another issue is the motor controller/inverter temperature limits. My gliderport went the entire summer (and even today) over 100degF at launch time.
I can tell you neither a Diana 2 in Australia nor a JS3RES in Europe has problems with battery temperatures. Never seen a warning on either with plenty of launches on both.
With OAT in the high 30c's the JS3RES usually goes overtemp on the controller around 400ft and automatically throttles back from 40kW (very strong climb, 800fpm dry) to 25kW (adequate climb ~300-400fpm). After a few thousand feet it goes overtemp on the motor too requiring a sawtooth profile. I have heard talk of further revisions to improve both of those. I think it'll be suitable for anything except the most hostile Western US/Australian summer days.
Only self-launching while ballasted in 48c have I ever seen temperature warnings on the FES motor, and only the first stage of warning.

Battery removals of both the FES and RES systems are annoyingly fiddly, but I concur with the above that unless you're not planning to ever leave your own airfield, batteries in the wings will be a major pain in the arse. Only one out of three events I went to in Europe this year had any strategy for charging outside. I don't think you'll make yourself popular leaving a generator running on a fine European summer afternoon.

On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:58:32 PM UTC-7, John Johnson wrote:
> I've had my ASH 31 for a bit over a year now: 60 flts, 300hrs, 24,000km. I love it (nothing has broke yet so there's that). I started with a lot of trepidation regarding complexity, costs, safety, etc thinking the negatives might outweigh the positives and I'd regret the decision. Instead, freedom of self-launch, much reduced retrieval anxiety, and great soaring performance have made this a wonderful step up from my DG300 (which I really enjoyed as well). I just flew on Tuesday (when my club is normally closed), self-launched, made a mistake and had to motor up for a few miles to the next thermal, shutdown the motor and then flew a really nice 500km flight after that. In that single flight, my 31 delivered on every promise I hoped for when I bought it.
>
> I've mostly self-launched just because I like doing it and it guarantees my target launch time. I've had 4-5 restarts out on course and I can say this: I hate giving up on a flight - landing out or restarting on course just sucks! I work my butt off to avoid them but my rate seems steady between my prior DG300's flights and now the 31's. But, wow, avoiding the retrieve hassle is a soothing salve to my wounded ambition. The independence to go soaring whenever the sky is calling can't be understated. At most, I just make sure my wife and maybe a friend are tracking the flight to make sure it concludes safely.
>
> So now I'm looking at electrics with the idea that I'm not getting any younger, lead times are an issue, and I want to enjoy it while I can. I love the concept of electric simplicity but the current offerings reveal troubling compromises.
>
> Neither the AS33 or JS3 have steerable tailwheels. After flying with one, I just don't want to go backwards. It's hard to believe they are not an option on these gliders but the manufacturers opted for retractable performance points instead. I fly from a gravel gliderport 99% of time - I still want the steerable tailwheel. I've been to Moriarty a few times and plan to fly from a few northern AZ and Utah airports next season. Can't imagine the hassle a fixed tailwheel taxi would be in those places.
>
> I pretty much would have to insist on removable batteries. My current glider's avionic and motor start batteries are a real hassle to remove and replace - about an hour at least. My field has no electrical utilities so charging them in-situ requires a solar panel, charge controller, donor storage battery, and other off-grid charging HW. It works fine but I can't imagine scaling that to a 8kWhr solution. Lugging a gas generator on a safari trip is a no-go for me.
>
> I heard a rumor that, for one of these electric gliders, max battery temperature to initiate self-launch is limited to 100degF (I have not confirmed this). Another issue is the motor controller/inverter temperature limits. My gliderport went the entire summer (and even today) over 100degF at launch time.
>
> I also worry about battery fires (mostly during charging). I'd like to see newer chemistries that alleviate this issue but that is not going to happen anytime soon.
>
> I'd probably jump on an electric with removable batteries, broad temperature range margin, reasonable battery max power out margin, steerable tailwheel, and competitive soaring performance (all while accepting the risks of an inflight battery fire). It's hard to see a reason to move on from the 31 but if the right solution emerges (SH?) ... I'm not getting any younger.
>
> JJ

Hi John,

You have done an excellent job of summarizing the pros and cons of ICE vs electric. The only thing I will add is that the ICE technology has been around for some 60+ years and the issues are well understood. That cannot be said for electrics, and every iteration of their technology (NiMH vs every lithium chemistry) pretty much resets the clock.

Tom 2G

On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 1:33:56 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 11:32:08 AM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:09:33 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 1:17:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 8:15:30 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > > > > Assuming there's an electrical outlet AND it's within reach. You would
> > > > > need to plan your airports for that to work rather than simply flying
> > > > > "thataway".
> > > > >
> > > > > The beauty of a partner with a trailer (alternating flying days) and
> > > > > ground launching means that you can land anywhere that you're
> > > > > comfortable with the ground launch options. Same for a gas powered self
> > > > > launcher if you have the range.
> > > > >
> > > > > With about 8 hours worth of fuel, I'd bet the Stemme is capable of
> > > > > running the length of the Rockies or Sierras without looking for gas. I
> > > > > add around 10 gallons of car gas once or twice per year.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dan
> > > > > 5J
> > > > > On 10/18/23 17:00, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > > > charge overnight while you sleep, and continue the next day
> > > > I tried to change the subject line, since the original one had no relation to the discussions we are now having.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, an assisted safari is more flexible than you describe, as you can land anywhere, even a farmer's field, put the glider in the trailer, and take it to a suitable launch site. Even better would be to have an FES glider, which you could self-launch or ground launch as desired (the ground launch could be to only 200' or so - no need for a long runway). The FES would make it more likely you'd end up at a desirable location, and the FES batteries could removed and charged at the airport, at your motel, from an inverter while driving the car, or a small 1kw-2kw camping generator.
> > > >
> > > > Eric
> > > Eric, pay close attention, I will try once more to explain why being a PURIST is the ultimate in soaring. Flying nice triangles through hazardous terrain and always relying on the next thermal is the most exciting part of cross country soaring. Sure, I could easily go out and buy one of those fancy tailwheel oriented motorgliders but us PURIST always enjoy the challenge of the last thermal getting us home instead of some propeller swinging queer looking contraption that pops up to make me look good, so I can sit around the campfire and gloat about how much battery or fuel that I used. That is, during the process of ignoring the airplane by paying more attention to the GMHB that ends up in killing the MG pilot. Now, all you motorglider whack jobs want to talk about is a steerable tail wheel, next you motorglider guys will be wanting AC in the cockpit of your motorglider's. OBTP
> >
> > "Flying nice triangles through hazardous terrain and always relying on the next thermal is the most exciting part of cross country soaring." Bob, Bob: you continue to conflate YOUR values with everyone else's values. Your sentence does not describe AT ALL why I go soaring. Or most pilots I know. Your constant yammering on about your perceived evils of motorgliders suggests that you feel threatened by them and in fact you have suggested that more directly in the past. Maybe you need some therapy? Take some deep breaths, get in your towed glider, head out on a triangle over hazardous terrain and think about what fun you are having. The rest of us are having fun too except for this constant, interminable bitching from Florida. We like you best flying over hazardous terrain looking for the next thermal to keep you away from the crocs, and away from the keyboard.
> >
> > I do like your suggestion about AC in the cockpit though.
> Fitch, you motorglider guys are mostly all alike, looking for the next gimmick to replace experience and ability. All you guys can talk about are things like batteries, fuel for your gliders, steerable tail wheels, battery chargers, the location of the GMH button, and a bunch of other non important factors that influence soaring. I have never felt threatened by some worthless motorglider, I fly with several guys that have motorgliders and they will be the first to say that Old Bob, can hold his on, in fact the sustainer guys prefer to have Old Bob at the controls of the Pawnee.
> At the end of the day you motorglider guys could never have as much fun as OBTP. Recently one of our members went up for a wave camp, while in flight he heard one of the motorglider guys come over the radio and announce that he was going to motor on up to the altitude of the rest of the pack, now do you think that this guy was having as much fun as those guys that did it pride and character like a purist does?
> I do enjoy flying out over the swamps, no guts, no glory! At the end of the day when I have accomplished my goal to fly my triangle, and I don't do those T-Bone triangles or what I call imaginary triangles I stick to the real deal.
> Now about that AC, there is a better solution that will provide comfort for a few hours, can be removed and tucked away. Staying cool like a PURIST is easily done, I will clue you in one of these days, until then keep flying that motorglider, it might just make you look good. I will be getting back in my Lowly 27 this weekend, it has been a while, and I do need the purist therapy of soaring over those alligator and python infested swamps, and I will be looking for that last thermal home, and calling over the radio for those motorglider guys flying out of Seminole Lake. Old Bob, The Purist

Hey Boobie, you're NOT a "purist" as you describe yourself: you rely on a gas-guzzling towplane to get you aloft. A true purist bungie launches off of a hill, but today's gliders have too high of a stall speed for that. Motorgliders use FAR LESS fuel to get airborne than you do, so we are FAR CLOSER to being "purists" than you are, or ever will be. If MG pilots talk about engines, fuel and maintenance, gravity glider pilots talk about WHERE and WHEN they can find a tow. The NUMBER ONE reason I hear from new MG owners for buying a MG is that they can't find any tows or they have to drive hours to get them. Or if they is a towplane they can't find a tow PILOT. This is why most new gliders coming into the US are MGs. That said, I am SURE that gravity glider pilots are grateful that you are providing tows at New Hibiscus, despite your curmudgeon attitude.