On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:17:00 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 2:54 PM, Charles Longley wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 1:33:36 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>> I skimmed through your OLC postings for the last two years, and it appears you always land
> >>>> back at your home airport, but I could easily have missed a flight where you landed
> >>>> elsewhere. When was the last time you needed a retrieve?
> >>>> --
> >>>> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >>>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >>>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> >>>
> >>> Now Eric, I am glad that I have captured your imagination, no, I do not always land back at my home airport, you missed something. About landing out, hell yes I have landed out, it really doesn't bother me, Oh, last year I need a retrieve, I always prepare for a landout rather than hitting the start button, which I do not have and never will.
> >>> I made some good landouts in my days, once landed in a prison yard in Arcadia , Florida, that was about 1976 and I came in over the baseball field fence and made a stop just before the backstop just behind the catcher. The entire event was kind of comical, all the guards and inmates were extremely helpful in getting my Std. Cirrus over the fence so that a nice Englishman named Derek Johnson could pull me out of the prison grounds. Another time I landed my ASW20 on the access road to Shark River Valley in the middle of the Everglades, even Alfonso, E9, was very complimentary of that landing. So, to answer your question landing out is something the purist must be prepared for unlike the motorglider guys and girls, don't want to be called a sexist. Oh, last year I needed a retrieve, from a field close to the airport, but, . that was after circumnavigating Lake O for the second time. Old Bob, The Purist
> >>>
> >> One retrieve in 38 flights suggests you fly very conservatively for the conditions. That's
> >> a choice many pilots make, for various reasons. Why do you choose to fly so conservatively?
> >> --
> >> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> > Eric,
> > I’ve landed out once while flying close to 300 hours in the last two years. You’ve seen my flying is it conservative?
> > Charlie L
> The remark to Bob was "...you fly very conservatively for the conditions".. That's an
> incomplete conclusion, and there should be a reference to the pilot, not just the
> conditions; ie, Bob is apparently not challenging himself. In your case, I think one
> landout in 300 hours also suggests you are not really challenging yourself, either, and
> you don't know the boundaries of your abilities. While we are waiting for Bob's
> self-awareness to kick in, maybe you could tell us why you don't need retrieves more often.
>
> Now I'm wondering how often Thorsten lands out, and if he feels he is challenging himself
> enough :^)
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
I feel like I am pushing it pretty hard Eric. My speeds continue to improve.. It’s been mostly luck that I haven’t landed out more. I am often out of glide from a runway and looking at field landing particularly during Region 8. Just been managing to find a thermal when I need it.

Charlie

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 5:26:04 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 2:59 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 4:33:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> >> On 7/11/2021 12:27 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> >>>> On 7/9/2021 3:19 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> Was I seeing things on OLC yesterday? Tell me I must be dreaming! As I was looking at the scores from yesterday I noticed a huge flight in a LS6, that was actually better that the EB-29 flown out of Ely yesterday. Some PURIST, laid down a huge flight and even with regard to the huge performance difference between the EB the purist in the LS6, a 40 year old PURIST platform smoked that 300K plus EB and set the standard for the day. Are you motor glider guys paying attention to the PURIST these days, if so you better trade those expensive motorgliders in for a 40 year old LS6 and become part of the PURIST revolution. This could be part of the critical glider theory. Old Bob, The PURIST!
> >>>>>
> >>>> I skimmed through your OLC postings for the last two years, and it appears you always land
> >>>> back at your home airport, but I could easily have missed a flight where you landed
> >>>> elsewhere. When was the last time you needed a retrieve?
> >>>> --
> >>>> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >>>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >>>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> >>>
> >>> Now Eric, I am glad that I have captured your imagination, no, I do not always land back at my home airport, you missed something. About landing out, hell yes I have landed out, it really doesn't bother me, Oh, last year I need a retrieve, I always prepare for a landout rather than hitting the start button, which I do not have and never will.
> >>> I made some good landouts in my days, once landed in a prison yard in Arcadia , Florida, that was about 1976 and I came in over the baseball field fence and made a stop just before the backstop just behind the catcher. The entire event was kind of comical, all the guards and inmates were extremely helpful in getting my Std. Cirrus over the fence so that a nice Englishman named Derek Johnson could pull me out of the prison grounds. Another time I landed my ASW20 on the access road to Shark River Valley in the middle of the Everglades, even Alfonso, E9, was very complimentary of that landing. So, to answer your question landing out is something the purist must be prepared for unlike the motorglider guys and girls, don't want to be called a sexist. Oh, last year I needed a retrieve, from a field close to the airport, but, . that was after circumnavigating Lake O for the second time. Old Bob, The Purist
> >>>
> >> One retrieve in 38 flights suggests you fly very conservatively for the conditions. That's
> >> a choice many pilots make, for various reasons. Why do you choose to fly so conservatively?
> >> --
> >> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> >
> > Ok Amos, your getting comical again, if you think getting 1000 AGL in the middle of a swamp going around the second largest lake in the country is conservative the you need a realization check. Once again, be my guest here in Florida, stay here enjoy the fine life of Florida living and we will have fun flying together. I anxiously await your arrival, all the tows are on me, October would be a good month. Old Bob , The Purist
> >
> Still avoiding the question, Bob. I hope you are not embarrassed about the possibility you
> are not challenging yourself as a soaring pilot. There many reasons for flying gliders,
> and "challenging" doesn't have to be one of them.
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Amos, when the time comes to challenging myself I have no problem accepting that task. Flying around Lake O twice, which I did, think that I am the only person to do that, is a challenge in and of itself. Hopefully you will be so fortunate to do the same when you come to Florida. Amos, there is a huge difference in staying 3 to 4 hours at 3000 AGL and below than cruising at 12000 AGL out in Ely. With all your wisdom and experience your scores should be double of what they were, maybe you were too conservative. Old Bob , The Purist

On 7/11/2021 3:16 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 2:54 PM, Charles Longley wrote:

>> I’ve landed out once while flying close to 300 hours in the last two years. You’ve seen
>> my flying is it conservative?
>> Charlie L
>
> The remark to Bob was "...you fly very conservatively for the conditions". That's an
> incomplete conclusion, and there should be a reference to the pilot, not just the
> conditions; ie, Bob is apparently not challenging himself. In your case, I think one
> landout in 300 hours also suggests you are not really challenging yourself, either, and
> you don't know the boundaries of your abilities. While we are waiting for Bob's
> self-awareness to kick in, maybe you could tell us why you don't need retrieves more often.
>
> Now I'm wondering how often Thorsten lands out, and if he feels he is challenging himself
> enough :^)

Charlie, I should be clear the flying you are doing is challenging, compared to the
average pilot, but is still not "challenging" your abilities. I think you could have some
better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often. THere are many
ways pilots can challenge themselves; in this case, I'm mostly mean "faster and farther",
and exploring difficult areas.
--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Gentlemen:
Let's not get so caught up in the animosity that we lose our brains along with our civility.

The number of landouts compared to the number of flights is no measure of whether a pilot is "conservative" or not. The pure glider pilot who scrapes it home at 200' with no room or time for a pattern - like the motor guy who punches "start" at 500' are not being "conservative" because they didn't land out. They are just idiots who got away with it. What IS being "conservative" in XC flying is giving up at a sane altitude, executing the landout safely, or getting the engine out & started with a safe margin for failure..

And, it does not contribute to a culture of safety in this sport to chide somebody about possibly being "embarrassed" about supposedly not "challenging himself" enough (arbitrarily measured by number of landouts). That is exactly the type of macho crap this sport has tried to get away from - and needs to keep trying to get away from.

Now back to the original point. Take a look at the last 5 minutes of Thorsten's flight. After 1237 km and 9 hours of flying what do we see? He gets back to Ely at a reasonable altitude, circles it off, flys a real pattern, and puts it safely on the ground all in a complete professional manner. That's both "conservative" - and it's "challenging yourself". Landout ratio is meaningless.

ROY

On 7/11/2021 3:43 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 5:26:04 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>> On 7/11/2021 2:59 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 4:33:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>>>> On 7/11/2021 12:27 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/9/2021 3:19 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Was I seeing things on OLC yesterday? Tell me I must be dreaming! As I was looking at the scores from yesterday I noticed a huge flight in a LS6, that was actually better that the EB-29 flown out of Ely yesterday. Some PURIST, laid down a huge flight and even with regard to the huge performance difference between the EB the purist in the LS6, a 40 year old PURIST platform smoked that 300K plus EB and set the standard for the day. Are you motor glider guys paying attention to the PURIST these days, if so you better trade those expensive motorgliders in for a 40 year old LS6 and become part of the PURIST revolution. This could be part of the critical glider theory. Old Bob, The PURIST!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I skimmed through your OLC postings for the last two years, and it appears you always land
>>>>>> back at your home airport, but I could easily have missed a flight where you landed
>>>>>> elsewhere. When was the last time you needed a retrieve?
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Eric Greenwell - USA
>>>>>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
>>>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
>>>>>
>>>>> Now Eric, I am glad that I have captured your imagination, no, I do not always land back at my home airport, you missed something. About landing out, hell yes I have landed out, it really doesn't bother me, Oh, last year I need a retrieve, I always prepare for a landout rather than hitting the start button, which I do not have and never will.
>>>>> I made some good landouts in my days, once landed in a prison yard in Arcadia , Florida, that was about 1976 and I came in over the baseball field fence and made a stop just before the backstop just behind the catcher. The entire event was kind of comical, all the guards and inmates were extremely helpful in getting my Std. Cirrus over the fence so that a nice Englishman named Derek Johnson could pull me out of the prison grounds. Another time I landed my ASW20 on the access road to Shark River Valley in the middle of the Everglades, even Alfonso, E9, was very complimentary of that landing. So, to answer your question landing out is something the purist must be prepared for unlike the motorglider guys and girls, don't want to be called a sexist. Oh, last year I needed a retrieve, from a field close to the airport, but, . that was after circumnavigating Lake O for the second time. Old Bob, The Purist
>>>>>
>>>> One retrieve in 38 flights suggests you fly very conservatively for the conditions. That's
>>>> a choice many pilots make, for various reasons. Why do you choose to fly so conservatively?
>>>> --
>>>> Eric Greenwell - USA
>>>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
>>>
>>> Ok Amos, your getting comical again, if you think getting 1000 AGL in the middle of a swamp going around the second largest lake in the country is conservative the you need a realization check. Once again, be my guest here in Florida, stay here enjoy the fine life of Florida living and we will have fun flying together. I anxiously await your arrival, all the tows are on me, October would be a good month. Old Bob , The Purist
>>>
>> Still avoiding the question, Bob. I hope you are not embarrassed about the possibility you
>> are not challenging yourself as a soaring pilot. There many reasons for flying gliders,
>> and "challenging" doesn't have to be one of them.
>> --
>> Eric Greenwell - USA
>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
>
> Amos, when the time comes to challenging myself I have no problem accepting that task. Flying around Lake O twice, which I did, think that I am the only person to do that, is a challenge in and of itself. Hopefully you will be so fortunate to do the same when you come to Florida. Amos, there is a huge difference in staying 3 to 4 hours at 3000 AGL and below than cruising at 12000 AGL out in Ely. With all your wisdom and experience your scores should be double of what they were, maybe you were too conservative. Old Bob , The Purist
>
Use my name to rewrite the above, and we can continue the discussion.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

On 7/11/2021 4:14 PM, Roy B. wrote:
> Gentlemen:
> Let's not get so caught up in the animosity that we lose our brains along with our civility.
>
> The number of landouts compared to the number of flights is no measure of whether a pilot is "conservative" or not. The pure glider pilot who scrapes it home at 200' with no room or time for a pattern - like the motor guy who punches "start" at 500' are not being "conservative" because they didn't land out. They are just idiots who got away with it. What IS being "conservative" in XC flying is giving up at a sane altitude, executing the landout safely, or getting the engine out & started with a safe margin for failure.
>
> And, it does not contribute to a culture of safety in this sport to chide somebody about possibly being "embarrassed" about supposedly not "challenging himself" enough (arbitrarily measured by number of landouts). That is exactly the type of macho crap this sport has tried to get away from - and needs to keep trying to get away from.
>
> Now back to the original point. Take a look at the last 5 minutes of Thorsten's flight. After 1237 km and 9 hours of flying what do we see? He gets back to Ely at a reasonable altitude, circles it off, flys a real pattern, and puts it safely on the ground all in a complete professional manner. That's both "conservative" - and it's "challenging yourself". Landout ratio is meaningless.
>
> ROY
>
I purposely used "needing a retrieve" instead of landout, because I wanted to include
landing at airports. I didn't chide Bob for being embarrassed if he didn't challenge
himself, but the reverse, that he shouldn't be embarrassed if he chose not to challenge
himself. I agree pushing your flying abilities in the landing phase is a bad idea, and was
not what I intended with the "challenge yourself" remark. I was thinking of flying faster,
stopping a climb sooner than later as the lift decreases, cutting across a blue area
instead of taking a longer route with clouds, setting yourself longer tasks that require
taking off earlier and flying later rather using only the best hours of the day.
"Challenging the weather", not your basic piloting skills.

But really, if a person rarely needs a retrieve, doesn't that suggest he's "leaving some
money on the table"? Regardless of his skill level, newby or a Thorsten, doesn't a low
retrieval ratio suggest he isn't be quite as bold as he might be?

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Eric Wrote:
> But really, if a person rarely needs a retrieve, doesn't that suggest he's "leaving some
> money on the table"? Regardless of his skill level, newby or a Thorsten, doesn't a low
> retrieval ratio suggest he isn't be quite as bold as he might be?
> --
Eric:
No it does not suggest that. Rarely needing a retrieve suggests to me a mature, balanced and careful approach to XC which is what I've been trying to teach for years. Do the pilots who win contests land out a lot? Do the pilots who obtain records land out a lot? A guy in my club this year landed out twice in the same day - does that make him a good XC pilot?

My comment was as much directed to your "advice" to Charlie L. as your comments to Bob. You told Charlie he should "push harder and fail more often" - well, in my view Charlie is doing just fine. In your book you write about the effect that some of our "low save" mythology and folklore has on the newbies who hear it and emulate it. Well, the same is true about the macho mythology that "real men land out because they are pushing themselves"

Land outs (airport and farm) are a part of XC. If you do a lot of XC you are going to do a lot of land outs over time. But indexing the number of land outs to a pilot's level of "boldness" promotes (to the new pilots) a mythology we really don't need - just like "low saves" promoted a mythology that we didn't need.

ROY

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 1:59:45 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 4:33:36 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On 7/11/2021 12:27 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 8:57:59 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > >> On 7/9/2021 3:19 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>> Was I seeing things on OLC yesterday? Tell me I must be dreaming! As I was looking at the scores from yesterday I noticed a huge flight in a LS6, that was actually better that the EB-29 flown out of Ely yesterday. Some PURIST, laid down a huge flight and even with regard to the huge performance difference between the EB the purist in the LS6, a 40 year old PURIST platform smoked that 300K plus EB and set the standard for the day. Are you motor glider guys paying attention to the PURIST these days, if so you better trade those expensive motorgliders in for a 40 year old LS6 and become part of the PURIST revolution. This could be part of the critical glider theory. Old Bob, The PURIST!
> > >>>
> > >> I skimmed through your OLC postings for the last two years, and it appears you always land
> > >> back at your home airport, but I could easily have missed a flight where you landed
> > >> elsewhere. When was the last time you needed a retrieve?
> > >> --
> > >> Eric Greenwell - USA
> > >> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> > >> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> > >
> > > Now Eric, I am glad that I have captured your imagination, no, I do not always land back at my home airport, you missed something. About landing out, hell yes I have landed out, it really doesn't bother me, Oh, last year I need a retrieve, I always prepare for a landout rather than hitting the start button, which I do not have and never will.
> > > I made some good landouts in my days, once landed in a prison yard in Arcadia , Florida, that was about 1976 and I came in over the baseball field fence and made a stop just before the backstop just behind the catcher. The entire event was kind of comical, all the guards and inmates were extremely helpful in getting my Std. Cirrus over the fence so that a nice Englishman named Derek Johnson could pull me out of the prison grounds. Another time I landed my ASW20 on the access road to Shark River Valley in the middle of the Everglades, even Alfonso, E9, was very complimentary of that landing. So, to answer your question landing out is something the purist must be prepared for unlike the motorglider guys and girls, don't want to be called a sexist. Oh, last year I needed a retrieve, from a field close to the airport, but, . that was after circumnavigating Lake O for the second time. Old Bob, The Purist
> > >
> > One retrieve in 38 flights suggests you fly very conservatively for the conditions. That's
> > a choice many pilots make, for various reasons. Why do you choose to fly so conservatively?
> > --
> > Eric Greenwell - USA
> > - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> > https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> Ok Amos, your getting comical again, if you think getting 1000 AGL in the middle of a swamp going around the second largest lake in the country is conservative the you need a realization check. Once again, be my guest here in Florida, stay here enjoy the fine life of Florida living and we will have fun flying together. I anxiously await your arrival, all the tows are on me, October would be a good month. Old Bob , The Purist

Bobby, PLEASE stop with your RACIST comments - they are VERY UNWELCOME on RAS!!!!

Tom

On 7/11/2021 9:34 PM, Roy B. wrote:
> Eric Wrote:
>> But really, if a person rarely needs a retrieve, doesn't that suggest he's "leaving some
>> money on the table"? Regardless of his skill level, newby or a Thorsten, doesn't a low
>> retrieval ratio suggest he isn't be quite as bold as he might be?
>> --
> Eric:
> No it does not suggest that. Rarely needing a retrieve suggests to me a mature, balanced and careful approach to XC which is what I've been trying to teach for years. Do the pilots who win contests land out a lot? Do the pilots who obtain records land out a lot? A guy in my club this year landed out twice in the same day - does that make him a good XC pilot?
>
> My comment was as much directed to your "advice" to Charlie L. as your comments to Bob. You told Charlie he should "push harder and fail more often" - well, in my view Charlie is doing just fine. In your book you write about the effect that some of our "low save" mythology and folklore has on the newbies who hear it and emulate it. Well, the same is true about the macho mythology that "real men land out because they are pushing themselves"
>
> Land outs (airport and farm) are a part of XC. If you do a lot of XC you are going to do a lot of land outs over time. But indexing the number of land outs to a pilot's level of "boldness" promotes (to the new pilots) a mythology we really don't need - just like "low saves" promoted a mythology that we didn't need.
>
> ROY
>

By your measure, I am not a mature, balanced and careful pilot. I flew towed gliders for
20 years, and needed some retrieves every year, ditto for the 26 years I've flown a
motorglider (I'm counting a motor restart as a retrieve). And yet, no glider damage, no
close calls.

I've been careful to use the term "suggests", not "proves", for retrieve ratio ("RR").
Perhaps a better measure of "boldness" is how often the pilot goes into "survival mode",
which can happen long before the landing/engine start. But maybe boldness isn't a good
measure of anything, though I do think Charlie is a bold pilot and Bob isn't.

Good contest pilots don't need retrieves very often because the scoring system
significantly rewards getting back, and current tasking is weighted to getting pilots
home, unlike the pre-1980s tasks. I don't know the RR for record pilots, but it may be low
because a record is all-or-nothing, and tasks are routinely abandoned if they are going
too slow, or appears they are likely to.

The only reason I brought it up was my suspicion Bob's obsession with motorglider
"advantage" might be his feeling "it's just not fair" that he has to constrain his soaring
while motorglider pilots can just fly around, willy-nilly, without any concerns.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Eric wrote:
"By your measure, I am not a mature, balanced and careful pilot."

Eric:
That is an example of personalizing a discussion that does not need to be personalized. I am not writing about your competence or manner of flying - and I have intentionally not mentioned my own statistics. Neither of us should need to prove anything about ourselves.

What I am talking about is "What are the newer and less experienced pilots taking away from your comments?" You say often, "what I was thinking was . . " or what I was "suggesting . . ." But what the new pilots are HEARING is different and that is what concerns me. You said to Charlie, ". . .[ you are] not "challenging" your abilities" and "I think you could have some better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often". You are telling new XC pilots that "good XC pilots are bolder and land out more" or "to be good at XC one must push and land out more". That's an ego driven myth and the opposite is usually true: as pilots gain experience and skill in cross country ( and graduate to better equipment) they land out less often than they did at the beginning. And, I would think that you have been around flying long enough to have heard the cliche about "old and bold" pilots. Nobody should be criticized or categorized based on their frequency of land outs (or motor restarts).

Let's not get so caught up in the "purist vs. motorglider" personal attack arguments that we lose sight of the message we are sending to the newer pilots. That's my point.

ROY

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 7:51:02 AM UTC-7, Roy B. wrote:
> Eric wrote:
> "By your measure, I am not a mature, balanced and careful pilot."
> Eric:
> That is an example of personalizing a discussion that does not need to be personalized. I am not writing about your competence or manner of flying - and I have intentionally not mentioned my own statistics. Neither of us should need to prove anything about ourselves.
>
> What I am talking about is "What are the newer and less experienced pilots taking away from your comments?" You say often, "what I was thinking was .. . " or what I was "suggesting . . ." But what the new pilots are HEARING is different and that is what concerns me. You said to Charlie, ". . .[ you are] not "challenging" your abilities" and "I think you could have some better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often". You are telling new XC pilots that "good XC pilots are bolder and land out more" or "to be good at XC one must push and land out more". That's an ego driven myth and the opposite is usually true: as pilots gain experience and skill in cross country ( and graduate to better equipment) they land out less often than they did at the beginning. And, I would think that you have been around flying long enough to have heard the cliche about "old and bold" pilots. Nobody should be criticized or categorized based on their frequency of land outs (or motor restarts).
>
> Let's not get so caught up in the "purist vs. motorglider" personal attack arguments that we lose sight of the message we are sending to the newer pilots. That's my point.
>
> ROY
This whole thread is totally ridiculous started by a racist who hasn't had an intelligent thought this century. The method of launch has nothing to do with the flight. In fact, Racist Bobby has argued that MGs have an unfair advantage: Thorsen's flight improved just the exactly the opposite. And his outrageous claim that we didn't congratulate him is total bullshit: I am at Ely and ALL of the MG pilots did EXACTLY THAT!

Tom

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 4:17:00 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 2:54 PM, Charles Longley wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 1:33:36 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>> I skimmed through your OLC postings for the last two years, and it appears you always land
> >>>> back at your home airport, but I could easily have missed a flight where you landed
> >>>> elsewhere. When was the last time you needed a retrieve?
> >>>> --
> >>>> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >>>> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >>>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> >>>
> >>> Now Eric, I am glad that I have captured your imagination, no, I do not always land back at my home airport, you missed something. About landing out, hell yes I have landed out, it really doesn't bother me, Oh, last year I need a retrieve, I always prepare for a landout rather than hitting the start button, which I do not have and never will.
> >>> I made some good landouts in my days, once landed in a prison yard in Arcadia , Florida, that was about 1976 and I came in over the baseball field fence and made a stop just before the backstop just behind the catcher. The entire event was kind of comical, all the guards and inmates were extremely helpful in getting my Std. Cirrus over the fence so that a nice Englishman named Derek Johnson could pull me out of the prison grounds. Another time I landed my ASW20 on the access road to Shark River Valley in the middle of the Everglades, even Alfonso, E9, was very complimentary of that landing. So, to answer your question landing out is something the purist must be prepared for unlike the motorglider guys and girls, don't want to be called a sexist. Oh, last year I needed a retrieve, from a field close to the airport, but, . that was after circumnavigating Lake O for the second time. Old Bob, The Purist
> >>>
> >> One retrieve in 38 flights suggests you fly very conservatively for the conditions. That's
> >> a choice many pilots make, for various reasons. Why do you choose to fly so conservatively?
> >> --
> >> Eric Greenwell - USA
> >> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> >> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
> > Eric,
> > I’ve landed out once while flying close to 300 hours in the last two years. You’ve seen my flying is it conservative?
> > Charlie L
> The remark to Bob was "...you fly very conservatively for the conditions".. That's an
> incomplete conclusion, and there should be a reference to the pilot, not just the
> conditions; ie, Bob is apparently not challenging himself. In your case, I think one
> landout in 300 hours also suggests you are not really challenging yourself, either, and
> you don't know the boundaries of your abilities. While we are waiting for Bob's
> self-awareness to kick in, maybe you could tell us why you don't need retrieves more often.
>
> Now I'm wondering how often Thorsten lands out, and if he feels he is challenging himself
> enough :^)
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
Good point, Eric.
Just little old me and just at Parowan over the years I retrieved Thorsten twice. Both times from air strips, by trailer. Landing out should be no big deal for purists and for us engine-handicapped.
Herb

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 11:00:52 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 4:14 PM, Roy B. wrote:
> > Gentlemen:
> > Let's not get so caught up in the animosity that we lose our brains along with our civility.
> >
> > The number of landouts compared to the number of flights is no measure of whether a pilot is "conservative" or not. The pure glider pilot who scrapes it home at 200' with no room or time for a pattern - like the motor guy who punches "start" at 500' are not being "conservative" because they didn't land out. They are just idiots who got away with it. What IS being "conservative" in XC flying is giving up at a sane altitude, executing the landout safely, or getting the engine out & started with a safe margin for failure.
> >
> > And, it does not contribute to a culture of safety in this sport to chide somebody about possibly being "embarrassed" about supposedly not "challenging himself" enough (arbitrarily measured by number of landouts). That is exactly the type of macho crap this sport has tried to get away from - and needs to keep trying to get away from.
> >
> > Now back to the original point. Take a look at the last 5 minutes of Thorsten's flight. After 1237 km and 9 hours of flying what do we see? He gets back to Ely at a reasonable altitude, circles it off, flys a real pattern, and puts it safely on the ground all in a complete professional manner. That's both "conservative" - and it's "challenging yourself". Landout ratio is meaningless.
> >
> > ROY
> >
> I purposely used "needing a retrieve" instead of landout, because I wanted to include
> landing at airports. I didn't chide Bob for being embarrassed if he didn't challenge
> himself, but the reverse, that he shouldn't be embarrassed if he chose not to challenge
> himself. I agree pushing your flying abilities in the landing phase is a bad idea, and was
> not what I intended with the "challenge yourself" remark. I was thinking of flying faster,
> stopping a climb sooner than later as the lift decreases, cutting across a blue area
> instead of taking a longer route with clouds, setting yourself longer tasks that require
> taking off earlier and flying later rather using only the best hours of the day.
> "Challenging the weather", not your basic piloting skills.
>
> But really, if a person rarely needs a retrieve, doesn't that suggest he's "leaving some
> money on the table"? Regardless of his skill level, newby or a Thorsten, doesn't a low
> retrieval ratio suggest he isn't be quite as bold as he might be?
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Eric, your challenge comments are not those I would expect from a CFIG like yourself. I would love for the Soaring Safety Foundation to do an article for Soaring in regard to your comments and see how most CFIG and XC glider pilots would react to your suggestion on challenging yourself in a glider flight.
I was not always successful on my XC flights, I failed miserably the first time I tried my 300K, and yes I landed out. I did complete my Diamond Goal and Gold Distance back in the day when we had no GPS and only carried a map and a couple of turnpoint cameras. I never said to myself that I did not challenge myself, but rather accomplished my goal.
Anyway, the door is always open here in Florida, come on down and enjoy our hospitality and nice winter weather. Old Bob, The Purist

This thread should have been all about Thorsten's remarkable achievement, not petty barbs about motorized vs gravity gliders.

Well done Thorsten!

T8

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 5:16:16 PM UTC-6, tango...@gmail.com wrote:
> This thread should have been all about Thorsten's remarkable achievement, not petty barbs about motorized vs gravity gliders.
>
> Well done Thorsten!
>
> T8

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 5:16:16 PM UTC-6, tango...@gmail.com wrote:
> This thread should have been all about Thorsten's remarkable achievement, not petty barbs about motorized vs gravity gliders.

This thread should never been posted in the first place. It is only a catfight between two or three guys who hate each other. All should take a deep breath and offer a prayer to Saint Fu for guidance.

That would be "ST. FU."

On 7/12/2021 8:51 AM, Roy B. wrote:
> Eric wrote:
> "By your measure, I am not a mature, balanced and careful pilot."
>
> Eric:
> That is an example of personalizing a discussion that does not need to be personalized. I am not writing about your competence or manner of flying - and I have intentionally not mentioned my own statistics. Neither of us should need to prove anything about ourselves.
>
> What I am talking about is "What are the newer and less experienced pilots taking away from your comments?" You say often, "what I was thinking was . . " or what I was "suggesting . . ." But what the new pilots are HEARING is different and that is what concerns me. You said to Charlie, ". . .[ you are] not "challenging" your abilities" and "I think you could have some better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often". You are telling new XC pilots that "good XC pilots are bolder and land out more" or "to be good at XC one must push and land out more". That's an ego driven myth and the opposite is usually true: as pilots gain experience and skill in cross country ( and graduate to better equipment) they land out less often than they did at the beginning. And, I would think that you have been around flying long enough to have heard the cliche about "old and bold" pilots. Nobody should be criticized or categorized based on their frequency of land outs (or motor restarts).
>
> Let's not get so caught up in the "purist vs. motorglider" personal attack arguments that we lose sight of the message we are sending to the newer pilots. That's my point.
>
> ROY
I used my experience because it was a handy example that was the opposite of your example.
I used it to support your belief that Retrieval Ratio may not be meaningful, which I
thought you might enjoy. Too subtle?
I thought I was making it clear that "bolder" did not mean _landing out_ more, by using
the term "need a retrieve", and that "bolder" in no way meant increasing your safety risk
beyond sensible bounds. I'm hardly ever around newer and less experienced pilots, since I
stopped instructing 25 years ago, so I can't properly judge how my remarks might be
interpreted by them.
What do other pilots think? Did what I say encourage the less experienced to take
unacceptable safety risks? Is Roy misreading what I said? I hope there is more than one or
two pilots still reading this, that are willing to give their opinion :^)
--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 4:16:16 PM UTC-7, tango...@gmail.com wrote:
> This thread should have been all about Thorsten's remarkable achievement, not petty barbs about motorized vs gravity gliders.
>
> Well done Thorsten!
>
> T8
Racist Bobby doesn't give a damn about Thorsten's flight - he just wanted to use the opportunity to take a jab at motorglider owners because he doesn't tow (or charge) them.

Tom

> > Eric wrote:
> > But really, if a person rarely needs a retrieve, doesn't that suggest he's "leaving some
> > money on the table"? Regardless of his skill level, newby or a Thorsten, doesn't a low
> > retrieval ratio suggest he isn't be quite as bold as he might be?

>> What do other pilots think?
As a newer glider pilot, I didn't perceive anything from Eric's query that suggested I take more risks or compromise safety. I like the question and the responses that are engaged in discussing its merits.

I see it both ways:
- Yes, more landout/retrieves do seem to indicate a person is pushing harder against the limits of specific elements of their skill level. Less retrieves are leaving 'something' on the table.
- That 'something' isn't a complete measure of capability which is more than just soaring/racing piloting skill. Other facets include experience based judgment along with learned tools and mitigation strategies to get home when things get marginal.

In my short glider XC experience, I've found I'm getting home more often under similar situations that found me landing out previously. I have about a 10% rate over 2yrs and 5-6% in 2021. While I'm flying more aggressively 'bolder', I'm also getting better at keeping it in the air and avoiding LO's. (Not claiming my rates constitute a useful target). I usually fly 2x a week and, over this time, I progressed from newly licensed to diamond goal and distance. The Tucson area has a lot of good soaring weather.

I believe the best progression in the spectrum of skills (piloting, strategy, judgment) should show increasing capability (outcomes) while LO's are held to a 'modest' level. So, while this is leaving some elements of skill demonstration 'on the table', we are maximizing and demonstrating the entire skill spectrum. Looking at retrieval (or engine start) rate of the pilots I fly with seems to show our best XC pilots with very few - even those prone to pushing hard in marginal conditions.

All subjective, of course, but I definitely don't think I would have progressed faster or built more than my current overall skill by landing out at a higher rate. I learned A LOT more by getting home on progressively challenging flights.

JJ (H8)

Eric
You might consider whether you have answered your question yourself with the acknowledgement, " I'm hardly ever around newer and less experienced pilots, since I stopped instructing 25 years ago, so I can't properly judge how my remarks might be
interpreted by them." You also wrote in your book, "I fly more aggressively now [ as a motor glider pilot]
than I did before, when misjudging the lift or the weather meant the end of the flight, followed
by a retrieve. "

So if that's all true, why are you telling a newer and less experienced non motor glider pilot on this forum that "[ you are] not "challenging" your abilities" and "I think you could have some better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often".

Now you are asking this list, "Do you think I encouraged the inexperienced to take unacceptable risks?" Well, the "inexperienced" don't alway know what's "unacceptable" and if there is a legitimate doubt in your mind about that, then the honest answer should be "I guess I should not have said that".

But let's ask a different question to this list, How many experienced XC instructors on this list would give such public "advice" to a less experienced pilot that they had not flown dual with nor otherwise instructed or coached? I certainly would not.

ROY

On 7/12/2021 1:20 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> Eric, your challenge comments are not those I would expect from a CFIG like yourself. I would love for the Soaring Safety Foundation to do an article for Soaring in regard to your comments and see how most CFIG and XC glider pilots would react to your suggestion on challenging yourself in a glider flight.

Flying a glider XC is inherently "challenging yourself", and the suggestions to improve
your XC abilities are common in articles in Soaring, Convention presentations, instructor
clinics, and clubs routinely encourage club members to extend themselves with classes on
XC, and mentoring with dual or lead-follow, and XC camps are commone every year. It is
very surprising to me that you and Roy do not seem to be aware of all this XC
encouragement that has been going on for decades.

So, please be as specific as possible, and point to my remark(s) that you think encourage
someone to take excessive safety risks and why it does so, so I can better understand your
concerns.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

It is a question of semantics: What constitutes "increased challenge" vs "increased risk"? This no doubt varies across conditions and terrain. Out west, challenging one's self means increasing the probability that one will land at an airport other than the home airport. Landings at airports are generally about equal in terms of outcome. Increasing risk would be flying in such a manner than your chances of landing off field are greater. Off field landings, out here, are probably 10x or even 20x more likely to result in a broken glider or pilot, compared to any airport landing.

Both airports and fields carry the inconvenience of a retrieve. What the motorglider does (and I think what Eric is attempting to convey) is it (usually) eliminate the inconvenience of the retrieve, making challenging one's self as defined above a more attractive proposition.

Just as a motorglider pilot can be called lazy for pushing the button for a retrieve, so can the purist be called lazy for not taking the chance of a remote airport landing and resulting retrieve. Economically, the purist is better off (no one spends as much on retrieves as the additional cost of a motor), but time wise the motorglider pilot is better off. Like nearly everything in life, time = money.

On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 7:14:46 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/12/2021 1:20 PM, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Eric, your challenge comments are not those I would expect from a CFIG like yourself. I would love for the Soaring Safety Foundation to do an article for Soaring in regard to your comments and see how most CFIG and XC glider pilots would react to your suggestion on challenging yourself in a glider flight.
> Flying a glider XC is inherently "challenging yourself", and the suggestions to improve
> your XC abilities are common in articles in Soaring, Convention presentations, instructor
> clinics, and clubs routinely encourage club members to extend themselves with classes on
> XC, and mentoring with dual or lead-follow, and XC camps are commone every year. It is
> very surprising to me that you and Roy do not seem to be aware of all this XC
> encouragement that has been going on for decades.
>
> So, please be as specific as possible, and point to my remark(s) that you think encourage
> someone to take excessive safety risks and why it does so, so I can better understand your
> concerns.
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

Eric:
If my last 3 posts don't explain the problem to you - nobody can. You keep trying to redefine the question to whether you encouraged new pilots to take "excessive" or "unacceptable" risks while refusing to recognize that precisely because they are new, they don't know what is "excessive" or "unacceptable". And - and the only measure you use as the basis for your opinions is their number of land outs. If you want specifics then start with your 7/11 advice to Charlie L ; " I think you could have some better flights than you do now, if you pushed harder and failed more often."

You had no basis to say that other than a cursory notice that he has successfully avoided landing out very much (which I commend). You have not coached him, flown dual with him nor instructed him -nor anybody else apparently, in a long time.

Coaching and helping new XC pilots is a serious business that our sport needs to take seriously - and you are not doing that.
Don't patronize me with your remarks that you are "surprised I am not aware" of the issues, encouragement and tools available to teach XC - it is most of what I do. I write, lecture, conduct seminars and video presentations, dual fly, lead and follow, and coach new XC pilots here and in South Africa. That's why I take this issue seriously. It seems to be none of what you do.

If you think that your expertise in motorgliders (which I freely acknowledge is second to none) coupled with your admission that you fly more aggressively with the motor somehow qualifies you to tell a less experienced, non MG pilot (that you have never flown with, instructed or coached) that he should "push harder" and land out more often, it is beyond my ability to change your thinking. But at least please don't do it publicly.

Good luck, - You can have the last word on this discussion. I'm done and will not post further on this. As noted above, I respect your expertise and commitment to motor gliding matters. I'm sorry that you don't respect my commitment to teaching and promoting safe XC to newer pilots.

ROY

On 7/15/2021 9:54 AM, Roy B. wrote:
> If you think that your expertise in motorgliders (which I freely acknowledge is second to none) coupled with your admission that you fly more aggressively with the motor somehow qualifies you to tell a less experienced, non MG pilot (that you have never flown with, instructed or coached) that he should "push harder" and land out more often, it is beyond my ability to change your thinking. But at least please don't do it publicly.

But I have flown with Charlie, just not in the same plane. We've flown at least two camps
together, interacted socially as well as shared thermals, I look at his OLC posts
routinely. Charlie is an experienced XC pilot, good at it, and won't be doing anything
foolish because of what I said.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 2:22:37 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 7/15/2021 9:54 AM, Roy B. wrote:
> > If you think that your expertise in motorgliders (which I freely acknowledge is second to none) coupled with your admission that you fly more aggressively with the motor somehow qualifies you to tell a less experienced, non MG pilot (that you have never flown with, instructed or coached) that he should "push harder" and land out more often, it is beyond my ability to change your thinking. But at least please don't do it publicly.
> But I have flown with Charlie, just not in the same plane. We've flown at least two camps
> together, interacted socially as well as shared thermals, I look at his OLC posts
> routinely. Charlie is an experienced XC pilot, good at it, and won't be doing anything
> foolish because of what I said.
> --
> Eric Greenwell - USA
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1

This is certainly NOT about semantics, this is about attitude, the attitude that encourages unsafe flight. What Eric should have acknowledged is that challenging yourself promotes a very unsafe environment. Landing out has nothing do do with challenging a young or any other XC sailplane pilot.
I have helped many young and inexperience sailplane pilots realize the dream of getting away from the home field, but always encouraged them work within a certain parameter to make it back home and avoid a possible unsafe event. When time come I am relative sure that they can handle any situation that they are presented with. Recently a young sailplane pilot said to me that they needed more practice, my reply was NO, you need perfect practice which will result in perfect performance.
So Eric, spin you comments anyway you desire, but your words spoke louder than your actions. Kind of reminds me of an old saying, " A Drunk Man's Words Are A Sober Man's Thoughts". Closing out for now, you need to ponder upon your comments. Old Bob, The Purist