The Price of Performance

[FunnyFlyer]

Had a great afternoon flying in very light conditions at my local Honey Hill slope. Met a couple of guys flying some very tasty Blaster DLGs. One was an old flying acquaintance from our teenage years - hi Chris!

There was some thermal lift - and the drill was to use the very light slope lift to hook a thermal. My somewhat battered EG with a brushless conversion was very much Cinderella to the Blaster's Prince Charming. When things got too light - I did the unthinkable and used the motor to avoid landing out and putting some serious altitude in the bank - much to the derision on the Blaster pilots!

To the point of my post.

When I stopped copping out with the motor - I deliberately engaged in some close in soaring to keep aloft and work the light slope lift. At times I dipped below the slope level - but I reckon on average I could maintain 10 - 20 feet above the lip. The Blaster flown by Chris was a good 20 to 30 feet above me at all times. He could ride smaller patches of weak thermal lift better. When the stronger stuff came through - we could both climb to great height.

I reckon that a Blaster equipped with MKS servos will be around £400, more than double the price of an EG Pro. In terms of quality and desirability, the Blaster beats the EG hands down. But on today's evidence - that £200 bought an extra 20 feet or so of altitude.

There will be a threshold, though, when that £200 buys the ability to fly at all - when the EG is grounded.

Interesting comparison...

Edited By FunnyFlyer on 23/08/2012 18:18:42

[Chris Theakstone]

We had a great day, first visit to Honey hill for over 30 years, 3 1/2 hours airbourne from 4 launches (had to keep landing for tea and sandwiches). I agree the blaster isn't cheap but is great fun discus launched from flat fields as well as good light lift sloper. We didnt need to resort to power to save the slog up and down the hill to collect land outs !!!!!!

Amazing thing is I have just charged the two 350 Ma 2s lipos I used today ,one flown for two hours took 213 Ma and the other flown for 1.5 hours took 175 ma so enough for five hours !.

Chris (off flying bigger stuff tomorrow)

[Dave Bran]

A comparison, but hardly as you well know like for like?

Fun, but does not allow for the difference in familiarity with the machine being flown or the base skills of the pilots. Uses two quite dissimilar machines.of probably very differing weights/drag/lift.

I'm VERY experienced (approx five years) with a sub 100g Alula Mk1, lots and lots of hours used, overall cost far less than your EG, and if the Blaster pilots could fly no more than 20-30 feet above your EG's ceiling with say a marginally sub 300g machine, I can pretty much guarantee that the Alula would have specced out. (and I have no claims on my piloting ability other than experience!)

Now check the relative cost, Alula to Blaster. TEE HEE.....................

Now I DO know someone who deliberately enters full on soaring competitions with a EG for a laugh, up against machines costing well into four figures......and regularly rubs the expensive mouldie pilot's noses in it.........................

[Peewhit]

I have both an EG electric and a Blaster 2.

Whilst the EG is good for electric flat field flying there is really no comparison on the slope.

The EG strugggles to do a decent roll.

The Blaster will do both vertical and horizontal eights.

Yes, the Blaster is more expensive.

You do not need to fit it out with expensive MKS servos as the control surfaces do not need that much power.

Try doing real aerobatics in light lift with an EG!

I know which I prefer.

[FunnyFlyer]

@Peewhit

Couple of things - Honey Hill is a very gentle slope and it was very light conditions. Secondly, EG makes no claims to be aerobatic.

Besides - I like gliders to go gliding and lift scratching with. If I want aeros I fly an aerobatic power model and give the slope a miss.

@Dave Bran

I don't think you or anybody else clould have specced any model out on slope lift alone in my example.

Edited By FunnyFlyer on 23/08/2012 21:10:50

[Peewhit]

Hey lad,

Aeros with power are so easy it is untrue.

Now, to do aeros on the slope with an unpowered glider takes that little bit of skill.

In additon to the Blaster, I only have a Skorp, Typhoon, Wizard Compact and Stinger, all of which can do superb aeros on wind power alone.

Try it sometime, if you dare

[FunnyFlyer]

@Peewhit - that's an impressive fleet of gliders you have - and also a penchant for making HUGE assumptions about my flying history.

Slope aeros? Been there and done that since 1984.

Now - you got me thinking about the "wind power" that powers our slope models.

It appears that the wind energy in Watts striking an area is:

​P = 1/2 x A x D x V^3

Where:

A = Area (Swept) the wind strikes of the slope in sq metres

D = Density of Air in Kg per cubic Metre. At sea level it's 1.23

V = Velocity in Metres per sec. A 20 mph wind is approx 9 m/s

So - some very crude calculations around my slope. It's about 200m long, and the projected depth to the wind is about 50m - so the swept area is 10,000 sq metres. Assume a 9 m/s wind straight on to the slope - and that we're at sea level. So the wind power onto the slope is:

​P = 1/2 x 10,000 x 1.23 x 729

=​4.48 Mega Watts

​Now that is quite a lot of power that is available to our little gliders. Not all of it, of course, is exploited - but the numbers are surprising! I wonder who can take this a bit further and work out the Power available to an individual glider.

That's the end of my anoraking. I'll let others do the calculation for Ivinghoe Beacon or the Great Orme...

Edited By FunnyFlyer on 24/08/2012 10:23:30

[bouncebounce crunch]

FunnyFlyer, you nearly killed my brain with the tech advise you gave me for electric terminology a few weeks back (Grateful.) are you tring to send me to the asykum now, hmm?

bbc.

[Tom Satinet]

what strikes me about that price comparision is how much cheaper the blaster is relative to the amount of time/effort/materials that has gone to making both models:

easy glider - injection moulded EPP - mass produced RC parts shuch as electric motor.

blaster - hand laid cloth and all the other things associated with the moulding process (which is lots).

I guess it depends on how you measure performance. The EG is an okay model for what it is. I wouldn't pay 200 quid to have one as a sloper though as I think it is really quite a boring model. I don't think it is well suited to general slope soaring for the reasons mentioned above. (i've got a non electric one by the way)

You could argue that if the objective of the exercise is "soaring" in inverted commas, as it were, then flat field soaring is the way to go. If it is about the challenge of keeping the model in the air. Per the comment above, things like the EG and the radian can do well in flat field soaring.

[FunnyFlyer]

@Tom

Agree that the Blaster is a lovely piece of work and oozes quality.

My EG electric has to be somewhat schizophrenic as I fly it from the flat as well as the slope in light conditions. My local slope does not produce the sort of high lift conditions that many others do.

To return to my original observation that on the light day in question - the Blaster did out soar the EG in the "pure" slope lift - by around 20 feet or so. When we both centred into thermal lift, the differential was practically zero. In dead air, min sink conditions I'm sure the Blaster would win hands down.

Disagree that the EG is boring. I've had many flat field flights of over 90 minutes and done several cross country flights of around 2 miles or so. It's whatever floats your boat.

 

Edited By FunnyFlyer on 24/08/2012 12:31:42

[Tom Satinet]

Well I said it is boring as a slope soarer. Which I stand by to be honest. I also have a radian pro electric which I sometimes fly from the flat field. I would put the two models in a similar categeory. You are right there is a lot of pleasure to be had from a good thermal flight and electric is really convient.

Either model as a sloper is pretty dull. Mind you the blaster is not a sloper either. With the blaster you are paying for it to be able to take a competition level discus launch which the EG is never going to be subjected to. The EG is a complete waste of money for a DLG comp and the blaster probably won't excell at e-soaring...

As a light air sloper the EG is okay, but like Peter says the roll rate is so bad it isn't that much fun, compared to other models. I'd rather have the alula for less money.

Where the EG and Radian suffer in thermal soaring is that they both have a poor L/D drag ratio when you want to move about the sky, which is necessary in some conditions. Obviously there is where the moulded stuff excells. Both the radian (pro in my case) and EG have good handling and go up okay in lift though (what doesn't though!).

chalk and cheese, apples and oranges, and all that.

[Handyman]

At the risk of being jumped on by all and sundry,it seems that a little bit of "One-up-man-ship" is springing up here. I am a power pilot and get an immense amount of pleasure from my hobby. I do have a 9ft discus glider that I often take down to South Wales to make use of the slopes there.

The pleasure I get lying on my back amongst the heather with my mate just watching my aircraft maintaining and sometimes gaining height is something else. I have never given any thought to how much an aircraft has cost me, nor would I denigrate another persons model, be it a foamy or handbuilt aircraft, except in "Fun".

The hobby is to be enjoyed whether you have a top of the range model or a "Bitsa" made from 2 or 3 other models.

I rest my case!!!!!

Tony.

[Chris Theakstone]

I didn't realise me turning up on the slope after some 30 years would cause such a fuss !!!!

I didnt realise it was a competition either, I avoid clubs for the reason of all the comments above, mines faster, lighter,more expensive, cheaper etc etc.For me this hobby is only about fun, it makes no difference how good or bad your kit is, how good or bad you are as a pilot, as long as you are safe and enjoy it thats all that matters.

By the way it was a Blaster three, which is not quite as good at aerobatics as the two and it's inverted soaring is terrible.

[Dave Bran]

So, it IS true about gliderists not understanding ironic humour then....................

TEE HEE...................