BarbR wrote: I started out in favor of an ESAP program as long as the accomplishments in this program were recognized as having been completed under the ESAP program and distinctly separate in recognition from the original SAP. I don’t believe color coding the LSF level insignia’s will clarify this. Clearly having a separate parallel program will not be the case as referenced by Jim Deck “If the ESAP is adopted, non-LSF members who complete the ESAP will receive the next available LSF number, current LSF members who choose to participate in the ESAP will retain their number”. This confirms the INTEGRATION aspect of the newly proposed ESAP into the current LSF rankings. And in fact adds another confusion if you are a current LSF SAP level and display that insignia and are working on a lower level in the ESAP how would anyone differentiate between what level you really are in which SAP program? I believe this action dilutes the original concept of the League of Silent Flight (hence silent flight) by adding a motor into the concept. In addition, the threads that are proposing “a majority of the flying between launch and landing be done without any motor power” are in complete contrast to the silent flight concept. ).
I don't understand your concern about your LSF number and what it has to do with which program you are working. Your LSF number is your membership number within LSF. What does that have to do with confusion about what level you are in each program? Are you saying the LSF Secretary will not be able to tell which program I am working when I submit my forms? I presume the forms will say which program they are for.
I also don't think that there is a general intent that the motor should be run during the flight. I think there was a discussion about what MIGHT be done or COULD be done, but I don't think anyone has made a solid proposal, nor is there a proposal under consideration that would have motor runs other than launch.
Perhaps you should go back and re-read the proposal under consideration.
BarbR wrote: With this proposal a pilot going for a 10 minute flight could use a motor for 4 min. and 59 seconds and soar for 5 min. and 1 second and call it a ten minute flight. Absolutely no way should this be allowed! Apparently there is a current electric soaring achievement program so I propose that one be kept and/or amended as needed but leave it out of the current LSF achievement program!
I do not recall seeing any proposal under consideration that would make your statement valid.
As to your other point, are you saying that LSF should ignore the growing numbers of glider pilots who are using electric launched gliders, I would like to bring your attention to the LSF web site and the very first paragraph of the Introduction to LSF.
Introduction to the LSF
The League of Silent Flight was established by a group of RC sailplane modelers in 1969 to provide a collective identification for radio control sailplane enthusiasts. The LSF, as it is now known throughout the world, quickly became very popular and has since grown to a membership of over 7,500 modelers. The non-profit LSF fosters and supports all phases of both sporting and competition activity for model sailplanes and encourages the advancement of model aeronautics and related aspects of RC soaring.
So, if this is truly what the LSF is about, then any suggestion that the electric launched sailplane community should be ignored or treated as a lesser community would be in direct contradiction to the above introduction to LSF.
BarbR wrote: For those who are arguing that there is no difference between un-motored gliders and motored-gliders why is there so much discussion, debate and proposals about method of launch, tasks to be completed, motor run time, and all the other issues that have been raised? Clearly this is a difference and I can only hope that my fellow LSF SAP aspirants will see this in the end of all this discussion and vote against “integrating” electric sailplanes into the current LSF SAP program.
Why is there so much discussion? Because comment and discussion was requested. And, for the most part, people enjoy discussing things. They enjoy throwing out new ideas.
As for integrating electric sailplanes into the current SAP, there are no proposals under consideration that suggest that path. And since there are no such proposals under consideration you can't vote against it. It does not exist.
BarbR wrote: Leave it as it is and let the electric sailplane enthusiasts create their own program by amending their existing program or starting a new one. I would participate in a separate ESAP program since I am in the process of getting into that method of flying gliders but I will not support or participate in an “integrated” program for electrics into the current LSF program unless the achievement levels are recognized as separate E levels of LSF (i.e. LSF Level IIIE or ELSF Level III).
Glad you agree. That is exactly what has been proposed and what is being discussed here. Perhaps you do not realize that what you are suggesting is exactly what has been proposed.
If you have not read the actual proposal, it can be found here:
A proposed Soaring Achievement Program for Electric Powered Sailplanes
www.silentflight.org/index.php/news
It is not about integrating e-gliders into the current program, it is about a separate program for e-gliders. Just as you suggested.