Asw20 vs Discus

[[email protected]]

Hi,

I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of these two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the same handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
Strong vs weak conditions?
How well does each carry water?
Anything else you can offer.

I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.

Thanks
RB

[Al McNamara[_2_]]

I think it's a really interesting question, made more complex by the
various versions of the ASW 20. The UK handicaps suggest the b,c and 16.6m
versions are better than the Discus (a,b, c or cs) and I think in terms of
pure performance that is probably right.

The main difference for me is that the Discus is a generation newer. It
has self connecting controls, achieves similar performance without the
complexity of flaps, is easier to get water into and probably easier to fly
for a less experienced pilot. Older ASW20's will probably come with
problems (e.g. water systems not working properly, poor gel) and might need
a bit of work to get to the same standard.

In Europe, a 20 'a' (same handicap as Discus) will probably cost
significantly less than a Discus, and the later versions (probably better
performance) about the same.

Overall, I find myself wondering which I would choose. I think with the
time to find the right 20, or flexibility to refurbish one, that is
probably the better option, but a close call and a decision which might not
be the same for everyone.


At 18:44 11 May 2014, wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of
>these two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the
>same handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>Strong vs weak conditions?
>How well does each carry water?
>Anything else you can offer.
>
>I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>
>Thanks
>RB
>

[Al McNamara]

Reply re-posted without the typo's:

I think it's a really interesting question, made more complex by the
various versions of the ASW 20. The UK handicaps suggest the b,c and 16.6
versions are better than the Discus (a,b, c or cs) and I think in terms of
pure performance that is probably right.

The main difference for me is that the Discus is a generation newer. It has
self connecting controls, achieves similar performance without the
complexity of flaps, is easier to get water into and probably easier to fly
for a less experienced pilot. Older ASW20's will probably come with
problems (e.g. water systems not working properly, poor gel) and might need
a bit of work to get to the same standard.

In Europe, a 20 'a' (same handicap as Discus) will probably cost
significantly less than a Discus, and the later versions (probably better
performance) about the same.

Overall, I find myself wondering which I would choose. I think with the
time to find the right 20, or flexibility to refurbish one, that the 20 is
probably the better option, but a close call and a decision which might not
be the same for everyone.


>At 18:44 11 May 2014, wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of
>>these two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the
>>same handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>>Strong vs weak conditions?
>>How well does each carry water?
>>Anything else you can offer.
>>
>>I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>>
>>Thanks
>>RB
>>
>
>

[krasw]

On Sunday, 11 May 2014 21:44:07 UTC+3, wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of these two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the same handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>
> Strong vs weak conditions?
>
> How well does each carry water?
>
> Anything else you can offer.
>
>
>
> I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> RB

I've flown over 500 hrs both (Discus b/WL and ASW20 "A"). Performance is pretty much the same. If you fly a lot without water ballast, ASW goes better in strong conditions. Discus can be ballasted to 70kg more so that evens it out (fully ballasted ASW20 climbs better, though). Both suffer from rain and bugs. ASW is a bit more complex because of flaps, but it is nicer to fly and accelerates better, plus you can land it in tighter spot. With Discus you have to get used to thermalling with controls crossed (it requires counter-aileron when turning). Directional stability is better in Discus (more so with winglets), with ASW you have to be more sensitive with rudder. Both have roomy cockpits, back rest can be removed for long pilots.

Discus is much easier to rig, ASW has heavier wings and manual connections. *This is the only part where you notice the Discus is newer generation*. Original gelcoat is probably long gone in both of them. You can put jet engine to ASW, but on the other hand buy a used Turbo Discus.

I have had water system issues both with Discus (those leaking S-H valves....) and ASW (leaking bag). Minor things.

Both are very good gliders, but ASW gives you same performance little bit cheaper.

[Chris Rollings[_2_]]

At 08:42 13 May 2014, krasw wrote:
>On Sunday, 11 May 2014 21:44:07 UTC+3, wrote:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of
>t=
>hese two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the
>same=
> handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>>=20
>> Strong vs weak conditions?
>>=20
>> How well does each carry water?
>>=20
>> Anything else you can offer.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Thanks
>>=20
>> RB
>
>I've flown over 500 hrs both (Discus b/WL and ASW20 "A"). Performance is
>pr=
>etty much the same. If you fly a lot without water ballast, ASW goes
>better=
> in strong conditions. Discus can be ballasted to 70kg more so that evens
>i=
>t out (fully ballasted ASW20 climbs better, though). Both suffer from
rain
>=
>and bugs. ASW is a bit more complex because of flaps, but it is nicer to
>fl=
>y and accelerates better, plus you can land it in tighter spot. With
>Discus=
> you have to get used to thermalling with controls crossed (it requires
>cou=
>nter-aileron when turning). Directional stability is better in Discus
>(more=
> so with winglets), with ASW you have to be more sensitive with rudder.
>Bot=
>h have roomy cockpits, back rest can be removed for long pilots.
>
>Discus is much easier to rig, ASW has heavier wings and manual
>connections.=
> *This is the only part where you notice the Discus is newer generation*.
>O=
>riginal gelcoat is probably long gone in both of them. You can put jet
>engi=
>ne to ASW, but on the other hand buy a used Turbo Discus.
>
>I have had water system issues both with Discus (those leaking S-H
>valves..=
>..) and ASW (leaking bag). Minor things.
>
>Both are very good gliders, but ASW gives you same performance little bit
>c=
>heaper.
>

Agree with all of the above, based on a fair amount of experience in both.
the only thing I would add is that, at more or less equal wing-loadings,
the ASW20 starts to do considerably better as you get above 80 - 90 knots.

[JS]

As previously stated plus:
It's likely a Discus has a better trailer than a 20 "A" or most B, for example Cobra with single-piece Al floor and captive 4-wheel dollies.
The 20C is new enough to have the same.
But my vote is always with flaps, as Chris points out re the high end of the polar.
Jim

[rlovinggood]

One other "plus" in the column for the Discus over the 20: It won't self-immolate when the canopy is open and positioned "just right" to catch the sun and focus the beam of light on the glare shield...

Ray
PS: If anyone has a Discus or 20 they would like to toss out, I'll be glad to come and tote it away for you!

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, 11 May 2014 19:44:07 UTC+1, wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of these two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the same handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>
> Strong vs weak conditions?
>
> How well does each carry water?
>
> Anything else you can offer.
>
>
>
> I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> RB

Thanks for the replies, very helpful!