Re: Newest Sailplane in the world on display at the 2016 SSA convention

[SF]

Yep, its the new Ventus. Sorry Boggs, I promise I'll shut up next week, and I will never again try to host a national event with a marketing budget of $0.00. This goes on the list along with: never try to run a manufacturing operation if the cost accountant works for someone else. That one didn't end well.

Would you believe that glider pilots will just not buy advance tickets? Makes it real hard to get comfortable with the number of attendees. Bought a bottle of Stranahan Colorado Whiskey Saturday, it might not make it to the convention start. May be going to Rehab week after next.

SF

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Interesting that the New Ventus has three distinct hard bends in the wing when viewed from photos underneath the wing. I wonder what the purpose of those are? Damn auto correct on prior post.

[Andrew Ainslie]

Who cares? God it's beautiful! An astonishingly gorgeous aircraft. I just hope it doesn't destroy the resale value of my 29 :)

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

I care that is why I commented. usually the air likes smooth transitions. If you view the photos on FB there are hard bends in the wing. I wonder what the purpose is, why they are not smooth transitions and is there any separation on the hard edges of the bends?

As for the 29, over 300 have been built for a reason, it is a wonderful glider. The new Ventus has a 3 plus year wait and it has not been vetted. I am sure it is a great glider, but only time will tell if it is better than the current standard.

On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:13:36 PM UTC-8, Andrew Ainslie wrote:
> Who cares? God it's beautiful! An astonishingly gorgeous aircraft. I just hope it doesn't destroy the resale value of my 29 :)

[Tony[_5_]]

Wow, looking forward to seeing it!

[waremark]

It looks very similar to the Arcus which has worked out well, seems to have proved the concept.

Re the 29, isn't the JS1C the glider it will be trying to beat?

[Peter F[_2_]]

Increasing dihedral towards the tip.

Seems to have worked well for the D2, DD & Arcus

Won't significantly affect the resale of a '29. You'll need to wait for the
ASx33 for that

PF

At 05:36 09 February 2016, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
>I care that is why I commented. usually the air likes smooth
transitions.
>=
> If you view the photos on FB there are hard bends in the wing. I wonder
>w=
>hat the purpose is, why they are not smooth transitions and is there any
>se=
>paration on the hard edges of the bends?
>
>As for the 29, over 300 have been built for a reason, it is a wonderful
>gli=
>der. The new Ventus has a 3 plus year wait and it has not been vetted.
I
>=
>am sure it is a great glider, but only time will tell if it is better
than
>=
>the current standard.
>
>On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 8:13:36 PM UTC-8, Andrew Ainslie wrote:
>> Who cares? God it's beautiful! An astonishingly gorgeous aircraft. I
>just=
> hope it doesn't destroy the resale value of my 29 :)
>

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Mon, 08 Feb 2016 21:36:04 -0800, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

> I care that is why I commented. usually the air likes smooth
> transitions. If you view the photos on FB there are hard bends in the
> wing. I wonder what the purpose is, why they are not smooth transitions
> and is there any separation on the hard edges of the bends?
>
You get interference drag at any dihedral break, but the amount of drag
is not linearly related to the angle between the panels. Consequently,
all other things being equal, a six panel wing will have less drag than a
four panel wing with the same span and tip height because the angles
between the panels are less.

At least, that is what I've heard from wing designers who know a lot more
about such matters than than I do. My design experience is limited to
free flight F1J power models and F1A gliders. I've usually designed and
built my own models and got decent competition results with them.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Steve Leonard[_2_]]

Couple of reasons for the "hard bends".

1. Manufacturing. Yes, you could do it as smooth, flowing curves since the molds are now machine cut. But, it is more difficult to fit and press together long, flowing curved joints than a series of straight line joints. You also notice that most wings have distinct taper breaks, and not the "elliptical" planform (SZD-55, PW-5 and PW-6 are exceptions).

2. Ease of repair or refinish. Ever try to make a sanding board to perfectly blend a re-pair or refinish on a continuously varying radius, 3D part?

The changes in dihedral are small enough to not cause any significant issues. Similar to the changes in taper ratio at a taper break. Yes, there is a change in the pressure field around the wing at each of these, but there is negligible impact until you get to much larger changes in taper ratio or dihedral than are used here.

To my mind, the real benefits of the changes in dihedral come about in the outer at most 1/3rd of the semi-span, where you can make the downwash field behind the wing work to keep the tip votrex from shrinking the span of the downwash field.

But, that is just my opinion.

Steve Leonard

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

I always thought the discrete breaks in dihedral and taper were primarily so the control surfaces could have straight hinge lines that didn't bind.

I suspect the other reasons are also true.

9B

[smfidler]

I'm starting to feel like I am at a boy band concert watching the girls screaming uncontrollably in he front row as the lead singer sings to them...

Just like the JS-1 camp has learned, out designing the ASG-29 in all conditions and at all wing loadings is a very, very high bar to jump over cleanly..

Here is a towel.

Stop drooling all over yourselves and let's see if the V3 wins the 18 meter World Championship in Australia next January before loosing consciousness, screaming like school girls at a boy band concert.

The V3 'might' win the Worlds and become a dominant 18m glider, but until it does, it's mainly marketing hype. They will employ a surge of top pilots (disproportional distribution) trying to win their first worlds (see Quintus) and seal in the marketing investment. JS-1 tried this too and never quite made it over the "29 bar."

Many, quite recently in fact, thought the JS-1 would dominate the ASG-29...but it has not. Only very recently with the new EVO design has the JS-1 begin to seriously challenge the 29. The JS1 has still never won a world championship against the ASG29. Not once (well, if you count the last SGP World Championship,yes, but there was a valid wing loading fairness controversy at that event).

And, even if the V3 does prove a match or better, Schleicher will simply draw up a new 18 meter glider specifically intended to make the V3 obsolete. Maybe Schleicher is down the track on this design already... Maybe they can simply improve the 29 with a new wing design like the JS-1 camp has with the newJS-1 Evo.

One thing is certain, the glider manufactures have us all right where they want us right now...buzzing wildly over almost nothing, fighting to hand over 200k checks in order to own a yet unproven glider which many somehow absolutely believe will beat the the pants off the 29 via its performance advantages alone. Good luck with that thinking gentleman. I've seen this cycle many times before in many sports.

And, if the V3 is somehow unstoppable in 18 meter, we already have so many ASG29s in the USA that we could just start a "29 ONLY class" (much less expensive than a new V3 and all with identical performance and already well proven machines!). One design! ;-). It will be 5 years before the V3 numbers approach a third of the 29s already in the USA. And that number is only in a perfect world for Shempp Hirth, with no hiccups or issues with the design. You V3 bling, bling glider guys will have to fly in open class again the Concordia!

So, I'm excited to see the V3 (and the buzz surrounding it) but won't be interested until it proves that it is a significantly better (or even equal) sailplane to the ASG29 and the JS1 Evo in a wide range of conditions. And even then, rather than jumping at it immediately, I'll be looking to see the reaction from the other manufacturers.

Amused and thoroughly enjoying the screams and shouts of glee (and drool) from the SH crowd... You can keep the towel.

Sean

[smfidler]

I'm starting to feel as if I'm at some boy band concert watching the girls screaming uncontrollably at the lead singer from the front row...

Just like the JS-1 camp learned, out designing the ASG-29 in all conditions and at all wing loadings is a very, very high bar to jump over cleanly.

Here is a towel.

Stop drooling all over yourselves and let's see if the V3 wins the 18 meter World Championship in Australia next January before loosing consciousness, screaming like school girls the latest, greatest boy band concert...

The V3 'might' just win the Worlds on its first go and even become a truly dominant 18m glider, but until it does, it's marketing hype. They will employ a surge of top pilots (disproportional distribution) trying to win their first worlds (see Quintus) and seal in the marketing investment. JS-1 tried this too but never made it over that pesky "ASG-29 bar." Pilots often trump a gliders true performance. Keep an eye on this.

Many, quite recently in fact, thought the JS-1 would dominate the ASG-29...but it has not. Only very recently, with the new EVO design, has the JS-1 begin to challenge the 29. And the JS1 has never won a FAI world championship against the enviable ASG29. Not once (well, if you count the last SGP World Championship,yes, but there was a valid wing loading fairness controversy at that smaller event)!

And, even if the V3 does prove a match or better, Schleicher will simply draw up a new 18 meter glider specifically intended to make the V3 obsolete, and so on... Maybe Schleicher is already well down the track on this new design already... Maybe they can simply improve the 29 with a new wing design like the JS-1 camp has with the new JS-1 Evo.

One thing is certain, the glider manufactures have you all right where they want you...buzzing wildly over almost nothing, fighting to hand over 200k checks in order to own (years from now) an unproven glider which many somehow absolutely (almost religiously) believe is sure to allow them to beat the pants off anyone flying the ASG-29 via its massive performance advantages.. Good luck with this gentleman. I for one have seen this cycle many times before in many sports.

And, if the V3 is somehow completely unstoppable in 18 meter (as you suggest), we already have so many ASG29s in the USA that we could "put our hands up" and start a "29 ONLY class" (much less expensive than buying (and waiting for) a new V3 and all with identical performance while being well proven machines!). One design 18 meter the racing! ;-). It will be 5 years, minimum, before the V3 US numbers approach a third of the 29s. And that 1/3 number is only in a perfect world for Shempp Hirth, with no hiccups or issues with the design. You V3 "bling, bling" glider guys (if it's ridiculously better) might just have to fly in open class again the Concordia! :-)

So, I'm excited to see the V3 at the convention (and the buzz surrounding it) but won't be interested until it clearly proves that it is a significantly better (or even equal) sailplane to the ASG29 and the JS1 Evo in a wide range of conditions. Until it proves its worth with contest results. And even then, rather than jumping at it immediately, I'll be looking to see the reaction from the other manufacturers.

Amused and thoroughly enjoying the "screams and shouts of glee" from the SH fan boys...

Sean

[smfidler]

And technically, the GP14 is a newer, far more innovative design. It has the potential to really grow the sport.

http://www.gpgliders.com/gp-14-velo-0

Powerful electric self launch w/o the FES propeller drag, 45:1, flapped 13.5 meter. Light, small and easier to manage.

Roughly 80k complete (yes, COMPLETE) with trailer. Even better if you order at the convention. That is simply incredible pricing.

I would be even more excited to see this little puppy at the convention floor! I already know what a SH wing with a Maumer winglet looks like. ;-)

Sean

[Tim[_11_]]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 11:00:00 AM UTC-6, smfidler wrote:
> And technically, the GP14 is a newer, far more innovative design. It has the potential to really grow the sport.
>
> http://www.gpgliders.com/gp-14-velo-0
>
> Powerful electric self launch w/o the FES propeller drag, 45:1, flapped 13.5 meter. Light, small and easier to manage.
>
> Roughly 80k complete (yes, COMPLETE) with trailer. Even better if you order at the convention. That is simply incredible pricing.
>
> I would be even more excited to see this little puppy at the convention floor! I already know what a SH wing with a Maumer winglet looks like. ;-)
>
> Sean

Thanks for the props for this glider Sean! Things are shaping up nicely for this glider and, as you say, the price/performance with self-launch capability is pretty spectacular. Promotional pricing is still available for early adopters!

Unfortunately, Innovation and High Quality take longer than the oringinal very aggressive ambitions of this young glider manufacturer. Things are progressing very well at the factory and they are putting the finishing touches on the prototype for first flight very "shortly". If someone could give a call to the weather gods of southeastern Poland, everyone involved would appreciate it. While a GP 14 will not be on the floor of this convention, please stop by the GP Gliders USA booth at the convention to learn more and pickup some cool schwag.

Tim McAllister
GP Gliders USA

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

I would be interested to know if the fuselage is the same from the V2CX series, the canopy is side hinged. is it the same Vertical fin airfoil, same horizontal? Are the wings turbinated with blow holes or zig zag tape?

I purchased a V2C waited two years to get it then 6 weeks after I got the V2C licensed and in the air the V2CX was announced, I was very unhappy. If the New Ventus is the same fuselage and tail feathers as to V2CX, then I wonder how long before the New Ventus X is announced.


On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 8:47:36 AM UTC-8, smfidler wrote:
> I'm starting to feel as if I'm at some boy band concert watching the girls screaming uncontrollably at the lead singer from the front row...
>
> Just like the JS-1 camp learned, out designing the ASG-29 in all conditions and at all wing loadings is a very, very high bar to jump over cleanly.
>
> Here is a towel.
>
> Stop drooling all over yourselves and let's see if the V3 wins the 18 meter World Championship in Australia next January before loosing consciousness, screaming like school girls the latest, greatest boy band concert...
>
> The V3 'might' just win the Worlds on its first go and even become a truly dominant 18m glider, but until it does, it's marketing hype. They will employ a surge of top pilots (disproportional distribution) trying to win their first worlds (see Quintus) and seal in the marketing investment. JS-1 tried this too but never made it over that pesky "ASG-29 bar." Pilots often trump a gliders true performance. Keep an eye on this.
>
> Many, quite recently in fact, thought the JS-1 would dominate the ASG-29....but it has not. Only very recently, with the new EVO design, has the JS-1 begin to challenge the 29. And the JS1 has never won a FAI world championship against the enviable ASG29. Not once (well, if you count the last SGP World Championship,yes, but there was a valid wing loading fairness controversy at that smaller event)!
>
> And, even if the V3 does prove a match or better, Schleicher will simply draw up a new 18 meter glider specifically intended to make the V3 obsolete, and so on... Maybe Schleicher is already well down the track on this new design already... Maybe they can simply improve the 29 with a new wing design like the JS-1 camp has with the new JS-1 Evo.
>
> One thing is certain, the glider manufactures have you all right where they want you...buzzing wildly over almost nothing, fighting to hand over 200k checks in order to own (years from now) an unproven glider which many somehow absolutely (almost religiously) believe is sure to allow them to beat the pants off anyone flying the ASG-29 via its massive performance advantages. Good luck with this gentleman. I for one have seen this cycle many times before in many sports.
>
> And, if the V3 is somehow completely unstoppable in 18 meter (as you suggest), we already have so many ASG29s in the USA that we could "put our hands up" and start a "29 ONLY class" (much less expensive than buying (and waiting for) a new V3 and all with identical performance while being well proven machines!). One design 18 meter the racing! ;-). It will be 5 years, minimum, before the V3 US numbers approach a third of the 29s. And that 1/3 number is only in a perfect world for Shempp Hirth, with no hiccups or issues with the design. You V3 "bling, bling" glider guys (if it's ridiculously better) might just have to fly in open class again the Concordia! :-)
>
> So, I'm excited to see the V3 at the convention (and the buzz surrounding it) but won't be interested until it clearly proves that it is a significantly better (or even equal) sailplane to the ASG29 and the JS1 Evo in a wide range of conditions. Until it proves its worth with contest results. And even then, rather than jumping at it immediately, I'll be looking to see the reaction from the other manufacturers.
>
> Amused and thoroughly enjoying the "screams and shouts of glee" from the SH fan boys...
>
> Sean

[K m]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:47:36 AM UTC-7, smfidler wrote:
> I'm starting to feel as if I'm at some boy band concert watching the girls screaming uncontrollably at the lead singer from the front row...
>
> Just like the JS-1 camp learned, out designing the ASG-29 in all conditions and at all wing loadings is a very, very high bar to jump over cleanly.
>
> Here is a towel.
>
> Stop drooling all over yourselves and let's see if the V3 wins the 18 meter World Championship in Australia next January before loosing consciousness, screaming like school girls the latest, greatest boy band concert...
>
> The V3 'might' just win the Worlds on its first go and even become a truly dominant 18m glider, but until it does, it's marketing hype. They will employ a surge of top pilots (disproportional distribution) trying to win their first worlds (see Quintus) and seal in the marketing investment. JS-1 tried this too but never made it over that pesky "ASG-29 bar." Pilots often trump a gliders true performance. Keep an eye on this.
>
> Many, quite recently in fact, thought the JS-1 would dominate the ASG-29....but it has not. Only very recently, with the new EVO design, has the JS-1 begin to challenge the 29. And the JS1 has never won a FAI world championship against the enviable ASG29. Not once (well, if you count the last SGP World Championship,yes, but there was a valid wing loading fairness controversy at that smaller event)!
>
> And, even if the V3 does prove a match or better, Schleicher will simply draw up a new 18 meter glider specifically intended to make the V3 obsolete, and so on... Maybe Schleicher is already well down the track on this new design already... Maybe they can simply improve the 29 with a new wing design like the JS-1 camp has with the new JS-1 Evo.
>
> One thing is certain, the glider manufactures have you all right where they want you...buzzing wildly over almost nothing, fighting to hand over 200k checks in order to own (years from now) an unproven glider which many somehow absolutely (almost religiously) believe is sure to allow them to beat the pants off anyone flying the ASG-29 via its massive performance advantages. Good luck with this gentleman. I for one have seen this cycle many times before in many sports.
>
> And, if the V3 is somehow completely unstoppable in 18 meter (as you suggest), we already have so many ASG29s in the USA that we could "put our hands up" and start a "29 ONLY class" (much less expensive than buying (and waiting for) a new V3 and all with identical performance while being well proven machines!). One design 18 meter the racing! ;-). It will be 5 years, minimum, before the V3 US numbers approach a third of the 29s. And that 1/3 number is only in a perfect world for Shempp Hirth, with no hiccups or issues with the design. You V3 "bling, bling" glider guys (if it's ridiculously better) might just have to fly in open class again the Concordia! :-)
>
> So, I'm excited to see the V3 at the convention (and the buzz surrounding it) but won't be interested until it clearly proves that it is a significantly better (or even equal) sailplane to the ASG29 and the JS1 Evo in a wide range of conditions. Until it proves its worth with contest results. And even then, rather than jumping at it immediately, I'll be looking to see the reaction from the other manufacturers.
>
> Amused and thoroughly enjoying the "screams and shouts of glee" from the SH fan boys...
>
> Sean

Sean,
I think we are all a little upset since Zane left One Direction but lets get a hold of ourselves. You are talking a bunch of straw man silliness. I didn't know "Everyone" thought the JS would dominate and you have to admit it has produced some good results at the World level. It also has the ability to fly at 21M. Perhaps SH just realized that with a Decades old planform and wing and fuse profile it was time for an update. And "Technically" the GP14 is just a shiny mock up and until it flys and proves the numbers and enters serial production I'll rely on an 80 YO company. I am a Lifelong Schleicher Man myself, (K21,20,and 27) but I will try the V3 on for size at the convention and am considering buying a slot. I promise not to jump up and down with glee.

[Steve Koerner]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 8:55:25 AM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> I always thought the discrete breaks in dihedral and taper were primarily so the control surfaces could have straight hinge lines that didn't bind.
>
> I suspect the other reasons are also true.
>
> 9B

And reason #4 for the discrete breaks is to provide a (sort of) practical place for the wing wheel. A smooth curve would put a lot more underside exposed to rocks and pavement necessitating a taller wheel with more drag.

GW

[smfidler]

Don't get me wrong, I think the SH V3 will be a very, very good glider! I like its looks. Beautiful! Elegant.

The queston is will it be great. It should beat the 29, but will it?

Agree the JS-1 is a great glider too. But the facts are facts. Neither of these other gliders have won an 18m world championship. Of course there are numerous reasons, other than the glider itself, that may add to those stunning statistics. For example, the huge number of excellent pilots who own and fly 29s. Or the simplicity of triming, tuning and flying the 29. Or its wing loading potential and flight characteristis when at 11.7 lbs/ft., etc, etc.

Still, actually winning the worlds is an important data point. The 29 has won almost every 18 meter world championship that I can rememeber. It is an absolutely amazing glider. Exeeding it is going to be a big challenge. I for one am not quite ready to admit defeat.

Remember, I am rarely serious about this stuff. Its all for fun. I just like rattling the SH cages a little. I like being the new underdog! ;-)

I'll probaby pay for it soon enough as the V3 fly by me with 10 points better glide and 10 knots at some point this summer. He might even give me a wave as he cruises on by me in my dinosoar 29. We shall see.

Sean

[HGXC[_4_]]

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 12:00:00 PM UTC-5, smfidler wrote:
> And technically, the GP14 is a newer, far more innovative design. It has the potential to really grow the sport.
>
> http://www.gpgliders.com/gp-14-velo-0
>
> Powerful electric self launch w/o the FES propeller drag, 45:1, flapped 13.5 meter. Light, small and easier to manage.
>
> Roughly 80k complete (yes, COMPLETE) with trailer. Even better if you order at the convention. That is simply incredible pricing.
>
> I would be even more excited to see this little puppy at the convention floor! I already know what a SH wing with a Maumer winglet looks like. ;-)
>
> Sean

Sean ...do you have some sort of hard on for SH?...I celebrate all new designs because it helps advance the R&D of gliding. Why the pale of cold water?

Dennis

[smfidler]

Not cold water. Just a cool breeze of clam and patience.

I think the nemerous deposits and absolute belief in the performance predictions (every new glider makes them) is quitepremature. I think the V3 is going to run well, but will it climb in weak lift? Will it be able to carry water early in the day? Will it handle? Have they made their compromises properly and was their data analysis of 18 meter contest behavior (speeds, running, climbing percentages) accurate?

All the little things make a glider truly great (see 29). The Arcus is good, but really has had not true performance competition until last year with the 32. Unlike the Arcus which was entering a new class (flapped 20m 2 place), the V3 is entering the worlds most competitive class. The 29 is enormously strong and the JS-1 has been significantly improved (although very good from the early stages). The V3 really has to be Newley perfect to be demonstrably better than those gliders in all conditions. Is it a "me too" or is it truly innovative as they contend.

The V3 might, for example, end up being great in strong conditions and weak in others. I also question if they will build them light enough. I also worry about the cockpit size.

We shall see. I hope it's great. But yes, not too great. I would love to not have to buy a new glider to be competitive. The current 18 meter balance is actually really great between the 29, JS1 and V2. A new, unbeatable 18 meter glider could hurt the class more than it helps it, initially. I'm all for supporting the builders. But many will probably not want to buy a new glider just to be somewhat competitive in a class.

If the V3 end up being a requirement to play in 18m, yes, I'll buy one...if Scheicher des not rapidly respond. Lots of if's....

And yes, the V3 wing is very pretty. But I would buy an ugly wing if it was better! I still like th 29 right now. The 29 fuselage shape is beautiful, and it's cockpit is incredibly comfortable and functional. It's resilient, easy to fly and really strong at high wing loading. If the V3 is only equal, I would likely keep the 29 for some time.

[Luke Szczepaniak]

On 2/10/2016 11:10 AM, smfidler wrote:
> Just a cool breeze of clam and patience
Not the first words that pop up in my mind when I read "internet Sean's"
posts ;-)

Luke

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 3:36:25 PM UTC-5, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:
> On 2/10/2016 11:10 AM, smfidler wrote:
> > Just a cool breeze of clam and patience
> Not the first words that pop up in my mind when I read "internet Sean's"
> posts ;-)
>
> Luke

Hey, Internet Sean is, "Happy as a clam" on new sailplanes...... or, did he mean to post "calm"???

[BTW, what is a "cool breeze of clam"?, a winter "passing of gas" from a bivalve?]

/sarcasm......

[I really HATE peeps that use small devices with "auto-complete" and then don't read BEFORE posting...... things can make a whole lot of difference after posting...., say's the "technophobe".....]

LOL....

There is always the, "Next great thing", marketing types always trumpet the advances, it's their job.
I've worked decades in service & manufacturing, I'm usually stuck between what "Sales sells" and what "engineering can provide within the costs".
I'm usually part of the phone calls that ask, "Why doesn't it do what I was told it would do?!".

As an aside, I wonder how much traction a 13.5 meter class will actually gain. Not the 1st time someone has pushed a "one design class". Only really good example is the SGS-1-26 class, basically the rest were, "Good ideas that went nowhere."

[Tony[_5_]]

The 13.5 meter class, like all of the other FAI classes (now), is not a one design class...

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 6:15:45 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
> The 13.5 meter class, like all of the other FAI classes (now), is not a one design class...

While you are correct, it "appears" to me that it is a direction some are going for.
Unless the handicap is good/one design class, why would you buy one unless it's NOT contest related?

It may be a great, "Get into soaring/XC soaring" sailplane for not a lot of money, but if you decide to do contests (outside of a one design class), what is the point?

Yes, I'm wearing Nomex underwear, flame away.
Not saying to avoid this or other sailplanes in this range, sorta depends on what you're looking for.
A "new design, no worries on NDH/NDDH issues, no AD's [in the US], warranty, etc." is a GREAT thing.
Buy away.
But, what is YOUR ultimate goal?

This could be a great way to "get your feet wet" on XC, fly a handicapped contest (yes, contest, NOT race.....) and decide where you want to go next.
It may even be the, "Modern SGS-1-26" to get peeps going away from the local airport.
Fantastic.

[smfidler]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 6:56:44 PM UTC-5, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 6:15:45 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:[i]
> > The 13.5 meter class, like all of the other FAI classes (now), is not a one design class...
>
> While you are correct, it "appears" to me that it is a direction some are going for.
> Unless the handicap is good/one design class, why would you buy one unless it's NOT contest related?
>
> It may be a great, "Get into soaring/XC soaring" sailplane for not a lot of money, but if you decide to do contests (outside of a one design class), what is the point?
>
> Yes, I'm wearing Nomex underwear, flame away.
> Not saying to avoid this or other sailplanes in this range, sorta depends on what you're looking for.
> A "new design, no worries on NDH/NDDH issues, no AD's , warranty, etc." is a GREAT thing.
> Buy away.
> But, what is YOUR ultimate goal?
>
> This could be a great way to "get your feet wet" on XC, fly a handicapped contest (yes, contest, NOT race.....) and decide where you want to go next.
> It may even be the, "Modern SGS-1-26" to get peeps going away from the local airport.
> Fantastic.

Sorry gents, my internet thumbs and rushing to type fast on a phone really blew that post up badly. Im just going to give up on that one...

[Kevin Neave[_2_]]

To have fun & enjoy soaring & flying XC.
Too many people are getting hung up on absolute levels of performance. Look
at the fun the club class are having.

In my case I wanted an Electric Sustainer.
Electric for reliability, and someone has to be an early adopter.
Only needs to be a sustainer to get me away from a farmers field to
hopefully a more friendly reception at an airfield.
Being electric limits the amount of "fuel" on board so minimum drag with
the engine running means FES appeals more than "engine on a stick".
(I've already owned a Discus bT for 10 years so been there done that on the
"Engine on a stick")
My preference would have been for a FES modification to my Discus B, but
too many hurdles in EASA land. I'm not aware of any FES modified sailplanes
in USA where things are apparently easier.
Most of the people I fly with have Discus / LS4 / ASW20 level of
performance so would have liked to avoid going up to 18m

Resale values mean Schempp or Schleicher.

The option I've gone for is the D2c FES, I'm prepared to take the hit on
the FES "penalty", my inability to keep the string in the middle is
probably a much greater issue anyway.

In 5-10 yrs time when we decide to replace the Discus bT I'll have another
look at the GP series.

KN

At 23:56 10 February 2016, Charlie M. UH & 002 owner/pilot wrote:
>Unless the handicap is good/one design class, why would you buy one
unless
>it's NOT contest related?
>

[krasw]

ASW27 and V2 have a wing profile from mid 90's. ASG29 has basically modified tips, which naturally have to follow the original profile.

V3 has 2 decades more worth of aerodynamical knowledge in it's design. One can speculate how much has happened during last 20 years but at least there is a great chance that something has.

Performance increase from one generation to next tends to be small but noticeable, otherwise you wouldn't design and build new gliders. For SH, all it takes is glider buying pilots believe that it will be better than 29. There are lot of pilots who tend to stick with one factory product and they surely have jumped already in que for V3.

One thing that bothers me is (6ft5') the fact that SH still sticks with fuselage built for dwarfs in a age when average size of people is something else. Would you buy new 200k glider with too big fuselage, knowing that similar glider with too small fuselage is better? Other one is FES blades sticking in the wind. The system is great, but when aiming to world's podium it just isn't the way to go. Unless they manage to fair the blades in some way (should be doable).

[[email protected]]

Comparing the FES to the GP14 folding prop/ pylon design I would hazard a guess that better propellor performance in the GP14 design will negate any detriment from pylon drag.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Actually the 29 vs 27 has more modified than the wing tips. The airfoil is modified, the planform of the wing even in 15 is modified and the mixer is modified...

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 12:34:37 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> ASW27 and V2 have a wing profile from mid 90's. ASG29 has basically modified tips, which naturally have to follow the original profile.
>
> V3 has 2 decades more worth of aerodynamical knowledge in it's design. One can speculate how much has happened during last 20 years but at least there is a great chance that something has.
>
> Performance increase from one generation to next tends to be small but noticeable, otherwise you wouldn't design and build new gliders. For SH, all it takes is glider buying pilots believe that it will be better than 29. There are lot of pilots who tend to stick with one factory product and they surely have jumped already in que for V3.
>
> One thing that bothers me is (6ft5') the fact that SH still sticks with fuselage built for dwarfs in a age when average size of people is something else. Would you buy new 200k glider with too big fuselage, knowing that similar glider with too small fuselage is better? Other one is FES blades sticking in the wind. The system is great, but when aiming to world's podium it just isn't the way to go. Unless they manage to fair the blades in some way (should be doable).

[krasw]

AFAIK 29 tip profile is modified as whole planform is different, but I still wouldn't categorize 29 in different generation than 27. Same with JS1a/b and JS1c-EVO, Ventus-2a/b and 2cx etc.

torstai 11. helmikuuta 2016 18.00.52 UTC+2 Jonathan St. Cloud kirjoitti:
> Actually the 29 vs 27 has more modified than the wing tips. The airfoil is modified, the planform of the wing even in 15 is modified and the mixer is modified...
>
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 12:34:37 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> > ASW27 and V2 have a wing profile from mid 90's. ASG29 has basically modified tips, which naturally have to follow the original profile.
> >
> > V3 has 2 decades more worth of aerodynamical knowledge in it's design. One can speculate how much has happened during last 20 years but at least there is a great chance that something has.
> >
> > Performance increase from one generation to next tends to be small but noticeable, otherwise you wouldn't design and build new gliders. For SH, all it takes is glider buying pilots believe that it will be better than 29. There are lot of pilots who tend to stick with one factory product and they surely have jumped already in que for V3.
> >
> > One thing that bothers me is (6ft5') the fact that SH still sticks with fuselage built for dwarfs in a age when average size of people is something else. Would you buy new 200k glider with too big fuselage, knowing that similar glider with too small fuselage is better? Other one is FES blades sticking in the wind. The system is great, but when aiming to world's podium it just isn't the way to go. Unless they manage to fair the blades in some way (should be doable).

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 11:00:52 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Actually the 29 vs 27 has more modified than the wing tips. The airfoil is modified, the planform of the wing even in 15 is modified and the mixer is modified...
>

Early on, right after the '29 came out I pulled a set of templates off one so could transplant the new airfoil onto my '27. Lo and behold there was no meaningful difference. I wonder when the change mentioned was implemented.
UH

[K m]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 9:00:52 AM UTC-7, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Actually the 29 vs 27 has more modified than the wing tips. The airfoil is modified, the planform of the wing even in 15 is modified and the mixer is modified...
>
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 12:34:37 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> > ASW27 and V2 have a wing profile from mid 90's. ASG29 has basically modified tips, which naturally have to follow the original profile.
> >
> > V3 has 2 decades more worth of aerodynamical knowledge in it's design. One can speculate how much has happened during last 20 years but at least there is a great chance that something has.
> >
> > Performance increase from one generation to next tends to be small but noticeable, otherwise you wouldn't design and build new gliders. For SH, all it takes is glider buying pilots believe that it will be better than 29. There are lot of pilots who tend to stick with one factory product and they surely have jumped already in que for V3.
> >
> > One thing that bothers me is (6ft5') the fact that SH still sticks with fuselage built for dwarfs in a age when average size of people is something else. Would you buy new 200k glider with too big fuselage, knowing that similar glider with too small fuselage is better? Other one is FES blades sticking in the wind. The system is great, but when aiming to world's podium it just isn't the way to go. Unless they manage to fair the blades in some way (should be doable).

I think another big 27 to 29 difference is the ability to fly at a higher wing loading.
And let me clarify about the "Boy Band" reasoning, I don't expect a dramatic jump in performance from the V3. Improvement just doesn't work this way at the top level of the sport. I highly suspect the V3 will be incrementally better that its predecessor in all areas (Climb, Cruise, Handling, Rigging, Etc.). For a top level racing pilot this could make a difference on the scoreboard and for most of the the sport level pilots (Like myself) we could care a less about making the 29 or the JS1 their bitch on race day.

[smfidler]

True, the 29 is 10 years old. But it also has been dominant thru this moment. Remember, the JS-1 gang did enormous research as well to beat the 29. Result, almost even performance. The JS-1 looks beautiful and exotic...but it's hard to surpass the 29.

I think without a dramatically major technical breakthru, any V3 improvements will be almost impercievable (especially at amateur levels). Designing a glider (or a racing sailboat, car, etc) is all about making the right proportions of design compromise. Every change (even highly modeled changes in similators, etc) has the potential to be better, equal or worse! The V3 has gambled that leaning further towards run performance and therefore less towards climb performance (and probably weak weather, survival slow conditions).

A lot is riding on this new airfoil and until very recently, no real performance data exists...

No real manufacturing innovation has been introduced with the C3. Autoclaved pre-impregnated preg carbon for example.

The V3s world dominance is simply not a given...

I look forward to seeing it...but I really look forward to seeing it fly in a wide range of conditions (minus the hype). If it's unstoppable, great. But I am highly sceptical that it will be."dominant." It may be great in certain conditions... We shall see.

[[email protected]]

The V3 is going to be the best glider ever built and everyone who can even just barely afford one should buy one(or two.) Pilots need to stop trash talking new gliders, the more new gliders pilots buy the better the used market. I need pilots to buy V3s now so there are lots of cheap V3s in thirty years. Don't forget if you are ordering a V3 get a nice trailer too. lolz

[Paul T[_4_]]

At 21:22 11 February 2016, wrote:
>The V3 is going to be the best glider ever built and everyone who can
even
>=
>just barely afford one should buy one(or two.) Pilots need to stop
trash
>t=
>alking new gliders, the more new gliders pilots buy the better the
used
>mar=
>ket. I need pilots to buy V3s now so there are lots of cheap V3s in
>thirty=
> years. Don't forget if you are ordering a V3 get a nice trailer too.
>lolz=
>=20
>

If the new Ventus was a real leap why did they stick the wings on the a
fuselage and not the c fuselage?

Glad I've got my deposit down for DG's new LS12 :-)

[Craig Funston]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 1:22:49 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> The V3 is going to be the best glider ever built and everyone who can even just barely afford one should buy one(or two.) Pilots need to stop trash talking new gliders, the more new gliders pilots buy the better the used market. I need pilots to buy V3s now so there are lots of cheap V3s in thirty years. Don't forget if you are ordering a V3 get a nice trailer too. lolz

I'm waiting for the glut of doggy old 29's that will be coming on the market. I'll be first in line to snap one up. Sell Schempp, sell!

7Q

[HGXC[_4_]]

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 8:22:55 PM UTC-5, Craig Funston wrote:
> On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 1:22:49 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> > The V3 is going to be the best glider ever built and everyone who can even just barely afford one should buy one(or two.) Pilots need to stop trash talking new gliders, the more new gliders pilots buy the better the used market. I need pilots to buy V3s now so there are lots of cheap V3s in thirty years. Don't forget if you are ordering a V3 get a nice trailer too. lolz
>
> I'm waiting for the glut of doggy old 29's that will be coming on the market. I'll be first in line to snap one up. Sell Schempp, sell!
>
> 7Q

I am at the convention....No V3!!!!!

Dennis

[[email protected]]

"I am at the convention....No V3!!!!!"

Given the date of first flight, there was no way it was getting to the convention in that time frame. Not unless they were stumping up the cash to put it on a vodka burner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLxEHIbHUlY

CJ

[[email protected]]

Anything interesting to report from Christoph Wannemacher's presentation on "Design Philosophy for the New Ventus" e.g information on the aspect ratio, aerofoil, wing thickness, transition position, turbulators etc?

John Galloway

[Jonathon May[_2_]]

At 18:23 20 February 2016, wrote:
>Anything interesting to report from Christoph Wannemacher's presentation
on
>"Design Philosophy for the New Ventus" e.g information on the aspect
ratio,
>aerofoil, wing thickness, transition position, turbulators etc?
>
>John Galloway
>r


I just got photos of the new self launching jet arcus,I think they were at
the
show.
Jon

[Dan Daly[_2_]]

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:23:11 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> Anything interesting to report from Christoph Wannemacher's presentation on "Design Philosophy for the New Ventus" e.g information on the aspect ratio, aerofoil, wing thickness, transition position, turbulators etc?
>
> John Galloway

From my notes:
600kg
10.83 m2/116.575 sq ft
55.4 kg/m2 11.35 psf
AR 29.9
sport (little - 2cxa size - based on 2cxa) side-hinged canopy
Goal of certification and having a number available for WGC Bennala
down the road, FES and T
then
performance edition (larger)
quintus cockpit
self-launch
(T or FES if demanded... but SL first)

Description of new wx model; validation using WGC Uvalde data and Euro championship. Result - you have 2 modes, thermalling or fast and spend almost no time at best L/D. goal to optimize for these 2 modes.

climb perf in weak small thermals - data from euro contests - lift that V2CXT couldn't climb in, V3 had theoretical 15 kph x-c speed (contests are won or lost on the weakest days).

Goal of increased cross-country speed.

Started with an aero check of Arcus from large contests to validate that aerofoil. Result - good basis for start of work on V3 ("new Ventus" according to S-H marketing but informally known as V3).

General of description of wing evolution from original Discus to this; discussion of winglets too (didn't take notes)

wing thickness
root 14.8%
closing in to root 12.9%
outboard of spoiler box 13.2%
blend near winglet 13.1%

Horizontal tail volume/area reduced

Flutter - certification for CS22 AL2 - higher torsional stiffness
Fuselage - higher crashworthiness = heavier fuselage

2 sets of water tanks (one small below bigger) - one release like zig-zag - looks like you dump the big one but keep a smaller volume that doesn't slosh when you have partial water (not stated but that's what it looked like to me - I have been wrong on this kind of thing).

Jan 29 first flight; to briefing date 20 flights / 13 hrs (wx has sucked in Europe)

Next, turbo in sport fuselage ~ 4-5 weeks. FES "in summer"

In 6 weeks, mockup of big version; canopy to be forward-hinged
carbon-fibre.

"later" - solo 2625-01 injected SL system - better high and hot

Questions - wing soft/stiff? Stiff. ran out of time for more...

Overall, an impression of a fast-moving, ambitious programme that starts with the pure gliders (small then big), and as resources permit, moving to turbo, then SL, then FES (if there is demand).

I think I have most of this correct - I was trying to pay attention and scribble mostly legible notes.

If you have questions, best to ask the dealer...

[John Galloway[_1_]]

At 16:18 21 February 2016, Dan Daly wrote:
>On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:23:11 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
>> Anything interesting to report from Christoph Wannemacher's
presentation
>=
>on "Design Philosophy for the New Ventus" e.g information on
the aspect
>rat=
>io, aerofoil, wing thickness, transition position, turbulators etc?
>>=20
>> John Galloway
>
>From my notes:
>600kg
>10.83 m2/116.575 sq ft
>55.4 kg/m2 11.35 psf
>AR 29.9
>sport (little - 2cxa size - based on 2cxa) side-hinged canopy
>Goal of certification and having a number available for WGC
Bennala
>down the road, FES and T
>then
>performance edition (larger)
>quintus cockpit
>self-launch
>(T or FES if demanded... but SL first)
>
>Description of new wx model; validation using WGC Uvalde data
and Euro
>cham=
>pionship. Result - you have 2 modes, thermalling or fast and
spend almost
>=
>no time at best L/D. goal to optimize for these 2 modes.
>
>climb perf in weak small thermals - data from euro contests - lift
that
>V2C=
>XT couldn't climb in, V3 had theoretical 15 kph x-c speed
(contests are
>won=
> or lost on the weakest days).
>
>Goal of increased cross-country speed.
>
>Started with an aero check of Arcus from large contests to
validate that
>ae=
>rofoil. Result - good basis for start of work on V3 ("new Ventus"
>accordin=
>g to S-H marketing but informally known as V3).
>
>General of description of wing evolution from original Discus to
this;
>disc=
>ussion of winglets too (didn't take notes)
>
>wing thickness
>root 14.8%
>closing in to root 12.9%
>outboard of spoiler box 13.2%
>blend near winglet 13.1%
>
>Horizontal tail volume/area reduced
>
>Flutter - certification for CS22 AL2 - higher torsional stiffness
>Fuselage - higher crashworthiness =3D heavier fuselage
>
>2 sets of water tanks (one small below bigger) - one release like
zig-zag
>-=
> looks like you dump the big one but keep a smaller volume that
doesn't
>slo=
>sh when you have partial water (not stated but that's what it
looked like
>t=
>o me - I have been wrong on this kind of thing).
>
>Jan 29 first flight; to briefing date 20 flights / 13 hrs (wx has
sucked
>in=
> Europe)
>
>Next, turbo in sport fuselage ~ 4-5 weeks. FES "in summer"
>
>In 6 weeks, mockup of big version; canopy to be forward-hinged
>carbon-fibre.
>
>"later" - solo 2625-01 injected SL system - better high and hot
>
>Questions - wing soft/stiff? Stiff. ran out of time for more...
>
>Overall, an impression of a fast-moving, ambitious programme
that starts
>wi=
>th the pure gliders (small then big), and as resources permit,
moving to
>tu=
>rbo, then SL, then FES (if there is demand).
>
>I think I have most of this correct - I was trying to pay attention
and
>scr=
>ibble mostly legible notes. =20
>
>If you have questions, best to ask the dealer...
>
Thanks Dan. Very interesting. I asked the UK dealer for this type
of information a couple of weeks ago but none was available
then.
JG

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 3:47:36 AM UTC+11, smfidler wrote:
> I'm starting to feel as if I'm at some boy band concert watching the girls screaming uncontrollably at the lead singer from the front row...
>
> Just like the JS-1 camp learned, out designing the ASG-29 in all conditions and at all wing loadings is a very, very high bar to jump over cleanly.
>
> Here is a towel.
>
> Stop drooling all over yourselves and let's see if the V3 wins the 18 meter World Championship in Australia next January before loosing consciousness, screaming like school girls the latest, greatest boy band concert...
>
> The V3 'might' just win the Worlds on its first go and even become a truly dominant 18m glider, but until it does, it's marketing hype. They will employ a surge of top pilots (disproportional distribution) trying to win their first worlds (see Quintus) and seal in the marketing investment. JS-1 tried this too but never made it over that pesky "ASG-29 bar." Pilots often trump a gliders true performance. Keep an eye on this.
>
> Many, quite recently in fact, thought the JS-1 would dominate the ASG-29....but it has not. Only very recently, with the new EVO design, has the JS-1 begin to challenge the 29. And the JS1 has never won a FAI world championship against the enviable ASG29. Not once (well, if you count the last SGP World Championship,yes, but there was a valid wing loading fairness controversy at that smaller event)!
>
> And, even if the V3 does prove a match or better, Schleicher will simply draw up a new 18 meter glider specifically intended to make the V3 obsolete, and so on... Maybe Schleicher is already well down the track on this new design already... Maybe they can simply improve the 29 with a new wing design like the JS-1 camp has with the new JS-1 Evo.
>
> One thing is certain, the glider manufactures have you all right where they want you...buzzing wildly over almost nothing, fighting to hand over 200k checks in order to own (years from now) an unproven glider which many somehow absolutely (almost religiously) believe is sure to allow them to beat the pants off anyone flying the ASG-29 via its massive performance advantages. Good luck with this gentleman. I for one have seen this cycle many times before in many sports.
>
> And, if the V3 is somehow completely unstoppable in 18 meter (as you suggest), we already have so many ASG29s in the USA that we could "put our hands up" and start a "29 ONLY class" (much less expensive than buying (and waiting for) a new V3 and all with identical performance while being well proven machines!). One design 18 meter the racing! ;-). It will be 5 years, minimum, before the V3 US numbers approach a third of the 29s. And that 1/3 number is only in a perfect world for Shempp Hirth, with no hiccups or issues with the design. You V3 "bling, bling" glider guys (if it's ridiculously better) might just have to fly in open class again the Concordia! :-)
>
> So, I'm excited to see the V3 at the convention (and the buzz surrounding it) but won't be interested until it clearly proves that it is a significantly better (or even equal) sailplane to the ASG29 and the JS1 Evo in a wide range of conditions. Until it proves its worth with contest results. And even then, rather than jumping at it immediately, I'll be looking to see the reaction from the other manufacturers.
>
> Amused and thoroughly enjoying the "screams and shouts of glee" from the SH fan boys...
>
> Sean

Honey, I need a new glider, the one that I've got's obselete... :)