Buying a glider, advice on type and prices [Archive]

August 29th 16, 04:37 PM

On Monday, August 29, 2016 at 4:04:11 PM UTC+1, Tony wrote:
> Standard advice:
>
> Something that fits in your budget of course. Leave reserve for some instruments, insurance, andoney to buy tows.
>
> Make sure you fit comfortably. You'll be wanting to sit in the seat for 5-8 hrs.
>
> Automatic control hookups are a deciding factor for many. Decide if it is for you.
>
> That will narrow it down to maybe a half dozen types. From there, find what's available at the price you like, and pick the one with the nicest trailer.

I agree with the above. Also, although I am an older current pilot flying a flapped 18/21m glider, I would suggest that an older slightly rusty pilot should fly a 15m unflapped glider for a couple of years before moving up. Presumably you aren't going to be going straight into high level competitions so the comments about the standard class dying out are not very relevant. The original Discus (along with the LS4) is the one of the most useful, benign and salable gliders ever made. The Discus 2 and ASW28 are also fine standard class gliders (I have owned A Discus B and a Discus 2c) and newer so more likely to come with better gelcoat or optional PU paint finish.

The 15m flapped gliders are have little performance advantage until you are happy flying them ballasted and are at the stage where your cross country speed is not limited by thermal selection and centering issues.

The ASW20 is a classic of its time but the lack of automatic control connections on this (and other) designs, particularly for the elevator, is a serious, literally killer, deficiency.

John Galloway

[email protected]

August 29th 16, 05:40 PM

I often suggest Discus or ASW-24's for pilots in your position. Those that have taken my advice have always been pleased with the result. We have 5 of them in our club right now. They have benign handling but can be pushed for really good cross country performance. They are competitive in sports class. They have great factory support and there are lots of them out there. They are easy to resell when you are ready to go flapped 18M. Especially Discus.

I second the opinion on pick the general type you are interested in and buy the one with the best trailer. It's hard to underestimate how ground handling can influence things.

I think it's also a good idea to not buy something too expensive while you are getting your feet wet flying XC. You need to feel comfortable putting the ship in harms way (out of glide range of an airport). That was always a concern of mine.

I wouldn't even consider an ASW-20 or -27 for a low time pilot. They are great aircraft in the right hands, but there are better options out there for low time pilots.

John[_37_]

August 29th 16, 08:08 PM

On Sunday, 28 August 2016 10:15:23 UTC+1, John wrote:
> Returned to gliding after many years and out of touch with types and prices.
>
> Have narrowed it down to one of these types but nothing set in concrete.
>
> ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus, Discus 2 or Ventus.
>
> Was originally looking to buy a lower cost glider but with interest rates being so poor, I am thinking that a good glider may be a better investment than money in the bank.
>
> Any suggestions and a rough guide on prices? (appreciate that it ultimately depends on level of equipment and condition.
>
> Thanks

Wow, thanks everyone for taking the time to help, just the kind of information I need. I'm not familiar with the LAK17 so will google it now.

I'm not low time or rusty in any way so just need a briefing on flaps really. Rarely flown with retractable undercarriage so that does concern me slightly and a good warning system would be handy.

My main limitation in a few years may be lifting, so light weight CF wings and easy to rig is important to me. And yes, it must be comfortable for tall pilot and long flights.

New to forums so hope I have posted correctly.

[email protected]

August 29th 16, 09:37 PM

John,
My ad is on page 4 of Wings And Wheels for sale page. Most all ships for sale in the US are on there. Discus-2 has automatic control hook ups, large cockpit, easy rigging and a hydraulic disc brake. Very light stick and fun to fly. A Wing-Rigger device makes solo assembly possible. The SN-10 computer gives deadly accurate winds and altitude required to any place you select (along with a whole bunch of other good info).
Cheers,
JJ

Kevin Brooker

August 29th 16, 09:40 PM

for he greatest investment in your soaring enjoyment, buy the absolute best trailer you can find. No issues and well equipped to make rigging so simple a child can do it blindfolded. Buy the trailer and fly whatever is inside.

Dan Daly[_2_]

August 29th 16, 10:58 PM

> Wow, thanks everyone for taking the time to help, just the kind of information I need. I'm not familiar with the LAK17 so will google it now.
>
> I'm not low time or rusty in any way so just need a briefing on flaps really. Rarely flown with retractable undercarriage so that does concern me slightly and a good warning system would be handy.
>
> My main limitation in a few years may be lifting, so light weight CF wings and easy to rig is important to me. And yes, it must be comfortable for tall pilot and long flights.
>
> New to forums so hope I have posted correctly.

If light wings are important, the SZD-55 is a good candidate. Late 80's standard class (no flaps) 15 m span design; 105 lb wings (no one runs away at assembly time); automatic control hook-ups. Comfortable for tall pilots. Still being produced new; good factory support (recently granted EASA life of 12,000 hours). If you're in the east, works well in weak weather, and if you fill it with water, good out west; can be ordered with an award winning stall warning system (SP-3). Very pretty as well, which should count for something! Availble with polyurathane paint (never a gelcoat finish problem). About the same performance as ASW-24 and original Discus B (less than Discus 2). The North American dealer (and others) flew a number of 1,000 km flights at the Ridge in PA. Less expensive new than other choices...
http://szd.com.pl/en/products/szd-55-1 (factory link)
http://www.windpath.ca/index.php/products/szd-allstar (NA dealer link)

I love my 55! The 24 and Discus are also good choices, and a good trailer makes all the difference, as others have said. Lots of performance, good handling, and safe.

Dan

Tango Whisky

August 30th 16, 05:47 AM

Nonsense.
Buy the best glidee you can afford, ans adapt the trailee if needed.

Bert
Ventis cM "TW"

John[_37_]

August 30th 16, 06:52 AM

On Monday, 29 August 2016 22:58:11 UTC+1, Dan Daly wrote:
> > Wow, thanks everyone for taking the time to help, just the kind of information I need. I'm not familiar with the LAK17 so will google it now.
> >
> > I'm not low time or rusty in any way so just need a briefing on flaps really. Rarely flown with retractable undercarriage so that does concern me slightly and a good warning system would be handy.
> >
> > My main limitation in a few years may be lifting, so light weight CF wings and easy to rig is important to me. And yes, it must be comfortable for tall pilot and long flights.
> >
> > New to forums so hope I have posted correctly.
>
> If light wings are important, the SZD-55 is a good candidate. Late 80's standard class (no flaps) 15 m span design; 105 lb wings (no one runs away at assembly time); automatic control hook-ups. Comfortable for tall pilots. Still being produced new; good factory support (recently granted EASA life of 12,000 hours). If you're in the east, works well in weak weather, and if you fill it with water, good out west; can be ordered with an award winning stall warning system (SP-3). Very pretty as well, which should count for something! Availble with polyurathane paint (never a gelcoat finish problem). About the same performance as ASW-24 and original Discus B (less than Discus 2). The North American dealer (and others) flew a number of 1,000 km flights at the Ridge in PA. Less expensive new than other choices...
> http://szd.com.pl/en/products/szd-55-1 (factory link)
> http://www.windpath.ca/index.php/products/szd-allstar (NA dealer link)
>
> I love my 55! The 24 and Discus are also good choices, and a good trailer makes all the difference, as others have said. Lots of performance, good handling, and safe.
>
> Dan

Looking it up thanks. I'm in Northern UK and poor lift comes as standard!

Light wings and low price for new is a definite bonus.

The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.

Question: Do all GRP and CF gliders have similar life spans to each other or does it vary considerably?

John[_37_]

August 30th 16, 06:53 AM

On Tuesday, 30 August 2016 01:43:12 UTC+1, Kevin Brooker wrote:
> for he greatest investment in your soaring enjoyment, buy the absolute
> best trailer you can find. No issues and well equipped to make rigging
> so simple a child can do it blindfolded. Buy the trailer and fly
> whatever is inside.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Kevin Brooker

Lol, nice SOH

[email protected]

August 30th 16, 08:24 AM

On Monday, August 29, 2016 at 10:52:20 PM UTC-7, John wrote:
> On Monday, 29 August 2016 22:58:11 UTC+1, Dan Daly wrote:
> > > Wow, thanks everyone for taking the time to help, just the kind of information I need. I'm not familiar with the LAK17 so will google it now.
> > >
> > > I'm not low time or rusty in any way so just need a briefing on flaps really. Rarely flown with retractable undercarriage so that does concern me slightly and a good warning system would be handy.
> > >
> > > My main limitation in a few years may be lifting, so light weight CF wings and easy to rig is important to me. And yes, it must be comfortable for tall pilot and long flights.
> > >
> > > New to forums so hope I have posted correctly.
> >
> > If light wings are important, the SZD-55 is a good candidate. Late 80's standard class (no flaps) 15 m span design; 105 lb wings (no one runs away at assembly time); automatic control hook-ups. Comfortable for tall pilots.. Still being produced new; good factory support (recently granted EASA life of 12,000 hours). If you're in the east, works well in weak weather, and if you fill it with water, good out west; can be ordered with an award winning stall warning system (SP-3). Very pretty as well, which should count for something! Availble with polyurathane paint (never a gelcoat finish problem). About the same performance as ASW-24 and original Discus B (less than Discus 2). The North American dealer (and others) flew a number of 1,000 km flights at the Ridge in PA. Less expensive new than other choices...
> > http://szd.com.pl/en/products/szd-55-1 (factory link)
> > http://www.windpath.ca/index.php/products/szd-allstar (NA dealer link)
> >
> > I love my 55! The 24 and Discus are also good choices, and a good trailer makes all the difference, as others have said. Lots of performance, good handling, and safe.
> >
> > Dan
>
> Looking it up thanks. I'm in Northern UK and poor lift comes as standard!
>
> Light wings and low price for new is a definite bonus.
>
> The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.
>
> Question: Do all GRP and CF gliders have similar life spans to each other or does it vary considerably?

Most of them seem to be similar - they start out with 3,000 hours and then keep getting extended as the fleet ages and experience is gained. The Pegase is one exception - but only under the aegis of the FAA. If I had your budget and was returning to soaring after a time off I would go with the ASW-28 or Discus 2. Hard to beat a nice friendly standard class (or 18 meter) for pure fun and ease of flying. In the price range you're looking at odds are the gliders will be in a good clamshell trailer which is a wonderful thing. Those of us in the bargain basement have to contend with choosing ships which may come with all sorts of oddball contraptions. There's a privately owned SZD-55 in my club. While I haven't flown it I can attest to the wings being nice and light and the ease of assembly. The build quality seems top notch too. The type certificate in Canada lists a stall warning device as mandatory equipment and two of the three 55's I've seen didn't have them so if the authority where you fly also requires it make sure it's in any 55 you're looking to buy.

Dan Daly[_2_]

August 30th 16, 12:53 PM

> The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.

http://szd.com.pl/downloads/4fdeffe8f1fb0easa-major-change-approval-10039816.pdf is the document which extends the life of all SZD-55 to 12k. The associated Flight Manual must be amended with the 2012 changes, which is noted at the end of the EASA document. Mainly they talk about what inspections have to be done periodically, and change the bits of the manual that talk about the authorized lifespan of the glider.

Most gliders get an initial 3,000 hr approval, then as they approach that, they are assessed by the factory to see if they have problems. If not, additional 3,000 hrs. As they approach 6,000, same, etc., until design life is reached. I don't know what the design life of Schempp-Hirth, Schleicher, etc are (I know ASK-21's are at 18,000 hrs). I think of most GRP gliders as having infinite lives, though gelcoat must be refinished periodically.

John[_37_]

August 30th 16, 07:48 PM

On Tuesday, 30 August 2016 08:24:21 UTC+1, wrote:
> On Monday, August 29, 2016 at 10:52:20 PM UTC-7, John wrote:
> > On Monday, 29 August 2016 22:58:11 UTC+1, Dan Daly wrote:
> > > > Wow, thanks everyone for taking the time to help, just the kind of information I need. I'm not familiar with the LAK17 so will google it now.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not low time or rusty in any way so just need a briefing on flaps really. Rarely flown with retractable undercarriage so that does concern me slightly and a good warning system would be handy.
> > > >
> > > > My main limitation in a few years may be lifting, so light weight CF wings and easy to rig is important to me. And yes, it must be comfortable for tall pilot and long flights.
> > > >
> > > > New to forums so hope I have posted correctly.
> > >
> > > If light wings are important, the SZD-55 is a good candidate. Late 80's standard class (no flaps) 15 m span design; 105 lb wings (no one runs away at assembly time); automatic control hook-ups. Comfortable for tall pilots. Still being produced new; good factory support (recently granted EASA life of 12,000 hours). If you're in the east, works well in weak weather, and if you fill it with water, good out west; can be ordered with an award winning stall warning system (SP-3). Very pretty as well, which should count for something! Availble with polyurathane paint (never a gelcoat finish problem). About the same performance as ASW-24 and original Discus B (less than Discus 2). The North American dealer (and others) flew a number of 1,000 km flights at the Ridge in PA. Less expensive new than other choices...
> > > http://szd.com.pl/en/products/szd-55-1 (factory link)
> > > http://www.windpath.ca/index.php/products/szd-allstar (NA dealer link)
> > >
> > > I love my 55! The 24 and Discus are also good choices, and a good trailer makes all the difference, as others have said. Lots of performance, good handling, and safe.
> > >
> > > Dan
> >
> > Looking it up thanks. I'm in Northern UK and poor lift comes as standard!
> >
> > Light wings and low price for new is a definite bonus.
> >
> > The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.
> >
> > Question: Do all GRP and CF gliders have similar life spans to each other or does it vary considerably?
>
> Most of them seem to be similar - they start out with 3,000 hours and then keep getting extended as the fleet ages and experience is gained. The Pegase is one exception - but only under the aegis of the FAA. If I had your budget and was returning to soaring after a time off I would go with the ASW-28 or Discus 2. Hard to beat a nice friendly standard class (or 18 meter) for pure fun and ease of flying. In the price range you're looking at odds are the gliders will be in a good clamshell trailer which is a wonderful thing. Those of us in the bargain basement have to contend with choosing ships which may come with all sorts of oddball contraptions. There's a privately owned SZD-55 in my club. While I haven't flown it I can attest to the wings being nice and light and the ease of assembly. The build quality seems top notch too. The type certificate in Canada lists a stall warning device as mandatory equipment and two of the three 55's I've seen didn't have them so if the authority where you fly also requires it make sure it's in any 55 you're looking to buy.

Thanks for the nice reply. I'm not wealthy at all, sold my house and bought a caravan when the ex. left me. I love my caravan, it's in a fantastic location and then I found a really exciting ridge soaring site nearby and here I am! May as well spend it whilst I can and have some fun. Thought a decent glider will be as good as money in the bank just now. Really appreciate the friendly help from everyone.

Papa3[_2_]

August 30th 16, 08:27 PM

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 2:49:02 PM UTC-4, John wrote:
>
> Thanks for the nice reply. I'm not wealthy at all, sold my house and bought a caravan when the ex. left me. I love my caravan, it's in a fantastic location and then I found a really exciting ridge soaring site nearby and here I am! May as well spend it whilst I can and have some fun. Thought a decent glider will be as good as money in the bank just now. Really appreciate the friendly help from everyone.

This has the makings of a great Country Music song. Ed Kilbourne, where are you?

John[_37_]

August 30th 16, 08:37 PM

On Tuesday, 30 August 2016 20:27:26 UTC+1, Papa3 wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 2:49:02 PM UTC-4, John wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the nice reply. I'm not wealthy at all, sold my house and bought a caravan when the ex. left me. I love my caravan, it's in a fantastic location and then I found a really exciting ridge soaring site nearby and here I am! May as well spend it whilst I can and have some fun. Thought a decent glider will be as good as money in the bank just now. Really appreciate the friendly help from everyone.
>
> This has the makings of a great Country Music song. Ed Kilbourne, where are you?

On Tuesday, 30 August 2016 20:27:26 UTC+1, Papa3 wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 2:49:02 PM UTC-4, John wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the nice reply. I'm not wealthy at all, sold my house and bought a caravan when the ex. left me. I love my caravan, it's in a fantastic location and then I found a really exciting ridge soaring site nearby and here I am! May as well spend it whilst I can and have some fun. Thought a decent glider will be as good as money in the bank just now. Really appreciate the friendly help from everyone.
>
> This has the makings of a great Country Music song. Ed Kilbourne, where are you?

Brilliant idea, yes it does!

Bruce Hoult

August 30th 16, 08:53 PM

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 11:53:20 PM UTC+12, Dan Daly wrote:
> > The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.
>
> http://szd.com.pl/downloads/4fdeffe8f1fb0easa-major-change-approval-10039816.pdf is the document which extends the life of all SZD-55 to 12k. The associated Flight Manual must be amended with the 2012 changes, which is noted at the end of the EASA document. Mainly they talk about what inspections have to be done periodically, and change the bits of the manual that talk about the authorized lifespan of the glider.
>
> Most gliders get an initial 3,000 hr approval, then as they approach that, they are assessed by the factory to see if they have problems. If not, additional 3,000 hrs. As they approach 6,000, same, etc., until design life is reached. I don't know what the design life of Schempp-Hirth, Schleicher, etc are (I know ASK-21's are at 18,000 hrs). I think of most GRP gliders as having infinite lives, though gelcoat must be refinished periodically.

OK .. *why* must gelcoat be refinished periodically?

I suppose eventually it might start letting moisture through into the structure, but I suspect most people are refinishing it at less than 50% (maybe much less) of its potential protective lifetime for purely aesthetic reasons.

Does cracked gelcoat have much of an effect on aerodynamics? One that someone other than a top competition pilot would notice?

[email protected]

August 30th 16, 09:42 PM

Aerodynamics isn't the issue - gelcoat failure can progress until it's a structural issue.

There are many early Cirrus & Libelle (amongst others) from the early / mid 70s that still flying with original gelcoat without any signs of failure.

Nick.

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 5:23:44 AM UTC+9:30, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 11:53:20 PM UTC+12, Dan Daly wrote:
> > > The site says something like approved life of 3000 hours with extensions so maybe that's the one that's now been upgraded to 12,000 hours. (will check) That's one reason I was looking for a more recent model in case GRP gliders do have problems in later life. Just about anything will outlast me but I'm thinking resale value.
> >
> > http://szd.com.pl/downloads/4fdeffe8f1fb0easa-major-change-approval-10039816.pdf is the document which extends the life of all SZD-55 to 12k. The associated Flight Manual must be amended with the 2012 changes, which is noted at the end of the EASA document. Mainly they talk about what inspections have to be done periodically, and change the bits of the manual that talk about the authorized lifespan of the glider.
> >
> > Most gliders get an initial 3,000 hr approval, then as they approach that, they are assessed by the factory to see if they have problems. If not, additional 3,000 hrs. As they approach 6,000, same, etc., until design life is reached. I don't know what the design life of Schempp-Hirth, Schleicher, etc are (I know ASK-21's are at 18,000 hrs). I think of most GRP gliders as having infinite lives, though gelcoat must be refinished periodically.
>
> OK .. *why* must gelcoat be refinished periodically?
>
> I suppose eventually it might start letting moisture through into the structure, but I suspect most people are refinishing it at less than 50% (maybe much less) of its potential protective lifetime for purely aesthetic reasons.
>
> Does cracked gelcoat have much of an effect on aerodynamics? One that someone other than a top competition pilot would notice?

Dan Daly[_2_]

August 30th 16, 09:50 PM

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 4:42:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Aerodynamics isn't the issue - gelcoat failure can progress until it's a structural issue.
>
> There are many early Cirrus & Libelle (amongst others) from the early / mid 70s that still flying with original gelcoat without any signs of failure..
>
> Nick.

Different gelcoats than today's, due to environmental concerns for the workers. Agree older gel held up better, unless exposed to a lot of temperature swings (wave flights without temperature stops every 5000'). Newer std class - which is what is being discussed here - have gelcoat issues. PU paint is preferable, in my opinion. I can also think of several original Cirrus which required full refinishes in their lives.

Bob Whelan[_3_]

August 31st 16, 12:20 AM

On 8/30/2016 2:42 PM, <It was written>:
> Aerodynamics isn't the issue - gelcoat failure can progress until it's a
> structural issue.

In the spirit of seeking genuine knowledge - and readily acknowledging
widespread *concern* that cracking/flaking gelcoat can "somehow" morph into a
"premature" structural issue - can anyone cite solid information (data, links,
etc.) shedding light on the mechanism(s?), location and quantity of UV-exposed
plastic sailplanes thrown onto the garbage heap after failing structural
tests, etc.? It's a serious - not rhetorical - query.

There's plenty of engineering data, as well as "common-sense/observational
data", around indicating UV is a catholic attacker/degrader of all manner of
materials, but have sailplane manufacturers, or (say) the LBA, or anyone else,
set about obtaining such data for GRP/CRP sailplanes?

Hard data eagerly welcomed!

Bob W.

Papa3[_2_]

August 31st 16, 03:11 AM

Failed gelcoat absolutely "prints" down into the glass/epoxy substrate. We've just refinished two gliders in our club which were left to go beyond minor crazing to full-on gelcoat failure. Once the gelcoat is totally stripped, you're left with visible lines in the glass/epoxy. Under a 4x loupe you can see that there is an edge to these lines where there are small voids in the epoxy.

Does this materially affect the integrity of the wing/fuselage/control surface structure? That's beyond my pay grade.

Gerhard Weibel's take is as follows (from the Schleicher Technical Note on "paint cracks"):
Owing to the UV-radiation the gel coat of the paint surfaces grows
brittle and shrinks; at the same time the UV-light destroys paint ingredients.
So moisture (rain, dew) working in on long term will wash the
decomposed paint ingredients out off the paint. The paint starts chalking
and gets hairline cracks owing to the concurrence of embrittlement
and shrinkage. Furthermore, these hairline cracks gather dirt
which through its aggressive effect and its stronger heating-up from
sun radiation further precipitates the degradation of the paint. Owing
to this the intended protective effect for the fiber composite structure
against moisture and UV-radiation is no longer granted.

Certainly a good care with hard wax can slow down the above process
distinctly, but it cannot be stopped completely. For this reason a
repainting of the aircraft will always become necessary at some point
of time.
However, we point out explicitly that paint cracks - even deep cracks -
do not represent damages to the aircraft structure if as of their first
appearance immediate correct maintenance and care is given furthermore
to the aircraft.
As all the outside skin of the aircraft is dimensioned for stiffness, there
are no critical mechanical strength problems, even if some cracks
have gone down into the fiber composite structure and have already
attacked the resin matrix base.
The unknown ageing effects caused by the influence of moisture and
UV on the unprotected fiber composite structure are more dangerous.

P3

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 7:20:26 PM UTC-4, Bob Whelan wrote:
> On 8/30/2016 2:42 PM, <It was written>:
> > Aerodynamics isn't the issue - gelcoat failure can progress until it's a
> > structural issue.
>
> In the spirit of seeking genuine knowledge - and readily acknowledging
> widespread *concern* that cracking/flaking gelcoat can "somehow" morph into a
> "premature" structural issue - can anyone cite solid information (data, links,
> etc.) shedding light on the mechanism(s?), location and quantity of UV-exposed
> plastic sailplanes thrown onto the garbage heap after failing structural
> tests, etc.? It's a serious - not rhetorical - query.
>
> There's plenty of engineering data, as well as "common-sense/observational
> data", around indicating UV is a catholic attacker/degrader of all manner of
> materials, but have sailplane manufacturers, or (say) the LBA, or anyone else,
> set about obtaining such data for GRP/CRP sailplanes?
>
> Hard data eagerly welcomed!
>
> Bob W.

Ian[_2_]

August 31st 16, 08:30 AM

On 30/08/2016 20:48, John wrote:

> Thanks for the nice reply. I'm not wealthy at all, sold my house and
> bought a caravan when the ex. left me. I love my caravan, it's in a
> fantastic location and then I found a really exciting ridge soaring
> site nearby and here I am! May as well spend it whilst I can and have
> some fun. Thought a decent glider will be as good as money in the
> bank just now. Really appreciate the friendly help from everyone.

Sounds like you intend to fund your post flying career pension by
reselling the ship. Be careful gliders are not always readily saleable.
A popular make of ship that is suitable for low our pilots would be most
easily resold. You may still take a bit of a knock if you have to sell
in a hurry.

Then look for a good trailer. A good finish, preferably already
refinished in PU. Modern radio and vario/computer and good instruments
with appropriate units (ft, m, knots, km/h, m/s etc) for your country.
Also a ship with good factory support.

Remember to budget for insurance costs if you not in a position to
absorb a "self insurance loss" and "maintenance plan" tax if you go for
one of the older LS/DG models.

Maybe a nice LS4? Or LS8, Discus 2 etc.

Ian

Steve Leonard[_2_]

August 31st 16, 06:54 PM

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 2:30:36 AM UTC-5, Ian wrote:
>
> Remember to budget for insurance costs if you not in a position to
> absorb a "self insurance loss" and "maintenance plan" tax if you go for
> one of the older LS/DG models.
>
> Maybe a nice LS4? Or LS8, Discus 2 etc.
>
> Ian

For the record, I am the owner of an "older LS model", and not associated with the company in any way other than owning a plane and having purchased the "Maintenance Plan". The "Maintenance plan tax" is 245 Euro per year. If that is a deal breaker for you, I think you will find some other reason to not buy a sailplane.

Steve Leonard

[email protected]

August 31st 16, 08:32 PM

Or you could run (not walk) to W&W and buy the Pegase101 that just went up - go to the Pegase Yahoo group and you will find 100 guys who love their Glider (including me) - a great glider to own while you figure out how to spend an additional large chunk of cash.

WH

Martin Gregorie[_5_]

August 31st 16, 09:29 PM

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:32:13 -0700, bythesea1234 wrote:

> Or you could run (not walk) to W&W and buy the Pegase101 that just went
> up - go to the Pegase Yahoo group and you will find 100 guys who love
> their Glider (including me) - a great glider to own while you figure out
> how to spend an additional large chunk of cash.
>
Pegase wings aren't that light, but not really a problem. I flew my
club's Pegase 90 a lot and really liked it. It was my first high
performance toy after getting Silver on the club's SZD Juniors.

One point to remember about the Pegase: if you have a choice between a
Pegase 101 and a Pegase 90, go for the 90 assuming that all other things
are similar. 101s all have Hotelier connectors on the ailerons and
airbrakes while the 90s were built later and have automatic connections
on all control surfaces.

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

Paul T[_4_]

August 31st 16, 10:18 PM

OK think you said your in the Northern UK so my advice with the
money and the experience you have and if your looking to sell the ship
at some point and not lose money is to buy a good LS4a, LS8-18
(probably best option if you have around £40-45k to spend) or Discus.
Make sure they have good gel coats and ancillary equipment.

But best talk to your CFI re: your skill level and what he might think an
appropriate ship - maybe get some time in a high performance two
seater i.e. Duo Discus/DG1000 first.

In the UK you will find it harder to resell an ASW24, ASW27, ASW28,
SZD55, Pegase, Lak 17 or Ventus A/B/C than the above. ASW20's are
getting long in the tooth.

Ignore Americans who don't read threads entirely - there are lots on
here that will give well meaning but crap advice for the UK scene.

Paul T[_4_]

August 31st 16, 10:22 PM

p.s. you might want to ask the same questions on
uk.rec.aviation.soaring -its more UK-centric than r.a.s. - which tends to
be full of our ex-colonial cousins.

tienshanman

August 31st 16, 10:59 PM

BobW

September 1st 16, 01:25 AM

In reply to (re-ordering for clarity's sake)...

> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 7:20:26 PM UTC-4, Bob Whelan wrote:
>> On 8/30/2016 2:42 PM, <It was written>:
>>> Aerodynamics isn't the issue - gelcoat failure can progress until it's
>>> a structural issue.
>>
>> In the spirit of seeking genuine knowledge - and readily acknowledging
>> widespread *concern* that cracking/flaking gelcoat can "somehow" morph
>> into a "premature" structural issue - can anyone cite solid information
>> (data, links, etc.) shedding light on the mechanism(s?), location and
>> quantity of UV-exposed plastic sailplanes thrown onto the garbage heap
>> after failing structural tests, etc.? It's a serious - not rhetorical -
>> query.
>>
>> There's plenty of engineering data, as well as
>> "common-sense/observational data", around indicating UV is a catholic
>> attacker/degrader of all manner of materials, but have sailplane
>> manufacturers, or (say) the LBA, or anyone else, set about obtaining such
>> data for GRP/CRP sailplanes?
>>
>> Hard data eagerly welcomed!
>>
>> Bob W.
>

....On 8/30/2016 8:11 PM, Papa3 wrote:
> Failed gelcoat absolutely "prints" down into the glass/epoxy substrate.
> We've just refinished two gliders in our club which were left to go beyond
> minor crazing to full-on gelcoat failure. Once the gelcoat is totally
> stripped, you're left with visible lines in the glass/epoxy. Under a 4x
> loupe you can see that there is an edge to these lines where there are
> small voids in the epoxy.

Long-ago memory sez I/we saw similar "lines" in?/atop? the first cloth layer
beneath cracked gelcoat on our club's G-103 wings that we refinished
(mid-90s-ish). At the time, and under the supervision of a highly-experienced
plastic glider repair person/DER (with "hand-in-hand" signoff authority of an
FAA-blessed A&P w. IA), I believe their working conclusions (after loupe-aided
inspection) were: a) the lines were in/on the epoxy only and did not extend
into the cloth; and b) the outermost cloth was a thin, fine-weave, layer
intended less for structure than to provide a "relatively smooth" underlayer
for the gelcoat to interact/bond with.

> Does this materially affect the integrity of the wing/fuselage/control
> surface structure? That's beyond my pay grade.
>
> Gerhard Weibel's take is as follows (from the Schleicher Technical Note on
> "paint cracks"): Owing to the UV-radiation the gel coat of the paint
> surfaces grows brittle and shrinks; at the same time the UV-light destroys
> paint ingredients. So moisture (rain, dew) working in on long term will
> wash the decomposed paint ingredients out off the paint. The paint starts
> chalking and gets hairline cracks owing to the concurrence of
> embrittlement and shrinkage. Furthermore, these hairline cracks gather
> dirt which through its aggressive effect and its stronger heating-up from
> sun radiation further precipitates the degradation of the paint. Owing to
> this the intended protective effect for the fiber composite structure
> against moisture and UV-radiation is no longer granted.
>
> Certainly a good care with hard wax can slow down the above process
> distinctly, but it cannot be stopped completely. For this reason a
> repainting of the aircraft will always become necessary at some point of
> time. However, we point out explicitly that paint cracks - even deep cracks
> - do not represent damages to the aircraft structure if as of their first
> appearance immediate correct maintenance and care is given furthermore to
> the aircraft. As all the outside skin of the aircraft is dimensioned for
> stiffness, there are no critical mechanical strength problems, even if some
> cracks have gone down into the fiber composite structure and have already
> attacked the resin matrix base. The unknown ageing effects caused by the
> influence of moisture and UV on the unprotected fiber composite structure
> are more dangerous.
>
> P3
>

Thanks for Dipl. Ing. Waibel's thoughts! Opinions from those with his
background and experience ought not be taken lightly.

As I interpret the above, his thoughts seem in alignment with our thoughts
"from the 90's." Paraphrasing: taking care of a ship's exterior finish is a
good idea if extending the life of the factory-applied finish is a concern.

The last two sentences of his second paragraph passingly touch upon the
question raised in my earlier post. I infer from the closing sentence, that at
the time his thoughts were put on paper, he was no more "structural life
informed" then than I seem to be today...though he also (and, almost
certainly, rightfully) had serious respect for the power of UV to eventually
degrade the structure...key word being "eventually."

I'd love to see GRP/CRP glider-based engineering data allowing
"even-semi-informed" inferences to be made as to whether "eventually" is (say)
one year, or (say) 10 years.

My interest stems simply from being by nature disinclined to worry about
"stuff" that can be safely ignored and that isn't simultaneously "good for
one's soul." If it's good for one's soul and pocketbook to "keep after" a
ship's factory finish, have at it! But don't agonize over structure if it's
unnecessary. Life's full enough of real worries without inventing imaginary ones.

Bob W.

waremark

September 1st 16, 02:02 PM

OP, what do other pilots at your club fly? I would want to have a similar performance glider to friends with whom I might fly cross country, and advice from owners of the same type can be helpful. Who will maintain it, and what gliders is he most familiar with?

Potential resale is obviously important to you. In the UK Schleicher, LS and Schempp Hirth gliders are probably the safest investment. I was surprised at the idea that an ASW 27 would be difficult to sell. I think the opposite.

Paul T[_4_]

September 1st 16, 05:22 PM

At 13:02 01 September 2016, waremark wrote:
>OP, what do other pilots at your club fly? I would want to have a
similar
>p=
>erformance glider to friends with whom I might fly cross country, and
>advic=
>e from owners of the same type can be helpful. Who will maintain it,
and
>wh=
>at gliders is he most familiar with?
>
>Potential resale is obviously important to you. In the UK Schleicher, LS
>an=
>d Schempp Hirth gliders are probably the safest investment. I was
>surprised=
> at the idea that an ASW 27 would be difficult to sell. I think the
>opposit=
>e.
>

Nobody really flies 15m class in UK anymore. For approx. same money
an LS8-18 is going to be a better buy and quicker sale.

firsys

September 1st 16, 08:37 PM

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 5:15:23 AM UTC-4, John wrote:
> Returned to gliding after many years and out of touch with types and prices.
>
> Have narrowed it down to one of these types but nothing set in concrete.
>
> ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus, Discus 2 or Ventus.
>
> Was originally looking to buy a lower cost glider but with interest rates being so poor, I am thinking that a good glider may be a better investment than money in the bank.
>
> Any suggestions and a rough guide on prices? (appreciate that it ultimately depends on level of equipment and condition.
>
> Thanks

Here is a wild card which will attract a lot of derision !

The Kestrel 19 is in an orphan class, but represents best L/D
per Euro. I owned one for 10 years, and I and several friends who
flew it rated it a very nice glider to fly ( except in rain).
it climbs well, is fairly docile, and does excellent short field
landings. I flew it for the first NA 750 km triangle thanks to the
cockpit comfort for 8 1/2 hrs.
The gel coat was schwabellac, less of a problem than later coatings.
May be easy to buy but hard to sell. Hardware support not known to me but there are many in the UK needing it.
Heavy wings, but there are excellent all body covers available for
< 1000 euros; leave it securely tied down and go flying in
20mins.

John Firth , an old no longer bold , pilot. Ottawa.

Craig Funston

September 1st 16, 09:59 PM

On Thursday, September 1, 2016 at 12:37:36 PM UTC-7, firsys wrote:
> On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 5:15:23 AM UTC-4, John wrote:
> > Returned to gliding after many years and out of touch with types and prices.
> >
> > Have narrowed it down to one of these types but nothing set in concrete.
> >
> > ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus, Discus 2 or Ventus.
> >
> > Was originally looking to buy a lower cost glider but with interest rates being so poor, I am thinking that a good glider may be a better investment than money in the bank.
> >
> > Any suggestions and a rough guide on prices? (appreciate that it ultimately depends on level of equipment and condition.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Here is a wild card which will attract a lot of derision !
>
> The Kestrel 19 is in an orphan class, but represents best L/D
> per Euro. I owned one for 10 years, and I and several friends who
> flew it rated it a very nice glider to fly ( except in rain).
> it climbs well, is fairly docile, and does excellent short field
> landings. I flew it for the first NA 750 km triangle thanks to the
> cockpit comfort for 8 1/2 hrs.
> The gel coat was schwabellac, less of a problem than later coatings.
> May be easy to buy but hard to sell. Hardware support not known to me but there are many in the UK needing it.
> Heavy wings, but there are excellent all body covers available for
> < 1000 euros; leave it securely tied down and go flying in
> 20mins.
>
> John Firth , an old no longer bold , pilot. Ottawa.

If we're talking L/D per Euro the Nimbus 3 is well placed too.

Craig

Bruce Hoult

September 1st 16, 10:14 PM

On Friday, September 2, 2016 at 7:37:36 AM UTC+12, firsys wrote:
> On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 5:15:23 AM UTC-4, John wrote:
> > Returned to gliding after many years and out of touch with types and prices.
> >
> > Have narrowed it down to one of these types but nothing set in concrete.
> >
> > ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus, Discus 2 or Ventus.
> >
> > Was originally looking to buy a lower cost glider but with interest rates being so poor, I am thinking that a good glider may be a better investment than money in the bank.
> >
> > Any suggestions and a rough guide on prices? (appreciate that it ultimately depends on level of equipment and condition.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Here is a wild card which will attract a lot of derision !
>
> The Kestrel 19 is in an orphan class, but represents best L/D
> per Euro. I owned one for 10 years, and I and several friends who
> flew it rated it a very nice glider to fly ( except in rain).
> it climbs well, is fairly docile, and does excellent short field
> landings. I flew it for the first NA 750 km triangle thanks to the
> cockpit comfort for 8 1/2 hrs.
> The gel coat was schwabellac, less of a problem than later coatings.
> May be easy to buy but hard to sell. Hardware support not known to me but there are many in the UK needing it.
> Heavy wings, but there are excellent all body covers available for
> < 1000 euros; leave it securely tied down and go flying in
> 20mins.

Being basically a Glasflugel design (and not a Std Libelle) it should be well made, comfortable, and without vices.

Max L/D isn't everything, but looking at a few internet threads and spreadsheets over the years, it looks quite ok at a decent cruising speed too. The spreadsheet I looked at worked out to about 29:1 at 80 knots.

George Haeh

September 1st 16, 11:02 PM

I helped derig a Kestrel a year or two ago.
The memory remains vivid. You need at
least four very good friends from the local
weight lifting gym.

At 21:14 01 September 2016, Bruce Hoult
wrote:
>On Friday, September 2, 2016 at 7:37:36
AM UTC+12, firsys wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 5:15:23
AM UTC-4, John wrote:
>> > Returned to gliding after many years
and out of touch with types and
>prices.
>> >
>> > Have narrowed it down to one of
these types but nothing set in
>concrete.
>> >
>> > ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus,
Discus 2 or Ventus.
>> >
>> > Was originally looking to buy a lower
cost glider but with interest
>rates being so poor, I am thinking that a
good glider may be a better
>investment than money in the bank.
>> >
>> > Any suggestions and a rough guide
on prices? (appreciate that it
>ultimately depends on level of equipment
and condition.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>>
>> Here is a wild card which will attract a
lot of derision !
>>
>> The Kestrel 19 is in an orphan class,
but represents best L/D
>> per Euro. I owned one for 10 years, and
I and several friends who
>> flew it rated it a very nice glider to fly (
except in rain).
>> it climbs well, is fairly docile, and does
excellent short field
>> landings. I flew it for the first NA 750
km triangle thanks to the
>> cockpit comfort for 8 1/2 hrs.
>> The gel coat was schwabellac, less of
a problem than later coatings.
>> May be easy to buy but hard to sell.
Hardware support not known to me
>but there are many in the UK needing it.
>> Heavy wings, but there are excellent all
body covers available for
>> 20mins.
>
>Being basically a Glasflugel design (and
not a Std Libelle) it should be
>well made, comfortable, and without
vices.
>
>Max L/D isn't everything, but looking at a
few internet threads and
>spreadsheets over the years, it looks
quite ok at a decent cruising speed
>too. The spreadsheet I looked at worked
out to about 29:1 at 80 knots.
>

Steve Leonard[_2_]

September 1st 16, 11:24 PM

On Thursday, September 1, 2016 at 5:15:06 PM UTC-5, George Haeh wrote:
> I helped derig a Kestrel a year or two ago.
> The memory remains vivid. You need at
> least four very good friends from the local
> weight lifting gym.
>

Rubbish. That may be your experience, but not mine. I one man rig my 604. You just need proper fixtures.

Steve Leonard

PS: The center wing section on the 604 weighs in at roughly 400 lbs. And with proper fixtures, you don't have to lift it.

PPS: The memory can't be too vivid, as you can't recall if it was one or two years ago. :-)

John[_37_]

September 2nd 16, 12:18 AM

On Wednesday, 31 August 2016 22:30:07 UTC+1, Paul T wrote:
> OK think you said your in the Northern UK so my advice with the
> money and the experience you have and if your looking to sell the ship
> at some point and not lose money is to buy a good LS4a, LS8-18
> (probably best option if you have around £40-45k to spend) or Discus..
> Make sure they have good gel coats and ancillary equipment.
>
> But best talk to your CFI re: your skill level and what he might think an
> appropriate ship - maybe get some time in a high performance two
> seater i.e. Duo Discus/DG1000 first.
>
> In the UK you will find it harder to resell an ASW24, ASW27, ASW28,
> SZD55, Pegase, Lak 17 or Ventus A/B/C than the above. ASW20's are
> getting long in the tooth.
>
> Ignore Americans who don't read threads entirely - there are lots on
> here that will give well meaning but crap advice for the UK scene.

Thanks again everyone for keeping the discussion going, I'm learning a lot.
We don't have many high performance gliders at our site and few pilots seem to go cross country.
Have started visiting other clubs to fly different types with flaps etc. Also helping more to rig and see how easy or difficult they are.
Definitely keeping away from older types, gell coat problems, poor spares and heavy wings. I've built and maintained aircraft for years but no longer have the facilities, patience and time on my side to be repairing. I just want to fly as much as possible.

Essential that it is light and easy one man rig due to my age and lack of assistance most days.
In current production or easy to obtain spares.
Yes I would like it to have a good resale value if possible.
Discus, Discus 2 and LS8 keep popping up.
Not sure why a difference of opinion on the ASW27 and ASW28 otherwise these would be on the short list too. I thought they would be good machines and hold the price well?
SZD55 may not hold price so well but much cheaper to buy initially?
Semi-aerobatic would be a bonus, just the odd loop and chandelle on poor soaring days. (we get a lots of them!)
I'm not really in to competitions.

Michael Opitz

September 2nd 16, 01:30 AM

OK, My two cents..

Just get a one man rigger, and you won't ever have to lift the wing
roots any more. I have used one for the last 20+ years, and they
work great. The bonus is that you don't have to trust some non-
glider person from the general public to not drop a wing when you
don't have any savvy glider types around. You can even land after
everyone else has left the field, and de-rig by yourself.

I am also 6'2" tall and 205 Lbs. Until I got my Discus-2b in 1999,
I had never been really comfortable in almost all prior types I had
flown. I was always worried that I was either going to put my head
through the canopy on an off field landing, or my head was stuck so
far back (almost behind the canopy) that I had to use glare shield
mirrors in order to see other gliders behind my wing line in a
thermal. (positively dangerous at a WGC level with 50+ other
aggressively flown gliders in the same thermal with you)

I was amazed when I sat in the prototype D-2b at the factory. Tilo
and Biggo just had big smiles on their faces, and said "We finally
designed a cockpit where everyone can be comfortable." I couldn't
believe it when I put a normal chute on, left the seat back in place,
sat in the seat, had my legs flat on the floor, and had to pull the
rudder pedals back 2 notches. I have done a fair amount of contest
flying, and most of my competitors had always had a comfort
advantage over me before the D-2b. Not any more.. My D-2b is
now 17 years old (with no spar waves), and it still goes with the
best and the newest Standard Class that are out there today. Oh,
the handling also happens to be superb, and the control hook-ups
are automatic. Yes, the newer gliders are more expensive, but in
this case, I definitely got what I paid for, and it has been well worth
it for me....

Good luck..

RO

>Thanks again everyone for keeping the discussion going, I'm
learning a lot.
>We don't have many high performance gliders at our site and few
pilots
>seem=
> to go cross country.
>Have started visiting other clubs to fly different types with flaps
etc.
>Al=
>so helping more to rig and see how easy or difficult they are.
>Definitely keeping away from older types, gell coat problems, poor
spares
>a=
>nd heavy wings. I've built and maintained aircraft for years but no
longer
>=
>have the facilities, patience and time on my side to be repairing. I
just
>w=
>ant to fly as much as possible.
>
>Essential that it is light and easy one man rig due to my age and
lack of
>a=
>ssistance most days.
>In current production or easy to obtain spares.
>Yes I would like it to have a good resale value if possible.
>Discus, Discus 2 and LS8 keep popping up.
>Not sure why a difference of opinion on the ASW27 and ASW28
otherwise
>these=
> would be on the short list too. I thought they would be good
machines and
>=
>hold the price well?
>SZD55 may not hold price so well but much cheaper to buy
initially?
>Semi-aerobatic would be a bonus, just the odd loop and chandelle
on poor
>so=
>aring days. (we get a lots of them!)
>I'm not really in to competitions.
>

[email protected]

September 2nd 16, 04:49 PM

In my view the glider market worldwide is quite sophisticated. If one type tends to be cheaper than others then it is for one or more of a variety of good reasons. I would always buy a good example of a well valued glider and would then be sure of having a glider without drawbacks and that was easy to sell.

[email protected]

September 2nd 16, 08:28 PM

The glider market is sophisticated, true. But that doesn't mean it's immune to fads, rumors, and conventional wisdom.

"Easy to sell" has several dimensions. At the right price, any glider can be sold. But there are more potential buyers for a type that's in greater demand (hence, a higher price). What you want is a below-market price on a popular glider. Good luck.

In the meantime, I feel about my ASW 24 like Mike Opitz does about his Discus 2, and I've owned mine for 24 years. The gel coat is showing its age now (though not terribly so) but it still goes with the rest of the Standard Class, is a delight to fly, has Gerhard Waibel's safety cockpit (why I bought it instead of the more popular first-generation Discus at the time), has not suffered the spar waves of some later Schleicher models, is easy to solo rig with the right equipment (I've been solo rigging since 1982), and is comfortable for my 6'3" (1.9m) frame, albeit with a few tweaks from the factory.

But because the initial version didn't have winglets, "everyone knows the '24 doesn't climb well." This was not helped by Schleicher's clever marketing for the ASW 28, which purported to "fix" the problem. In reality, the '24 climbs great with the right winglets. Mine are from Hank Nixon here in the U.S., which are now approved by Schleicher, as I understand it, but there are others.

But...when the time comes to sell it, there will be fewer potential buyers. It's the same challenge I faced when I sold my well-maintained, competition profiled/tuned LS-3. Everyone wanted an ASW 20. The performance was identical but the '20 was (is) almost a "cult" glider in the U.S. And a new buyer (the logical candidate for, at that time, a 13-year-old glider) was more interested in keeping up with his/her buddies, and not just in climb and glide.

Here's an off-the-wall idea. Decent performance, easy to fly, light weight, durable gel coat, large owner group, much lower investment than even a generation-old Standard Class ship: has anyone suggested a Libelle 201? I know Glasflugel has been out of business for decades (most of these gliders are 40 years old) but spares are available from Streifeneder. I flew one for years, including in our first 15M Nationals, and loved every minute of it. Many in the U.S. came in the Eberle "clamshell" trailers that made rigging a trivial task.

Chip Bearden

bobanja

October 16th 16, 10:07 PM

Long time listener, first time caller...

Looks like I'm in the same situation as John 37. I'm returning to the sport after many years (since about 2000) and kind of wondering which ship to buy. I owned a Libelle 201 previously and put about 450hr on her. The obvious choices are something like a Discus, ASW-24, or an LS. I really don't have a limit on how much I can spend, but a $50K-$60K (US) budget seems reasonable. Except for casual club racing, I have no desire whatsoever to race (20+ years sailboat racing, I done), so having the latest and greatest ship really isn't a huge priority. I'll being using the plane just for X-counrty and pleasure flying in the western US (California/Nevada) and I'll probably fly about 50hr/year.

So other then the obvious choices, I'm a little curious about the LAK and the HpH ships, which really were not around when I left the sport. Anyone care to tell me the pros/cons of buying a LAK or HpH or other? How would you spend $50K-$60K if you were looking to buy?

Renny[_2_]

October 17th 16, 03:00 AM

On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 6:43:30 PM UTC-6, bobanja wrote:
> Long time listener, first time caller...
>
> Looks like I'm in the same situation as John 37. I'm returning to the
> sport after many years (since about 2000) and kind of wondering which
> ship to buy. I owned a Libelle 201 previously and put about 450hr on
> her. The obvious choices are something like a Discus, ASW-24, or an LS.
> I really don't have a limit on how much I can spend, but a $50K-$60K
> (US) budget seems reasonable. Except for casual club racing, I have no
> desire whatsoever to race (20+ years sailboat racing, I done), so having
> the latest and greatest ship really isn't a huge priority. I'll being
> using the plane just for X-counrty and pleasure flying in the western US
> (California/Nevada) and I'll probably fly about 50hr/year.
>
> So other then the obvious choices, I'm a little curious about the LAK
> and the HpH ships, which really were not around when I left the sport.
> Anyone care to tell me the pros/cons of buying a LAK or HpH or other?
> How would you spend $50K-$60K if you were looking to buy?
>
>
>
>
> --
> bobanja

Well, I do not think you would go wrong buying a nice LAK-17A, an HPH304CZ or a DG600. They are all out there on W&W right now and depending on how they are equipped, and the shape they are in, you can probably purchase one in the $50-$70K range. I have always felt that all 3 gliders are really an excellent value for the money and they will give you fine performance for X-C flying out west. I am a big proponent of flaps, but if you really want a standard class ship, you can look at possibly a Discus 2 (it might be on the high end of your price range...), HPH 304C or an ASW24. Please remember that whatever you purchase be sure that it has a good trailer and one last thing...I strongly believe in good glider brakes, so try to buy a glider with a hydraulic brake. Flying out of airports out west, you may be landing at high altitude airports and a really good hydraulic brake might pay for itself someday....Good luck - Renny

October 17th 16, 04:04 AM

On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 7:00:56 PM UTC-7, Renny wrote:
> On Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 6:43:30 PM UTC-6, bobanja wrote:
> > Long time listener, first time caller...
> >
> > Looks like I'm in the same situation as John 37. I'm returning to the
> > sport after many years (since about 2000) and kind of wondering which
> > ship to buy. I owned a Libelle 201 previously and put about 450hr on
> > her. The obvious choices are something like a Discus, ASW-24, or an LS.
> > I really don't have a limit on how much I can spend, but a $50K-$60K
> > (US) budget seems reasonable. Except for casual club racing, I have no
> > desire whatsoever to race (20+ years sailboat racing, I done), so having
> > the latest and greatest ship really isn't a huge priority. I'll being
> > using the plane just for X-counrty and pleasure flying in the western US
> > (California/Nevada) and I'll probably fly about 50hr/year.
> >
> > So other then the obvious choices, I'm a little curious about the LAK
> > and the HpH ships, which really were not around when I left the sport.
> > Anyone care to tell me the pros/cons of buying a LAK or HpH or other?
> > How would you spend $50K-$60K if you were looking to buy?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > bobanja
>
> Well, I do not think you would go wrong buying a nice LAK-17A, an HPH304CZ or a DG600. They are all out there on W&W right now and depending on how they are equipped, and the shape they are in, you can probably purchase one in the $50-$70K range. I have always felt that all 3 gliders are really an excellent value for the money and they will give you fine performance for X-C flying out west. I am a big proponent of flaps, but if you really want a standard class ship, you can look at possibly a Discus 2 (it might be on the high end of your price range...), HPH 304C or an ASW24. Please remember that whatever you purchase be sure that it has a good trailer and one last thing...I strongly believe in good glider brakes, so try to buy a glider with a hydraulic brake. Flying out of airports out west, you may be landing at high altitude airports and a really good hydraulic brake might pay for itself someday....Good luck - Renny

Make sure the trailer paperwork is in order. Neglected by more than you'd think.
Jim

Frank Whiteley

October 17th 16, 11:42 PM

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 3:30:07 PM UTC-6, Paul T wrote:
> OK think you said your in the Northern UK so my advice with the
> money and the experience you have and if your looking to sell the ship
> at some point and not lose money is to buy a good LS4a, LS8-18
> (probably best option if you have around £40-45k to spend) or Discus..
> Make sure they have good gel coats and ancillary equipment.
>
> But best talk to your CFI re: your skill level and what he might think an
> appropriate ship - maybe get some time in a high performance two
> seater i.e. Duo Discus/DG1000 first.
>
> In the UK you will find it harder to resell an ASW24, ASW27, ASW28,
> SZD55, Pegase, Lak 17 or Ventus A/B/C than the above. ASW20's are
> getting long in the tooth.
>
> Ignore Americans who don't read threads entirely - there are lots on
> here that will give well meaning but crap advice for the UK scene.

http://www.segelflug.de/osclass/ is definitely worth checking.

bobanja

October 18th 16, 04:05 PM

Remmy, Jim,

Thanks for the info. I'm on board with the trailer issues. There is nothing worse than having a crappy trailer. I've had several boat/plane trailers is various states of disrepair and/or various state of legality, so I'll be highly critical in my next purchase. My old Libelle trailer could only be described as "novel."

I'm not really locked into a standard class ship, so something with flaps like a ASW-20, Ventus, LAK-17A or 304CZ could be fun to learn (after the appropriate training).

At any rate, the soaring season is about over, so I'll have plenty of time over the winter to go shopping before the start of next season.

BTW: Is it me or does the sites search function completely suck?

Renny[_2_]

October 18th 16, 08:24 PM

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 12:43:06 PM UTC-6, bobanja wrote:
> Remmy, Jim,
>
> Thanks for the info. I'm on board with the trailer issues. There is
> nothing worse than having a crappy trailer. I've had several boat/plane
> trailers is various states of disrepair and/or various state of
> legality, so I'll be highly critical in my next purchase. My old Libelle
> trailer could only be described as "novel."
>
> I'm not really locked into a standard class ship, so something with
> flaps like a ASW-20, Ventus, LAK-17A or 304CZ could be fun to learn
> (after the appropriate training).
>
> At any rate, the soaring season is about over, so I'll have plenty of
> time over the winter to go shopping before the start of next season.
>
> BTW: Is it me or does the sites search function completely suck?
>
>
>
>
> --
> bobanja

Fall and winter tend to be a good time to purchase a glider, but do not wait too long because the glider you may be interested in may be sold before you even have a chance to make an offer. Reasonably priced gliders, in good shape and with decent performance, tend to be snapped up quickly.

You really do not want to have to say that you missed out on buying a fine glider because you believed you had "plenty of time" to decide....

Finally, in addition to the LAK-17A (that I mentioned previously), do not overlook the DG-600. It's a fine ship with excellent performance and they are usually very reasonably priced.

Good luck in your glider search! Renny

October 18th 16, 08:30 PM

If you're considering flapped gliders in that price range, the LS6C is one of the most underrated gliders. My first flight in a 6C was the day after my first flight in a JS1. Not unimpressed!
But then Derek Piggott always said his favourite glider was the last one he flew.
Jim

Jonathan St. Cloud

October 19th 16, 03:25 AM

The problem with LS-6/7/8/10 is fuselage size. I am 200 Lbs 6 ft in shape and could not find a way to fit comfortably. If you fit they are great gliders.

You said you are not interested in Standard class, but there is a lot of fun and performance and ease of use in standard class. Easy to rig, light to rig and great performance. Some days I miss the simplicity of my ASW-24, especially around rigging time, washing time, waxing time... I flew that bird virtually every Saturday. With 18 meter and open birds I have owned, I check weather before i decide to drive to airport.

I would encourage you to look at also: LS-4; ASW-24; ASW-19; Discus.

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 12:30:21 PM UTC-7, JS wrote:
> If you're considering flapped gliders in that price range, the LS6C is one of the most underrated gliders. My first flight in a 6C was the day after my first flight in a JS1. Not unimpressed!
> But then Derek Piggott always said his favourite glider was the last one he flew.
> Jim

[email protected]

October 19th 16, 02:11 PM

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 10:25:33 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> The problem with LS-6/7/8/10 is fuselage size. I am 200 Lbs 6 ft in shape and could not find a way to fit comfortably. If you fit they are great gliders.
>
> You said you are not interested in Standard class, but there is a lot of fun and performance and ease of use in standard class. Easy to rig, light to rig and great performance. Some days I miss the simplicity of my ASW-24, especially around rigging time, washing time, waxing time... I flew that bird virtually every Saturday. With 18 meter and open birds I have owned, I check weather before i decide to drive to airport.
>
> I would encourage you to look at also: LS-4; ASW-24; ASW-19; Discus.
>
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 12:30:21 PM UTC-7, JS wrote:
> > If you're considering flapped gliders in that price range, the LS6C is one of the most underrated gliders. My first flight in a 6C was the day after my first flight in a JS1. Not unimpressed!
> > But then Derek Piggott always said his favourite glider was the last one he flew.
> > Jim

Very good advice.
UH

John Carlyle

October 19th 16, 07:53 PM

Interesting comment. I'm pretty much your size, 5'11" and 205 lbs, but I fit very comfortably in my LS-8. Guess it depends upon torso length and shoulder width. I'd recommend sitting in an LS-6/7/8/10 before rejecting them. As you said, they are great gliders...

-Johm, Q3

On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 10:25:33 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> The problem with LS-6/7/8/10 is fuselage size. I am 200 Lbs 6 ft in shape and could not find a way to fit comfortably. If you fit they are great gliders.
>

[email protected]

December 2nd 16, 03:02 AM

On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 9:15:23 PM UTC+12, John wrote:
> Returned to gliding after many years and out of touch with types and prices.
>
> Have narrowed it down to one of these types but nothing set in concrete.
>
> ASW20, ASW27, ASW28, Discus, Discus 2 or Ventus.
>
> Was originally looking to buy a lower cost glider but with interest rates being so poor, I am thinking that a good glider may be a better investment than money in the bank.
>
> Any suggestions and a rough guide on prices? (appreciate that it ultimately depends on level of equipment and condition.
>
> Thanks

My budget was the deciding limit - but I picked up a decent Glasflugel Mosquito with perfect tinted canopy, heel brakes and in decent condition, then spent a small fortune on a proper avionic and oxygen fit-out - very happy pilot !! All for around $30k NZD / 22k USD. Goes like a cut cat, and more than enough performance for the relaxed type of flying I do. Trailing edge Brakes and flaps are excellent. Keeps up with a LS4 at most speeds, ASW27 outperforms it.