Russia Sailplanes website

[Willie]

I am in the market for a sailplane and have been looking at
PW 5s and Russia AC 4s. I noticed the Russia Sailplanes site has been
inaccessable for a few weeks. Anyone know why?

[Tim Mara]

I was told they have given up offering the Russia Gliders....
I don't know if anyone will pick this up again.
tim

"Willie" > wrote in message
m...
> I am in the market for a sailplane and have been looking at
> PW 5s and Russia AC 4s. I noticed the Russia Sailplanes site has been
> inaccessable for a few weeks. Anyone know why?

[Eric Greenwell]

Tim Mara wrote:
> I was told they have given up offering the Russia Gliders....
> I don't know if anyone will pick this up again.
> tim
>
> "Willie" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>I am in the market for a sailplane and have been looking at
>>PW 5s and Russia AC 4s. I noticed the Russia Sailplanes site has been
>>inaccessable for a few weeks. Anyone know why?

Go to www.motorglider.org, and use the links section to join the Russia
AC4/5 newsgroup. You can ask questions there, but basically Tim is right
about the website. The compamy web site is available, but you'll need to
use a translation tool (Google, Alta Vista) to read it in "English",
since it is in Russian.

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[BTIZ]

sounds like a PW-5 is a better offer now..

BT

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
> Tim Mara wrote:
> > I was told they have given up offering the Russia Gliders....
> > I don't know if anyone will pick this up again.
> > tim
> >
> > "Willie" > wrote in message
> > m...
> >
> >>I am in the market for a sailplane and have been looking at
> >>PW 5s and Russia AC 4s. I noticed the Russia Sailplanes site has been
> >>inaccessable for a few weeks. Anyone know why?
>
> Go to www.motorglider.org, and use the links section to join the Russia
> AC4/5 newsgroup. You can ask questions there, but basically Tim is right
> about the website. The compamy web site is available, but you'll need to
> use a translation tool (Google, Alta Vista) to read it in "English",
> since it is in Russian.
>
> --
> -----
> change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>
> Eric Greenwell
> Washington State
> USA
>

[John]

Rumor is there will be a new US distributor announced this year. If
you look at the Aviastroitel website (in Russian), you see many new
models being developed. Since the US was the largest market, clearly
these new models will likely be made available in the US. Which
indicates the rumors of the new US distributor might actually come
true.

Having flown both the PW5 and the Russia, I would say the PW5 is a bit
fancier in the cockpit (small stick like the expensive birds, for
example), but that is all. The Russia has much better control harmony
and seems a lot tougher overall. The rudder coordination take a while
to figure out in the PW5. Assembly of the Russia is way better
(really is a 10 minute, one person job), and glide performance with
the retract gear is much better than the fixed gear PW5. The only
negative with the Russia is it is a little pitch sensitive, requiring
re-adjusting attitude with spoiler changes (that is, more spoilers
cause the plane to slow down). Takes a bit of practice to smooth out
your landing if you transition directly from a more stable bird like
the 2-33.

The Russia does have a very bad tailwheel that just does not hold air.
Expect to spend around $130 to replace the Russian tailwheel with a
Tost tailwheel. Some owners report leaky mainwheels, but nothing
beyond having to add air every other month. Cheap fixes ($8)
involving Slime are available for the mainwheel.

Availability of used aircraft for sale seems a good indicator of how
well owners like living with a particular airplane. While you can
find a number of the self-launch AC5M Russians for sale (like due to
the 400-450 fpm climb rate from the 28 hp engine....I think this might
have disappointed a few owners), not many of the glider AC4 are for
sale. Seems like a satisfied group.

John

[Ernie]

it always was ;-)

Ernie

(c'mon - it is still winter, there is enough time for some serious PW5
discussion ;-)

BTIZ wrote:
> sounds like a PW-5 is a better offer now..
>
> BT
>
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Tim Mara wrote:
>>
>>>I was told they have given up offering the Russia Gliders....
>>>I don't know if anyone will pick this up again.
>>>tim
>>>
>>>"Willie" > wrote in message
m...
>>>
>>>
>>>>I am in the market for a sailplane and have been looking at
>>>>PW 5s and Russia AC 4s. I noticed the Russia Sailplanes site has been
>>>>inaccessable for a few weeks. Anyone know why?
>>
>>Go to www.motorglider.org, and use the links section to join the Russia
>>AC4/5 newsgroup. You can ask questions there, but basically Tim is right
>>about the website. The compamy web site is available, but you'll need to
>>use a translation tool (Google, Alta Vista) to read it in "English",
>>since it is in Russian.
>>
>>--
>>-----
>>change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>>
>>Eric Greenwell
>>Washington State
>>USA
>>
>
>
>

[Willie]

(John) wrote in message >...
> Rumor is there will be a new US distributor announced this year.

Thanks for the information. I have been considering a used ship in the
20 -25 thousand range. I really like the look of the Russia, it
reminds
me of a Phoebus, but without the heavy wings. I am also watching the
Sparrowhawk and Apis, but since they are so new, I don't think I will
find a used one for awhile.

The PW5 seems to be a good fit for me in terms of performance, but I
have heard and read nothing but negative comments from other
sailplane pilots. Is it really a bad ship? It seems to have the
performance
that I'm looking for (33 to 1) or better.

I am in no great hurry and can afford to wait for a deal, so I will
keep my eyes open and watch for the new Russia distributor.

Thanks again,
Willie

[Tim Mara]

I'm sure I won't be the first to suggest it....but if you are looking for a
"good" ship in the 20-25K range there will be a lot of "really good" (some
will even be far cheaper) Libelle's, Hornets, Mosquito's, LS1f's, LS3's
Jantar's and so on and even some later gliders like ASW19's, DG300's and
now even some LS4's ect that will be in or near your price range just to
name a few .....many will even be certified with Standard airworthiness....
performance isn't everything, but all of these will certainly out-perform
your wish-list and give you solid, record proven reliability and known
habits....plus since many of these have already depreciated (and
appreciated) you'll have some known value and resale.....plus plus plus.....
tim

"Willie" > wrote in message
m...
> (John) wrote in message
>...
> > Rumor is there will be a new US distributor announced this year.
>
> Thanks for the information. I have been considering a used ship in the
> 20 -25 thousand range. I really like the look of the Russia, it
> reminds
> me of a Phoebus, but without the heavy wings. I am also watching the
> Sparrowhawk and Apis, but since they are so new, I don't think I will
> find a used one for awhile.
>
> The PW5 seems to be a good fit for me in terms of performance, but I
> have heard and read nothing but negative comments from other
> sailplane pilots. Is it really a bad ship? It seems to have the
> performance
> that I'm looking for (33 to 1) or better.
>
> I am in no great hurry and can afford to wait for a deal, so I will
> keep my eyes open and watch for the new Russia distributor.
>
> Thanks again,
> Willie

[John]

Here is more proof the Russia is better than the PW5, at least in the
USA.

There were 81 Russian gliders imported to America, 26 motorgliders
imported, and 3 kits built. This according to the yahoo AC4 group.

If you search the FAA aircraft registry on the Internet, you will find
a smaller number of the "other" world class gliders registered in the
USA. Specifically, the FAA lists the number of PW-5 aircraft
registered as 65; and the number of L-33 Solo aircraft registered as
55.

Based on these numbers, the USA market place clearly prefers the
Russia to the PW5.

I assume one reason the Russia is a better choice then the PW5 is the
design has evolved from tail dragger, to nose wheel, to retract gear,
to motor glider, to now apparently touring glider, and soon-to-be
longer-span/winglet/flapped glider. The PW5 is "stuck" as a design
and not allowed to evolve.

So really, can you compare a new Russia with a decade-old design such
as the PW5? I once watched a retract gear C model Russia literally
run away from a PW5 between thermals...almost like the PW5 was going
backwards. Pull the gear up and add the wing root fairings, and the
Russia is 35:1. Nothing the poor 30:1 PW5 can do about that.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:58:17 -0500, "Tim Mara"
> wrote:

>I'm sure I won't be the first to suggest it....but if you are looking for a
>"good" ship in the 20-25K range there will be a lot of "really good" (some
>will even be far cheaper) Libelle's, Hornets, Mosquito's, LS1f's, LS3's
>Jantar's and so on and even some later gliders like ASW19's, DG300's and
>now even some LS4's ect that will be in or near your price range just to
>name a few .....many will even be certified with Standard airworthiness....
>performance isn't everything, but all of these will certainly out-perform
>your wish-list and give you solid, record proven reliability and known
>habits....plus since many of these have already depreciated (and
>appreciated) you'll have some known value and resale.....plus plus plus.....
>tim
>
First, a word in defense of the PW-5. It is quite pleasant to fly
judging from one flight. Controls are light and its responsive. The
only vice I was warned about before flying it is a tendency to PIO on
aero-tow take off if you let it pop up and are then over-enthusiastic
in correcting. I didn't have a problem - got it running on the main
wheel with the nose a little raised and it just flew off. If you can
fly a modern glass two seater (ASK-21 or G103) you'd have no problem
with it. OTOH the build quality of the early ones is a bit scruffy and
the short wheelbase could well make for a choppy roll-out on an uneven
field.

Having said that I'd certainly echo Tim's advice. I made my first
Libelle flight an hour or so after flying the PW-5 and it was a
delight to fly as well as having a lot more performance than the PW-5.
Again, I was warned about poor brakes, but didn't find them a problem
though they are weaker than you find on, say, a Pegase or Discus. They
sell for $US16K -$US18K with trailer here and have to represent good
value if you can get a nice one.

Me? I'm spoilt by an enjoyable two seasons on a Pegase and so am
prepared to pay for at least an ASW-19 level of performance.

--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

[Eric Greenwell]

John wrote:
> The only
> negative with the Russia is it is a little pitch sensitive, requiring
> re-adjusting attitude with spoiler changes (that is, more spoilers
> cause the plane to slow down). Takes a bit of practice to smooth out
> your landing if you transition directly from a more stable bird like
> the 2-33.

All the gliders I've flown have required a pitch-down when the spoilers
were opened, including my ASH 26 E, ASW 20 C, Libelle 301, Blanik, and more.
>
> The Russia does have a very bad tailwheel that just does not hold air.
> Expect to spend around $130 to replace the Russian tailwheel with a
> Tost tailwheel. Some owners report leaky mainwheels, but nothing
> beyond having to add air every other month. Cheap fixes ($8)
> involving Slime are available for the mainwheel.

All tires lose pressure, smaller tires lose pressure more quickly. The
500 x 5 Goodyear tire on the mainwheel of my ASH 26 E required air every
month, even with it's inner tube. It's normal, not a "Russia" thing.


--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Willie wrote:

> The PW5 seems to be a good fit for me in terms of performance, but I
> have heard and read nothing but negative comments from other
> sailplane pilots. Is it really a bad ship? It seems to have the
> performance that I'm looking for (33 to 1) or better.

It isn't a bad ship. The negative comments are basically 1) "it's ugly",
and 2) "you can buy a used glider with more performance for less money".

The #1 is personal taste. #2 is correct, but not decisive. If you want a
new glider instead of a much older one, or want to fly in the World
Class, then the PW5 is worth considering. There are groups much more
enthused about the PW5 than some the posters here; for example, try

http://www.wcsa.org/ [World Class Soaring Association]

I think the New Zealanders like them too. I had two nice flights in PW5s
when I was down there a few years ago.
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Bruce Greeff]

Eric's comment is correct, and could do with some expansion.

From personal experience, owning a 30+ year old glass ship is something of a
never ending tinkering excercise.
The seals are rotten, and the canopy doesnt fit like the designer intended, and
the hinges are worn (still legal but I'd like to replace them), and the gell
coat is dull (got to get better with the polish, or maybe that refinish is due)
and then you have to get some regulated part worked on, like - your oxygen
cylinder tested and there is no ISO documentation.

Please note that this is with what many consider to be a "mint" condition 1971
model Schempp-hirth glider. A neglected one, or a rare and poorly supported one
is going to be a lot of work...

I happen to enjoy working on the toy as much as flying her, but if you want a
"get in and fly" experience a new glider will inevitably be less work.

For us it is academic, no PW5s in the country.


Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Willie wrote:
>
>> The PW5 seems to be a good fit for me in terms of performance, but I
>> have heard and read nothing but negative comments from other
>> sailplane pilots. Is it really a bad ship? It seems to have the
>> performance that I'm looking for (33 to 1) or better.
>
>
> It isn't a bad ship. The negative comments are basically 1) "it's ugly",
> and 2) "you can buy a used glider with more performance for less money".
>
> The #1 is personal taste. #2 is correct, but not decisive. If you want a
> new glider instead of a much older one, or want to fly in the World
> Class, then the PW5 is worth considering. There are groups much more
> enthused about the PW5 than some the posters here; for example, try
>
> http://www.wcsa.org/ [World Class Soaring Association]
>
> I think the New Zealanders like them too. I had two nice flights in PW5s
> when I was down there a few years ago.

[bumper]

I'll add that it's normal for most general aviation tires to lose air. Those
on my Mooney used to require adding air every month or so. But there is a
fix. Michelin sells an aircraft tube advertised to hold air better, and it
works!




"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
> John wrote:
> > The only
> > negative with the Russia is it is a little pitch sensitive, requiring
> > re-adjusting attitude with spoiler changes (that is, more spoilers
> > cause the plane to slow down). Takes a bit of practice to smooth out
> > your landing if you transition directly from a more stable bird like
> > the 2-33.
>
> All the gliders I've flown have required a pitch-down when the spoilers
> were opened, including my ASH 26 E, ASW 20 C, Libelle 301, Blanik, and
more.
> >
> > The Russia does have a very bad tailwheel that just does not hold air.
> > Expect to spend around $130 to replace the Russian tailwheel with a
> > Tost tailwheel. Some owners report leaky mainwheels, but nothing
> > beyond having to add air every other month. Cheap fixes ($8)
> > involving Slime are available for the mainwheel.
>
> All tires lose pressure, smaller tires lose pressure more quickly. The
> 500 x 5 Goodyear tire on the mainwheel of my ASH 26 E required air every
> month, even with it's inner tube. It's normal, not a "Russia" thing.
>
>
> --
> -----
> change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
>
> Eric Greenwell
> Washington State
> USA
>

[Mark James Boyd]

In article >,
Eric Greenwell > wrote:
>Willie wrote:
>
>It isn't a bad ship. The negative comments are basically 1) "it's ugly",
>and 2) "you can buy a used glider with more performance for less money".
>
>The #1 is personal taste. #2 is correct, but not decisive. If you want a

1. You can't see if it's ugly from the inside. Besides, you're
going to wear that stupid fishing hat and take pictures your
wife will see forever, and you're worried about what the
GLIDER looks like?

2. You can buy a used glider with heavier wings that has
instant maintenance needs for less money. You have all those
hours to work on the glider, but you can't do another
two turns in each thermal? :P

The biggest advantages of the Russia and PW-5 is that they are
small and light and new. This is very convenient.
I personally wouldn't give up this kind of
convenience and ease of use for better performance
in a glider I was going to own, but there are those
who don't mind something bigger, heavier, that needs more
frequent TLC. Which type are you?

[Kirk Stant]

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4034d0ed$1@darkstar>...

> 1. You can't see if it's ugly from the inside. Besides, you're
> going to wear that stupid fishing hat and take pictures your
> wife will see forever, and you're worried about what the
> GLIDER looks like?

No, but you can see what it looks like everytime to walk up to it, rig
it, wash it, tie it down. To some people beauty is very important.
And for most people, all things being equal, beautiful (or "more
normal") gets the nod.

> 2. You can buy a used glider with heavier wings that has
> instant maintenance needs for less money. You have all those
> hours to work on the glider, but you can't do another
> two turns in each thermal? :P

What instant maintenance? Gliders are not like power planes in this
respect. Every new glider I've seen has needed more work to get it
set up and working correctly than the vast majority of used gliders.
You can buy a fully set-up used glider and be flying as soon as you
hand over the check. Good luck doing that with any new glider, from
PW-5s to Nimbus 4s! But as you say, for some new is important, just
like beauty for others. Oh, and you can do all the extra turns you
want, but if you can't keep up with your friends or get back...
>
> The biggest advantages of the Russia and PW-5 is that they are
> small and light and new. This is very convenient.
> I personally wouldn't give up this kind of
> convenience and ease of use for better performance
> in a glider I was going to own, but there are those
> who don't mind something bigger, heavier, that needs more
> frequent TLC. Which type are you?

So what if they are small and light? How much time do you spend
rigging? If you really mind lifting a few more pounds for a couple of
minutes, then by all means get a PW-5 (or Russia, or Apis, etc..).
But then you should also not mind the 25% lower performance. Of
course you could get a one-man rig and not worry about the weight at
all. Ironically, we all seem to be paying money to go the gym to work
out... And all that extra weight (meaning wingspan, and wingloading,
etc.) sure is nice to have on a booming day in the desert.

Some personal observations: I know 4 pilots out here in Arizona who
have owned PW-5s; 3 sold them after a couple of seasons and moved up
to 15m ships (304CZ, ASW-20, and Pik-20). The 4th flew his PW-5
primarily to compete and set records, since he also had an LS8 at the
time, since replaced by an ASH-26, he is hardly the typical PW-5 owner
(actually I don't know if he still has it). There is one PW-5 still
based at Turf where I fly, but it's owner bought a motorglider and I
havn't seen the PW fly in a while (pity, since I've been wanting to
try it out before it gets sold!).

Maybe it's just an Arizona thing, but the PW just doesn't seem to hack
it out here - the guys who had them (both experienced and new glider
pilots) got tired of flying by themselves, watching all the standard
and 15m ships disappear in the distance. And that is not my opinion,
it's what they said when asked why they sold their PW-5s.

This isn't a slam of the PW-5, which from all accounts is a nice
little glider to fly, and is popular with clubs. But anyone thinking
of buying one - especially new - instead of flying one in a club,
needs to think hard about what they want to do with it. I actually
tried to get our club to buy one, so I could race it in the World
Class - no luck.

Just my opinion, worth every penny you paid for it.

Kirk

[Eric Greenwell]

Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Willie wrote:
>
>> The PW5 seems to be a good fit for me in terms of performance, but I
>> have heard and read nothing but negative comments from other
>> sailplane pilots. Is it really a bad ship? It seems to have the
>> performance that I'm looking for (33 to 1) or better.
>
>
> It isn't a bad ship. The negative comments are basically 1) "it's ugly",
> and 2) "you can buy a used glider with more performance for less money".
>
> The #1 is personal taste. #2 is correct, but not decisive. If you want a
> new glider instead of a much older one, or want to fly in the World
> Class, then the PW5 is worth considering. There are groups much more
> enthused about the PW5 than some the posters here; for example, try

I forgot to mention that if a PW5 is interesting to you, and a used
glider is acceptable, a used PW5 will be even cheaper.
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Tim Mara]

> 2. You can buy a used glider with heavier wings that has
> instant maintenance needs for less money. You have all those
> hours to work on the glider, but you can't do another
> two turns in each thermal? :P
> The biggest advantages of the Russia and PW-5 is that they are
> small and light and new. This is very convenient.

I dunno about this.......I've seen and owned a number of really nice older
gliders..sure there are plenty of "lumps" for sale out there, but still for
not too may $ you can still find some pretty mint older gliders out
there....maintenance on sailplanes really isn't all that complicated either
and you pretty much can't "ware one out"...you can of course damage one or
mistreat one, you can update one if you like but these are pretty much all
user issues and even new glider buyers do all this too....
but you are right about one thing, some of these new light and ultra-light
gliders are easy to assemble and disassemble and that may be more important
to some of their owners since they probably will need to retrieve them more
often when they don't make the final glide home! :-)
tim

[Eric Greenwell]

Tim Mara wrote:
>>2. You can buy a used glider with heavier wings that has
>>instant maintenance needs for less money. You have all those
>>hours to work on the glider, but you can't do another
>>two turns in each thermal? :P
>>The biggest advantages of the Russia and PW-5 is that they are
>>small and light and new. This is very convenient.

snip
> but you are right about one thing, some of these new light and ultra-light
> gliders are easy to assemble and disassemble and that may be more important
> to some of their owners since they probably will need to retrieve them more
> often when they don't make the final glide home! :-)

If the pilots are flying to the limits of their craft, they'll all
landout about the same. If they are flying to make it home, L/D doesn't
make much difference - the lower L/D glider just doesn't go as far
before turning around and heading b. Landouts are up to the pilot, once
he has some experience.

But to address the weight and size issue: These can actually be an
important factor. One thing that keeps many people from going
cross-country is the potential difficulty of a retrieve. A 600 pound
glider may be more than a guy and his wife can manage, but 300 pound
glider (like a Russia) isn't. Or it may mean s/he can retrieve
themselves, instead of always needing a crew. An easy to retrieve glider
is very liberating for some people, even if it has less performance,
because they are willing to land out more instead of nervously sticking
close to airports.

A high L/D glider effectively puts the airports closer together, but
having a light enough glider so that the retrieve isn't a bitch is a
viable alternative.

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Mark James Boyd]

Kirk Stant > wrote:
(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4034d0ed$1@darkstar>...
>
>>
>> The biggest advantages of the Russia and PW-5 is that they are
>> small and light and new. This is very convenient.
>
>So what if they are small and light? How much time do you spend
>rigging? If you really mind lifting a few more pounds for a couple of
>minutes, then by all means get a PW-5 (or Russia, or Apis, etc..).

Well, I've also pushed the PW-5 singlehanded about 5 miles total.
I've NEVER pushed the L-13 or 2-33 singlehanded. When
I land out on a runway, it's nice to be able to push the
glider to a certain spot off the runway afterwards, on my own.
The 1-26 was great for this too.

A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
and has other implications than just rigging...

>Ironically, we all seem to be paying money to go the gym to work
>out...

Not me, brother. I'm already in shape. The shape I've chosen
is an oval...

\
{:)-()=[
/

>
>Some personal observations: I know 4 pilots out here in Arizona who
>have owned PW-5s; 3 sold them after a couple of seasons and moved up
>to 15m ships (304CZ, ASW-20, and Pik-20). The 4th flew his PW-5
>primarily to compete and set records, since he also had an LS8 at the
>time, since replaced by an ASH-26, he is hardly the typical PW-5 owner
>(actually I don't know if he still has it). There is one PW-5 still
>based at Turf where I fly, but it's owner bought a motorglider and I
>havn't seen the PW fly in a while (pity, since I've been wanting to
>try it out before it gets sold!).

It sounds like the pilots that got a coupla seasons and the
record setter got some great use. These gliders are entry level,
and I'd expect someone to move up later. I thought the
poster was looking for a first time glider (kinda like
a Cezzna 172.) The PIK-20 with a few groundloops and the
ASW-20 with quite a bit of complexity are excellent second gliders.

I've seen a few "used" gliders. Gelcoats, extra weight from repairs,
etc. aren't uncommon, and if you get something really mint,
the $$$$$$ really go upupupup...

>
>This isn't a slam of the PW-5, which from all accounts is a nice
>little glider to fly, and is popular with clubs. But anyone thinking
>of buying one - especially new - instead of flying one in a club,
>needs to think hard about what they want to do with it. I actually
>tried to get our club to buy one, so I could race it in the World
>Class - no luck.

Agreed, these are good club gliders and entry level first
gliders. If someone has quite a bit more experience, or knows
for sure they will stick with the sport like us fanatics, something
sexier may be warranted. After all, I haven't seen a
World class in the regionals anywhere near where I fly...

>
>Just my opinion, worth every penny you paid for it.
>
>Kirk

[Christian Husvik]

Hei!

Mark James Boyd wrote:

> A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
> from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
> and has other implications than just rigging...

I used to tow our LS-3a with a Toyota Corolla with 1.6l engine without
any problems at all. Now I have Carina E with a 2.0l engine for more
comfort though; it tows two-seaters like the ASK-21 and Janus just fine,
and I wouldn't expect an open-class glider to pose any difficulties. So
I do wonder what kind of gliders would require a V8 truck.

> [...], these are good club gliders and entry level first
> gliders. If someone has quite a bit more experience, or knows
> for sure they will stick with the sport like us fanatics, something
> sexier may be warranted.

I don't see any reason why someone would need to own an "entry level"
glider privately; you can fly those in your club. When the need for
your own glider arrives you are no longer a beginner, and you are better
off with a used LS-3, ASW-20 or something similar.

Christian 8-)

[Liam Finley]

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>
> A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
> from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
> and has other implications than just rigging...
>

WTF? I've owned two 600-lb 15m gliders, and I've never used more than
4 cylinders to tow them.

Perhaps you forgot to release the parking brake?

[Mark James Boyd]

Christian Husvik > wrote:
>Hei!
>
>Mark James Boyd wrote:
>
>> A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
>> from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
>> and has other implications than just rigging...
>
>I used to tow our LS-3a with a Toyota Corolla with 1.6l engine without
>any problems at all. Now I have Carina E with a 2.0l engine for more
>comfort though; it tows two-seaters like the ASK-21 and Janus just fine,
>and I wouldn't expect an open-class glider to pose any difficulties. So
>I do wonder what kind of gliders would require a V8 truck.

Try towing something heavy uphill, both ways, in the snow. 3 percent or
better grade. Sure sure, on the flat roads and beaches of Santa
Cruz I'd tow a catamaran, but a heavy trailer of ski gear up
to Tahoe with four people seemed to like a nice big engine...

If your path is flat enough, and acceleration is no issue, you
can tow your 600# glider with a bicycle, right? :)

>
>> [...], these are good club gliders and entry level first
>> gliders. If someone has quite a bit more experience, or knows
>> for sure they will stick with the sport like us fanatics, something
>> sexier may be warranted.
>
>I don't see any reason why someone would need to own an "entry level"
>glider privately; you can fly those in your club. When the need for
>your own glider arrives you are no longer a beginner, and you are better
>off with a used LS-3, ASW-20 or something similar.

I think there are those who don't want a "club" glider
because it may be too heavily scheduled and they want something they don't
have to compete for time with. This and going to remote gliding
spots without getting "permission." This is the case for my club
PW-5 and is a little bit of a hassle.

But if the person is no longer a beginner, then sure, they're
gonna want more performance, and if they don't mind the
required "extras" then yep, get something faster...


>
>Christian 8-)
>

[Mark James Boyd]

In article >,
Liam Finley > wrote:
(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>>
>> A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
>> from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
>> and has other implications than just rigging...
>>
>
>WTF? I've owned two 600-lb 15m gliders, and I've never used more than
>4 cylinders to tow them.
>
>Perhaps you forgot to release the parking brake?

LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...

[Liam Finley]

(John) wrote in message >...
> Availability of used aircraft for sale seems a good indicator of how
> well owners like living with a particular airplane...

Not really. The statistical fluctuations are too high due to the
small number of aircraft built. Right now there are no Russias for
sale in the US, a little while back there were a whole bunch. Not
long ago there were a bunch of ASW20s on the market, I don't think
that's an indication that ASW20 owners are dissatisfied.

I think a better indicator is the number of hours on the ones that do
go up for sale. If they are racking up a high average number of hours
per year, their owners are probably quite happy with them. If you see
them going for sale with like 5 or 10 hours per year on them, then
maybe not so.

[Eric Greenwell]

8 cylinders vs 4 cylinders
Tahoe vs Golf
USA vs the World
Diesel vs Gasoline

Does it seem like a longer than usual winter?

Liam Finley wrote:
> (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>
>>A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
>>from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
>>and has other implications than just rigging...
>>
>
>
> WTF? I've owned two 600-lb 15m gliders, and I've never used more than
> 4 cylinders to tow them.
>
> Perhaps you forgot to release the parking brake?

Maybe each poster should list his parameters at the start of a posting:

Typical towing speeds
Distance towed each year
Elevations towed over
Peak air temperatures while towing
Length of trip during towing (days, not distance)
Number of passengers and their luggage
Weight of trailer
Weight of tow vehicle

It'll bring some reality to the discussion when you realize one poster
tows his glider 50 miles to the gliderport at the start of the season
and back home at the end, while another is traveling 10,000 miles a
year, with his family and luggage for 3 weeks at a time, several times a
year.

I know, it won't be as much fun! It might let us figure out why there is
such a discrepancy in what is needed for an "adequate" tow vehicle.
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Lauren Reitz]

If I can tow a horse trailer with two 1200 lb horses up Seven Mountains
(322 just west of Mifflin Co. Airport in PA) at 55mph with a 6-cylinder
Explorer, I don't know what glider you could be hauling that would
require a V8.

Cheers.

Liam Finley wrote:
(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:...
>>
>> A trailer+glider that requires a V8 truck to tow is different
>> from one I can tow with a 6 cylinder SUV. The weight is there,
>> and has other implications than just rigging...
>>
>
>WTF? I've owned two 600-lb 15m gliders, and I've never used more than
>4 cylinders to tow them.
>
>Perhaps you forgot to release the parking brake?

LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...


------------------------------------------------------------

[Liam Finley]

(Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
> (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...

Not exactly.

As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
Basin.

It's true, I've never towed my trailer to Lake Tahoe in the snow, but
given that the only soaring operation there closes in September, I
don't see the need.

>Try towing something heavy uphill, both ways, in the snow. 3 percent
or
>better grade. Sure sure, on the flat roads and beaches of Santa
>Cruz I'd tow a catamaran, but a heavy trailer of ski gear up
>to Tahoe with four people seemed to like a nice big engine...

The lengths people will go to to rationalize the purchase of these
expensive underperforming little gliders!

[Eric Greenwell]

Liam Finley wrote:
> (Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
>
(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>>LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...
>
>
> Not exactly.
>
> As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
> 4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
> covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
> Basin.

I have no illusions, just an interest in what people are towing, what
they're towing it with, and - what's often missing from the discussion -
the conditions under which they are doing it.

For example, I don't know these things about your towing:

Typical towing speeds
Distance towed each year
Elevations towed over
Peak air temperatures while towing
Length of trip during towing (days, not distance)
Number of passengers and their luggage
Weight of trailer
Weight of tow vehicle

And the number of cylinders isn't too useful: my six cylinder mini van
has less horsepower than my 4 cylinder sedan, and weighs more than the
sedan. I think the sedan would do a better job towing, but I haven't
tried it. It certainly would be more comfortable!

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Tom Seim]

(Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
> (Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
> > (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
> >LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...
>
> Not exactly.
>
> As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
> 4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
> covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
> Basin.

Try reading your owner's manual, especially the part about towing weight limits.

[Mark James Boyd]

Liam Finley > wrote:
(Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
>> (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>>LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...
>
>Not exactly.
>
>As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
>4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
>covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
>Basin.
>
>The lengths people will go to to rationalize the purchase of these
>expensive underperforming little gliders!

Hehehe. Darn, you got my number. Can't get anything past these
ras guys :P

Yep, it's been a long winter...two more weeks to freedom for
me though! And I've heard rumors of thermals...

[Mark James Boyd]

In article >,
Tom Seim > wrote:
(Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
>> (Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
>> > (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<4035b4c5$1@darkstar>...
>> >LOL. I bet you live somewhere a bit flat? Good for you...
>>
>> Not exactly.
>>
>> As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
>> 4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
>> covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
>> Basin.
>
>Try reading your owner's manual, especially the part about towing weight limits.

"Never tow anything with your Mazda." Hmmm...I guess
when I sell it I'm gonna say it was just for a mountain bike
rack :P

[Marc Ramsey]

Tom Seim wrote:

> (Liam Finley) wrote in message >...
>>As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
>>4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
>>covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
>>Basin.
>
> Try reading your owner's manual, especially the part about towing weight limits.

There are quite a few 4 cylinder vehicles available in the US with
specified towing capacities in the 1500 to 3000 lb range. VW Golf and
Jetta, Subaru Outback and Forester, Volvo V40, Saab 9-3, Toyota Tacoma...

Marc

[Fredrik Thörnell]

Marc Ramsey > skrev den Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:27:59
GMT:

> There are quite a few 4 cylinder vehicles available in the US with
> specified towing capacities in the 1500 to 3000 lb range. VW Golf and
> Jetta, Subaru Outback and Forester, Volvo V40, Saab 9-3, Toyota Tacoma...

Towed a Discus with my -87 Golf II, 70 hp. It was very doable, doing 90
km/h on the freeway with no problems. When I encountered some steep hills,
it was a different story though (we're talking steep here, normal road
gradients posed no trouble). Felt like I was driving a heavy truck
instead, having to downshift into second and pull onto the shoulder
climbing. Not something you're used to in your car! Under 30 km/h,
attention shifted to the engine temperature gauge rather than the speedo
as the thermostat was wide open by then, trying to find the balance
between speed (radiator airflow) and engine strain. Not something I cared
much to repeat.

It is legal and doable, but make sure there aren't any unusually long
and/or steep climbs along the way.

And if I _owned_ a glider, I would get a bigger car to go along with it.
Er, actually, I did that anyway. Too much rust! :D

Cheers,
Fred

[Eric Greenwell]

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> Tom Seim wrote:
>
>> (Liam Finley) wrote in message
>> >...
>>
>>> As much as I'd like to support yours and Greenwell's illusions, my
>>> 4-cylinder trailering experience includes trips of up to 1500 miles
>>> covering mountainous terrain in the eastern Sierras and Nevada Great
>>> Basin.
>>
>>
>> Try reading your owner's manual, especially the part about towing
>> weight limits.
>
>
> There are quite a few 4 cylinder vehicles available in the US with
> specified towing capacities in the 1500 to 3000 lb range. VW Golf and
> Jetta, Subaru Outback and Forester, Volvo V40, Saab 9-3, Toyota Tacoma...

Toyota Camry (2000 pound limit).
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Liam Finley wrote:

>
>>better grade. Sure sure, on the flat roads and beaches of Santa
>>Cruz I'd tow a catamaran, but a heavy trailer of ski gear up
>>to Tahoe with four people seemed to like a nice big engine...
>
>
> The lengths people will go to to rationalize the purchase of these
> expensive underperforming little gliders!

Glider purchases can be rational? I'm reminded of Ed Kilbourne's song
that goes something like "Honey, I need a new glider, the one we have
now just won't do, they've come out with the new LS22. I knew you'd
agree, so I ordered one today,...."

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Greg Arnold]

Eric Greenwell wrote:

> Liam Finley wrote:
>
>>
>>> better grade. Sure sure, on the flat roads and beaches of Santa Cruz
>>> I'd tow a catamaran, but a heavy trailer of ski gear up
>>> to Tahoe with four people seemed to like a nice big engine...
>>
>>
>>
>> The lengths people will go to to rationalize the purchase of these
>> expensive underperforming little gliders!
>
>
> Glider purchases can be rational?

I think they are as rational as purchases of expensive SUV's for driving
around town. Plus they hold their value better, and require less
maintenance. And certainly more fun. Not as good at impressing the
neighbors, though.

[Eric Greenwell]

Greg Arnold wrote:
>> Glider purchases can be rational?
>
>
> I think they are as rational as purchases of expensive SUV's for driving
> around town. Plus they hold their value better, and require less
> maintenance. And certainly more fun. Not as good at impressing the
> neighbors, though.

Bingo! A pet peeve of mine. Though, as a motorglider owner who bought
the last time the dollar was weakish, I've probably lost an SUV in value
over the last 9 years, and it certainly has taken more maintenance. But
surely, a LOT more fun! And my wife goes along with the claim I bought
it because I love her, 'cause when I get hit by a bus and expire, she
can sell the glider and live extravagantly with the pool guy (and idea
she got from Pez), something she couldn't do if I bought a cheap glider,
whose sale would leave her destitute (I said she goes along with it, I
didn't say she believes it).

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[OscarCVox]

Plus they hold their value better, and require less
> maintenance. And certainly more fun. Not as good at impressing the
> neighbors, though

Try rigging it on your front lawn one day! sure as hell impressed my neighbours
even if it did block half the road

[Liam Finley]

(Tom Seim) wrote in message >...
>
> Try reading your owner's manual, especially the part about towing weight limits.

2,000 pounds. Your point being?

[John]

Are we saying larger sailplanes require larger tow vehicles?

Smaller sailplanes (Russia, PW5) require smaller tow vehicles?

You can buy new "small" trucks for $15 K. Large trucks/SUV near $25
K.

If this is part of the equation, the "old" used ships (which tend to
be very heavy) look even less practical then the new, small planes.

Performance difference? Maybe the "old" gliders have better L/D, but
the new, small sailplanes (Russia, PW5) have better climb. Both can
go cross-country.

John

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, (Tom Seim) wrote:

> Try reading your owner's manual, especially
> the part about towing weight limits.

For my 4-cylinder Volvos (240 and 740), the specified weight limit is
about twice what my glider+trailer rig weighs, and I've done many
trips across the Sierra.

Bob K.

[Liam Finley]

(John) wrote in message >...
> Are we saying larger sailplanes require larger tow vehicles?
>
> Smaller sailplanes (Russia, PW5) require smaller tow vehicles?
>
> You can buy new "small" trucks for $15 K. Large trucks/SUV near $25
> K.
>
> If this is part of the equation, the "old" used ships (which tend to
> be very heavy) look even less practical then the new, small planes.
>
> Performance difference? Maybe the "old" gliders have better L/D, but
> the new, small sailplanes (Russia, PW5) have better climb. Both can
> go cross-country.
>
> John

Your argument fails because one could just as well tow the "old"
glider with the "small" truck, sacrificing a little acceleration and
perhaps a few miles per hour safe cruising speed.

On the other hand, this does bring up a possible application where the
PW5/Russia could really excell: the cross-country trailer race! Kind
of like the RTKH event of last year, an event where contestents
trailer their gliders along a specified route, stopping periodically
to assemble and disassemble their gliders in front of judges.

If you can just get over your fixation with flying, the midget gliders
do start to look really attractive.