Sparrowhawk vs PW5

[Willie]

I have been looking at some of the current crop of lightweight
sailplanes
on the market and wonder if the sparrowhawk is a good value. Does
anyone have any experience flying one? If so how would it compare to a
PW5 or a Russia?

The price of a new Sparrowhawk with trailer and instruments is pretty
high compared to some of other ships available. I am interested in
these ships because I am not a competition pilot, and I don't have a
crew. So, a ship that is easy to rig and retrieve is desirable to me.

I really am looking for some advice from people with experience in
these smaller ships.

I'm not a new pilot, I am returning after a 15 year hiatus from the
sport. I have had a Libelle and a DG 202-17. I appreciate the info in
the last thread but it veered of onto the realm of trailer towing
weight.

[Joseph L. Hyde]

Willie,

I don't have experience "flying" any of those aircraft. I did visit
serial number 4 sparrowhawk at it's owner's workshop yesterday. I am VERY
impressed with this aircraft. The wings do indeed weigh 42 lbs each. (I
have an LS-3 so light wings really impress me) The cockpit is wider and
roomier than my LS. All reports are that the performance is better than
advertised. This is indeed going to be a revolutionary aircraft. From all
the reports of the 15 meter design in this series, I might just sell the
cars, house and first born to get my hands on a duckhawk. I think that
this aircraft is in a category far beyond the PW5 or Russia. When the
owner gets into the air with this machine it's performance coupled with the
owner's experience will probably leave me in the dust in my 15 meter ship.


Take Care and Fly Safe,

Joe Hyde


"Willie" > wrote in message
...
> I have been looking at some of the current crop of lightweight
> sailplanes
> on the market and wonder if the sparrowhawk is a good value. Does
> anyone have any experience flying one? If so how would it compare to a
> PW5 or a Russia?
>
> The price of a new Sparrowhawk with trailer and instruments is pretty
> high compared to some of other ships available. I am interested in
> these ships because I am not a competition pilot, and I don't have a
> crew. So, a ship that is easy to rig and retrieve is desirable to me.
>
> I really am looking for some advice from people with experience in
> these smaller ships.
>
> I'm not a new pilot, I am returning after a 15 year hiatus from the
> sport. I have had a Libelle and a DG 202-17. I appreciate the info in
> the last thread but it veered of onto the realm of trailer towing
> weight.

[Ted Wagner]

I haven't flown either of those ships either, but I took close looks at both of them up close and in person when I was trying to decide what I was going to buy.

First, you might be comparing apples and oranges. The Sparrowhawk is an ultralight glider (a very intentional design goal to avoid FAA certification expenses), the PW-5 is not, and is significantly smaller than the -5 (less than 12 meter wingspan).

If I had no interest in competition or serious cross-country and I had to choose between a Sparrowhawk and PW-5, I'd pick the Sparrowhawk; the performance is most impressive and they look like a blast to fly.

-tw

"Willie" > wrote in message ...
> I have been looking at some of the current crop of lightweight
> sailplanes
> on the market and wonder if the sparrowhawk is a good value. Does
> anyone have any experience flying one? If so how would it compare to a
> PW5 or a Russia?
>
> The price of a new Sparrowhawk with trailer and instruments is pretty
> high compared to some of other ships available. I am interested in
> these ships because I am not a competition pilot, and I don't have a
> crew. So, a ship that is easy to rig and retrieve is desirable to me.
>
> I really am looking for some advice from people with experience in
> these smaller ships.
>
> I'm not a new pilot, I am returning after a 15 year hiatus from the
> sport. I have had a Libelle and a DG 202-17. I appreciate the info in
> the last thread but it veered of onto the realm of trailer towing
> weight.

[Robertmudd1u]

>I have been looking at some of the current crop of lightweight
>sailplanes

Willie, Take a look at the Apis.
www.apisgliders.com
I think you will find something you like.

Robert Mudd

[John]

I have flown both the Russia and the PW5. No comparison, the Russia
is much better. Easier to assemble, better performance with the
retract gear, greater control harmony, more durable.

Next on the development list for the Russia is a 13m wing (up from
12.6m wing) with winglets and flaps. This will be the AC-4D model.
Prototype already flying, likely production will start once the new US
distributor is announced this year.

Clearly, adding flaps to the Russia seems a direct response to the
Apis. Not flown an Apis, but if the Russians are copying it, must be
doing some things right.

You might check the Silent too. Have interesting self launch
versions.

Not sure the Sparrowhawk directly compares to these others. It is an
ultralight, so have different set of rules (no certification, resale
value??). One good thing is the ability to paint the plane something
other than white due to the high temperature tolerance of the
composite. Also, being light weight, should be very easy to tow,
allowing good launches on very hot summer days. One wonders if it
more "hang glider" in its manner and capable of finding micro-lift
other sailplanes can't use. In any case, the light weight will result
in a more bumpy ride....weight does tend to cancel out turbulence a
bit.

John

[N5360C]

Willie:

I will second Robert Mudd's recommendation. I have flown the 13 meter
Apis, and it is light, responsive and sporty without being an
ultralight. With its flaps (actually flaperons), the Apis climbs like
a lovesick angel in very light thermals but still makes very good time
over the ground. Workmanship is also exceptional, and the wing panels
are light enough to make handling no problem whatsoever. On top of
the super performance and ease of assembly, availability is something
you might want to compare as you're looking. Your search will not be
complete without considering the Apis, and I think you'll be glad you
looked.

Fred LaSor

[nafod40]

John wrote:
>
> Not sure the Sparrowhawk directly compares to these others. It is an
> ultralight, so have different set of rules (no certification, resale
> value??).

Because it is an ultralight, it has its own categories for setting FAI
records, correct? It looks like the category is wide open too, with
plenty of room to push out the records.

[Mark James Boyd]

John > wrote:
>
>Not sure the Sparrowhawk directly compares to these others. It is an
>ultralight, so have different set of rules (no certification, resale
>value??). One good thing is the ability to paint the plane something
>other than white due to the high temperature tolerance of the
>composite. Also, being light weight, should be very easy to tow,
>allowing good launches on very hot summer days. One wonders if it
>more "hang glider" in its manner and capable of finding micro-lift
>other sailplanes can't use. In any case, the light weight will result
>in a more bumpy ride....weight does tend to cancel out turbulence a
>bit.

I was a little surprised that over the past few years, if
I recall correctly, the Sparrowhawk has gone from a base price
in the low $20 thousands to now the low $30 thousands.
With likely options and tax, more like $40K. At $260 a pound,
it's a good thing one is paying for less weight and not more.

Anybody who thinks there's no rampant inflation in the US
must just be buying Wonder bread and Campbell's soup...

For that much moula, I could buy a nice Russia or Grob-103,
and train and pay standby rates for a coupla teenagers
as crew to do ALL the lifting...

[John]

There are several clubs where you can rent a Russia or a PW5. Try one
and see which one is more fun to fly.

Also, there many clubs where you can watch/assist a private owner
assemble a privately owned Russia or PW5. This might be a good thing
to do, get some hands on experience and owner feedback. Other issues,
like how good is the trailer, also come into play when deciding which
plane to buy. You also get feedback on "improvements" made to each
plane. For example, Russian tailwheels are horrible, but you can
replace them with either an aluminum or nylon Tost tailwheel ($130) or
figure out how to add air each flight to a non-standard air valve (2
easy, cheap ways actually). Or how do you add a boom mike to a PW5?
Where do you store the water bottle in each one? Little things like
this are not in the sales brochure!

I am not sure the Apis, Silent, or Sparrowhawk are readily available
at the club level yet. The dealers seem helpful, though.

[Robertmudd1u]

>Because it is an ultralight, it has its own categories for setting FAI
>records, correct?

Being an part 103 ultralight in the US is not the same as being an ultralight
for the FAI record catogory.

Go to www.apisgliders.com and click on the link to the FAI site for details.

Robert Mudd

[Mark James Boyd]

John > wrote:
>
>I am not sure the Apis, Silent, or Sparrowhawk are readily available
>at the club level yet. The dealers seem helpful, though.

I'm a little surprised that these dealers don't sponsor
some competition pilots (at least a little). One would
think a $1000 sponsorship, an insurance subsidy
for an open pilot clause, and parts would buy a lot of
exposure at a contest for these gliders. Who's going to buy
a glider they've never seen nor flown? Is there a better way to
get new product exposure than at a contest?

[Gary Osoba]

Polar data on the gliders which have been discussed reveals the
following:

The PW-5 is at the bottom of the stack when it comes to lighter
sailplanes. The Apis and the Russia are both a little better at
different parts of the curve and depending upon the part of the curve
you are more concerned about.

The SparrowHawk is heads above all of these when it comes to running
and XC capability. I have set several world records in the prototype,
and production models are better. To give you some idea of the
capabilities, I flew 2 back -to -back 500 km triangles on my first two
attempts at same with this glider. I do not believe that any of the
other gliders mentioned would have completed the courses in the
ambient conditions. I have a total of 14 world records in gliders and
regularly fly a wide variety- from the lightest wing loading at 2.25
psf to the heaviest open class ships at 12.65 psf (an experimental
glider). The SparrowHawk is a fine design, and my favorite thing about
it is the extremely rapid handling qualities it posesses. It is safe,
with no surprises.

Comments from another poster re ability to damp out turbulence are not
correct. This ability comes from W/S (wing loading), not empty weight,
and the SparrowHawk has a higher capability in this regard compared to
the others. On tow, you will find it similar to your previous Libelle
and DG. In flight, it will rapidly outclimb both. In glide, it should
best the Libelle in almost all conditions while running and come close
to the DG 17m in some, below its capabilities in others. As far as
assembly/ground handling is concerned, the 40 lb. wings are unmatched
by the others and sustain a much higher g-loading. I flew 130 mph-plus
groundspeeds during some of the world record runs.

SparrowHawk owners can either keep their gliders unregistered as a US
part 103 ultralight or can obtain an N-number. One more degree of
flexibility than the others, depending upon your desires.You might
think of the glider as an FAI Ultralight category design that is so
well executed given the use of pre-preg carbon (something the others
don't do) that it goes beyond this and also satisfies the stricter FAA
part 103 Ultralight requirements ( under 155 lbs. empty weight).

I have no connection with the SparrowHawk manufacturing company. Just
giving some objective observations. In fact, this summer I will be
flying a one-of-the-kind Silent 2 prototype specifically designed for
meeting the FAI crtieria for DU category. I will be flying for
performance and handling evaluation and possibly world records.

Having said all this, I can also say that both Greg Cole, the
SparrowHawk manufacturer and Robert Mudd, the Apis distributor, are
people of integrity. I am not saying that other
distributor/manufacturers are not. Simply that of the gliders
mentioned, these are people I have dealt with and have recommendations
based upon that.

Best Regards,
Gary Osoba

President, SHA- the Experimental Division of the Soaring Society of
Am.
President, Foundation for the Advancemnt of Microceteorological
Soaring

[Kirk Stant]

(Gary Osoba) wrote in message >...

I have set several world records in the prototype...


Gary, what category are you setting the world records in? And what
were they previously held in?

I'm eagerly waiting for the Duckhawk to show up at a 15m race, so some
real comparison flying can be done.

I hope it is the breakthrough it is claimed to be; we need something
to shake up the status quo (and to drive down the costs of ASW-27s so
I can afford one!).

Bring a Sparrowhawk by Turf Soaring this summer, we would love to see
it in action in some good strong AZ thermals.

Kirk

[G.Kurek]

I once participated in traveling around Midwest with a Pw-5 and we
were giving out a free rides to anybody that qualifies, the effects
were depressing, all we met was bunch of numbnuts who's only concern
was who is going to pay for a tow...And PLEASE save your comments
about Pw-5 for yourself. It was the most discouraging experience ever
and this exactly why it will not happen again for Diana, Pw-5 or SZD
55 - lack of interest! If you're interested in any of Polish (I don't
know about Germans) manufactured gliders contact the dealer and they
will be more than happy to let you use it for a day.

[Mark James Boyd]

G.Kurek > wrote:
>I once participated in traveling around Midwest with a Pw-5 and we
>were giving out a free rides to anybody that qualifies, the effects
>were depressing, all we met was bunch of numbnuts who's only concern
>was who is going to pay for a tow...

Hehehehe. Another good reason to have a competition pilot fly
it during a competition as a demo. Then maybe DON'T let anyone
fly it unless they beg and fill out a ton of paperwork, and
make a non-refundable down payment (which just so happens to be the
same as the price of the tow) :P

But face it, glider pilots are as a group trying to
get something for nothing, right? Heck, we're too cheap
to pay for most of our climb. We expect mother nature to provide
it. How cheap is that! :)

[JB]

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<403f918a$1@darkstar>...
> G.Kurek > wrote:
> >I once participated in traveling around Midwest with a Pw-5 and we
> >were giving out a free rides to anybody that qualifies, the effects
> >were depressing, all we met was bunch of numbnuts who's only concern
> >was who is going to pay for a tow...
>
> Hehehehe. Another good reason to have a competition pilot fly
> it during a competition as a demo. Then maybe DON'T let anyone
> fly it unless they beg and fill out a ton of paperwork, and
> make a non-refundable down payment (which just so happens to be the
> same as the price of the tow) :P
>
> But face it, glider pilots are as a group trying to
> get something for nothing, right? Heck, we're too cheap
> to pay for most of our climb. We expect mother nature to provide
> it. How cheap is that! :)

It is allways a tough question to let someone fly a new glider for
nothing or even the price of a tow. There is alot at risk, the only
demo glider, and what of insurance? If someone puts down a deposit
that is diffrent but for the rest of us we will just have to take the
word of our fellow pilots and make our desicions on that.

[Mark James Boyd]

In article >,
JB > wrote:
(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:<403f918a$1@darkstar>...
>> G.Kurek > wrote:
>> >I once participated in traveling around Midwest with a Pw-5 and we
>> >were giving out a free rides to anybody that qualifies, the effects
>> >were depressing, all we met was bunch of numbnuts who's only concern
>> >was who is going to pay for a tow...
>>
>> Hehehehe. Another good reason to have a competition pilot fly
>> it during a competition as a demo. Then maybe DON'T let anyone
>> fly it unless they beg and fill out a ton of paperwork, and
>> make a non-refundable down payment (which just so happens to be the
>> same as the price of the tow) :P
>>
>> But face it, glider pilots are as a group trying to
>> get something for nothing, right? Heck, we're too cheap
>> to pay for most of our climb. We expect mother nature to provide
>> it. How cheap is that! :)
>
> It is allways a tough question to let someone fly a new glider for
>nothing or even the price of a tow. There is alot at risk, the only
>demo glider, and what of insurance? If someone puts down a deposit
>that is diffrent but for the rest of us we will just have to take the
>word of our fellow pilots and make our desicions on that.

In any sales venture, legwork is key. Prepping the customers,
getting invited to things, getting publicity, getting the
feelgood is important. Then reliability and trust.

As a salesman, even if all this is done, the deposit, and the final
payment are the thing. I've taken more than a few deposits,
made the terms clear, and had the buyer withdraw. Always
very amicably. I was fine with it, since the deposit was very
carefully priced to pay for my time, and the customer was
satisfied because the non-refundable terms were clear.

I've also lost deposits as the buyer before. I was very clear
about what I wanted to do (test flights, inspections) and
number of hours I'd put on the aircraft and how long
it would stay off the market. I was always satisfied that
the deposit was fair and even though I didn't complete the sale
(this has happened about 1/2 dozen times) the seller was
satisfied too.

I've done a very few transactions where the money/merchandise
exchanged but not simultaneously. I've done this maybe 6 times,
and very carefully, with low $$$ items and in country.
By and large, soaring pilots are much more trustworthy than the
general yahoo. I abmire Bob Wander for his "I'll send it, then
you send me a check" policy. Amazing.

I don't know if I'd commit to showing up for anything (especially
with a demo glider) for less than $100. If a guy doesn't have
a $100 itching to get out of his wallet, he ain't gonna buy no glider...
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA