Opinions on ASW-17

[Thomas Mærsk Pedersen]

I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with regards
to performance, handling, value for money etc?

Comments will be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Thomas Mærsk
Copenhagen, Denmark.

[goneill]

performance, handling, value for money "buy it now"
The 17 scores massive on these points
BUT they have these reality checks
1/ Typical early open class ,heavy "MUST" have rigging gear
2/ they have a narrow approach angle ,weak airbrakes so best
countryside to fly them over is where outlanding fields are larger
than usual ,they land just as short as a 15meter ship but pilot
workload is much more intense.Very little room for error.

"Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
...
>I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
>regards
> to performance, handling, value for money etc?
>
> Comments will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Thomas Mærsk
> Copenhagen, Denmark.
>
>

[Gary Boggs]

I have a friend that has one and it is a bitch to put together. Good
performance for the dollar though.

Boggs

"Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
...
> I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
regards
> to performance, handling, value for money etc?
>
> Comments will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Thomas Mærsk
> Copenhagen, Denmark.
>
>

[Jean]

As a happy owner - F-FAQC - I would just add that it's not very "nervous" as
roll rate is not impressive (in mountain flight some anticipation is needed)
however the controls remains light. Climbing ability is outstanding, and
it's very good in transition up to 160 km/h.
My co-owner succeeded a 1000km flight last summer from Challes-les-Eaux
(France/North Alps).

Mine has a tail chute which is very efficient at compensating the weak
airbrakes; However tail chutes are not 100% reliable so it's better to keep
trained to narrow approach angle.

.... And yes a rigging gear is mandatory if you want to keep friends
Jean

"goneill" > a écrit dans le message de
...
> performance, handling, value for money "buy it now"
> The 17 scores massive on these points
> BUT they have these reality checks
> 1/ Typical early open class ,heavy "MUST" have rigging gear
> 2/ they have a narrow approach angle ,weak airbrakes so best
> countryside to fly them over is where outlanding fields are larger
> than usual ,they land just as short as a 15meter ship but pilot
> workload is much more intense.Very little room for error.
>
> "Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
> >regards
> > to performance, handling, value for money etc?
> >
> > Comments will be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Thomas Mærsk
> > Copenhagen, Denmark.
> >
> >
>
>

[W.J. \(Bill\) Dean \(U.K.\).]

It is possible to modify the brakes by fitting a second paddle to each of
the four brakes (top and bottom).

This is the same mod. as that to the ASW19.

I know of several examples which have had this modification, and I have
flown
one of them. I have heard the modified braking described as similar to the
K21, I agree.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.

>
> "goneill" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> performance, handling, value for money "buy it now".
> The 17 scores massive on these points.
> BUT they have these reality checks:
> 1/ Typical early open class, heavy "MUST" have rigging gear.
> 2/ They have a narrow approach angle, weak airbrakes so best
> countryside to fly them over is where outlanding fields are larger
> than usual, they land just as short as a 15meter ship but pilot
> workload is much more intense. Very little room for error.
>
> >
> >"Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
> > regards to performance, handling, value for money etc?
> >
> > Comments will be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Thomas Mærsk
> > Copenhagen, Denmark.
> >
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Gary Boggs wrote:

> I have a friend that has one and it is a bitch to put together. Good
> performance for the dollar though.
>=20
> Boggs
>=20
> "Thomas M=E6rsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
> ...
>=20
>>I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
>=20
> regards
>=20
>>to performance, handling, value for money etc?

Be sure the wing inspections have been done - I think there is some wood =

inside that can cause problems.

--=20
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[ken ward]

Save yourself some money. Buy a used LAK-12 with same performance. The
LAK looks like a 17 clone, and will have way less hours. Everyone
whinges about the 220# weight of a complete 12 wing, but the inner 17
panel by itself weighs 190#. you'll need some helpers.

Ken
no, my 12 is NOT for sale!

In article >,
"Jean" > wrote:

> As a happy owner - F-FAQC - I would just add that it's not very "nervous" as
> roll rate is not impressive (in mountain flight some anticipation is needed)
> however the controls remains light. Climbing ability is outstanding, and
> it's very good in transition up to 160 km/h.
> My co-owner succeeded a 1000km flight last summer from Challes-les-Eaux
> (France/North Alps).
>
> Mine has a tail chute which is very efficient at compensating the weak
> airbrakes; However tail chutes are not 100% reliable so it's better to keep
> trained to narrow approach angle.
>
> ... And yes a rigging gear is mandatory if you want to keep friends
> Jean
>
> "goneill" > a écrit dans le message de
> ...
> > performance, handling, value for money "buy it now"
> > The 17 scores massive on these points
> > BUT they have these reality checks
> > 1/ Typical early open class ,heavy "MUST" have rigging gear
> > 2/ they have a narrow approach angle ,weak airbrakes so best
> > countryside to fly them over is where outlanding fields are larger
> > than usual ,they land just as short as a 15meter ship but pilot
> > workload is much more intense.Very little room for error.
> >
> > "Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
> > >regards
> > > to performance, handling, value for money etc?
> > >
> > > Comments will be greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Thomas Mærsk
> > > Copenhagen, Denmark.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Janusz Kesik]

U=BFytkownik ken ward > w wiadomo=B6ci do grup =
dyskusyjnych =
=
m...
> Save yourself some money. Buy a used LAK-12 with same performance. =
The=20
> LAK looks like a 17 clone, and will have way less hours. Everyone=20
> whinges about the 220# weight of a complete 12 wing, but the inner 17=20
> panel by itself weighs 190#. you'll need some helpers.

I fully agree, save your money for other things, the LAK-12 looks like =
xerox of the '17' and our local owner is happy with his '12' he brought =
from Russia. It had only 104h logged then. :)

Regards,


--=20
Janusz Kesik

-------------
http://www.wroclaw.dolny.slask.pl
See Breslau (Wroclaw) in photography
From the XIX Century, through the 1945 Festung Breslau, to the photos =
taken today morning...

[Jean]

Well, according to Schleicher GmbH "for the ASW 17 there is no approved
technical note/drawing or modification
kit for double airbrake paddles available"
Jean

"W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.)." > a écrit dans le message
de ...
> It is possible to modify the brakes by fitting a second paddle to each of
> the four brakes (top and bottom).
>
> This is the same mod. as that to the ASW19.
>
> I know of several examples which have had this modification, and I have
> flown
> one of them. I have heard the modified braking described as similar to
the
> K21, I agree.
>
> W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
> Remove "ic" to reply.
>
> >
> > "goneill" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > performance, handling, value for money "buy it now".
> > The 17 scores massive on these points.
> > BUT they have these reality checks:
> > 1/ Typical early open class, heavy "MUST" have rigging gear.
> > 2/ They have a narrow approach angle, weak airbrakes so best
> > countryside to fly them over is where outlanding fields are larger
> > than usual, they land just as short as a 15meter ship but pilot
> > workload is much more intense. Very little room for error.
> >
> > >
> > >"Thomas Mærsk Pedersen" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > I am considering buying an AWS-17 - any opinions on this glider with
> > > regards to performance, handling, value for money etc?
> > >
> > > Comments will be greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Thomas Mærsk
> > > Copenhagen, Denmark.
> > >
> >
>
>
>

[W.J. \(Bill\) Dean \(U.K.\).]

I do not have the drawings etc. with me, they are with the repairer who did
the modification. The drawings etc. are the same as the ones for the
ASW19. I got them from the BGA who have of course approved the
modification.

Remember that the ASW19 modification was not in origin by Schleicher; it was
private and then Schleicher adopted it and included it in new production.

Perhaps there are advantages in flying in the U.K. rather than in France!

When I had a tail wheel fitted to the ASW17 to replace the tailskid, the
repairer used a deep moulding for the wheel with a fixed ballast point
inside at the top. Ballast can be fitted or removed just by taking out the
wheel to get access to the ballast point bolt. This modification can be
fitted to the ASW19 and 20.

There is also a U.K. approved modification to the ASW20 to fit a tail
ballast tank, it is also approved to double the brake paddles on the ASW20.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.

>
> "Jean" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Well, according to Schleicher GmbH "for the ASW 17 there is no approved
> technical note/drawing or modification kit for double airbrake paddles
> available".
>
> Jean
>
> >
> > "W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.)." > a écrit dans le
> > message de ...
> >
> > It is possible to modify the brakes by fitting a second paddle to each
> > of the four brakes (top and bottom).
> >
> > This is the same mod. as that to the ASW19.
> >
> > I know of several examples which have had this modification, and I have
> > flown one of them. I have heard the modified braking described as
> > similar to the K21, I agree.
> >
> > W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
> > Remove "ic" to reply.
> >
>

[Bert Willing]

Bill,
do you have a link for the ASW20 tail tank modification?


--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.)." > a écrit dans le message
de news: ...
>I do not have the drawings etc. with me, they are with the repairer who did
> the modification. The drawings etc. are the same as the ones for the
> ASW19. I got them from the BGA who have of course approved the
> modification.
>
> Remember that the ASW19 modification was not in origin by Schleicher; it
> was
> private and then Schleicher adopted it and included it in new production.
>
> Perhaps there are advantages in flying in the U.K. rather than in France!
>
> When I had a tail wheel fitted to the ASW17 to replace the tailskid, the
> repairer used a deep moulding for the wheel with a fixed ballast point
> inside at the top. Ballast can be fitted or removed just by taking out
> the
> wheel to get access to the ballast point bolt. This modification can be
> fitted to the ASW19 and 20.
>
> There is also a U.K. approved modification to the ASW20 to fit a tail
> ballast tank, it is also approved to double the brake paddles on the
> ASW20.
>
> W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
> Remove "ic" to reply.
>
>>
>> "Jean" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> Well, according to Schleicher GmbH "for the ASW 17 there is no approved
>> technical note/drawing or modification kit for double airbrake paddles
>> available".
>>
>> Jean
>>
>> >
>> > "W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.)." > a écrit dans le
>> > message de ...
>> >
>> > It is possible to modify the brakes by fitting a second paddle to each
>> > of the four brakes (top and bottom).
>> >
>> > This is the same mod. as that to the ASW19.
>> >
>> > I know of several examples which have had this modification, and I have
>> > flown one of them. I have heard the modified braking described as
>> > similar to the K21, I agree.
>> >
>> > W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
>> > Remove "ic" to reply.
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
>