LAK-12 or a Jantar, and which model Jantar?

[rich]

Haven't flown either one, but have flown the ASW17, and liked it.
Would like to avoid gel coat issues.
Thanks all,
Rich

[Don Johnstone]

If you have flown a 17 why would you want either of
the others. My 17 is finished in acrylic but not for
sale.

At 07:12 18 July 2005, Rich wrote:
>Haven't flown either one, but have flown the ASW17,
>and liked it.
>Would like to avoid gel coat issues.
>Thanks all,
>Rich
>
>

[rich]

I found the 17 we owned a little cramped, but a great performer. If I
find one that's painted I'll consider it.
Rich

[[email protected]]

Don Johnstone wrote:
> If you have flown a 17 why would you want either of
> the others. My 17 is finished in acrylic but not for
> sale.


Cost! LAK 12's available in the West are all generally newer than 1992
with some as late as 1998. A used LAK 12 would generally be in better
condition than a Nimbus 2 or ASW 17 and also be a lot cheaper. A good,
used ~8 year old LAK 12 will generally cost less than a 15m German
Glider ~20-25 years old or a ~25-30 year old ASW 17 or Nimbus 2.
Jantars usually go for a little more than a LAK 12 but not as much as
the German aircraft. Most Western LAK 12's on the market have had their
original Russian glide computers and radios replaced by more modern
Western instruments.

Downside of the LAK 12 and the early Jantars are the single piece wings
and resultant long, heavy trailers. Upside is more water ballast and
epoxy or polyurethane finishes which should be more durable than gel
coats. My LAK 12 was recently repaired and painted after being damaged
in the hangar. The AP doing the repair commented a number of times how
well the aircraft is built. The aircraft now has a beautiful, white
polyurethane finish which is far more attractive than the original,
dull, slightly beige epoxy finish.

I love flying my LAK 12 but rigging it is a pain. I keep it rigged in a
hangar but not everybody has hangar space for 20m gliders. At least a
Nimbus can have the outer panels removed and then fit it in a smaller
hangar.

Clinton
LAK 12

[rich]

Thanks for the input, I didn't know about the one piece wings. Did
that ever change, what serial number, and subsequent?
Rich

[Marc Ramsey]

rich wrote:
> Thanks for the input, I didn't know about the one piece wings. Did
> that ever change, what serial number, and subsequent?

No, all LAK-12s have single piece wings. After having failed, a number
of times, to avoid being in the vicinity when ASW-17s and LAK-12s are
ready to be assembled, I'll say that the inner section of a 17 wing is
somewhat more awkward and tiring to hold up than an entire 12 wing...

Marc

[Robert Backer]

I owned a 17 for about 10 years. I can tell you from personal
experience that the 17 is very easy to rig IF you have a good system and
appropriate rigging aids. There is no reason to be holding a 17 inner
panel for any longer than it takes to get it on a nice stable wing
stand. When both inner panels are inserted and resting on stands, you
just adjust the height of the fuselage with the ramp jack till the holes
line up. You will then be able to insert the pins with one finger, no
struggling. What is true of any glider but most certainly with the big
ships, if it doesn't go together easily, something is not in the right
place. Find and fix the problem, a bigger hammer is not the answer.
Don't fight with it, and on the big ships, use two wing stands and keep
your friends.

Bob

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> rich wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the input, I didn't know about the one piece wings. Did
>> that ever change, what serial number, and subsequent?
>
>
> No, all LAK-12s have single piece wings. After having failed, a number
> of times, to avoid being in the vicinity when ASW-17s and LAK-12s are
> ready to be assembled, I'll say that the inner section of a 17 wing is
> somewhat more awkward and tiring to hold up than an entire 12 wing...
>
> Marc

[Marc Ramsey]

Robert Backer wrote:
> I owned a 17 for about 10 years. I can tell you from personal
> experience that the 17 is very easy to rig IF you have a good system and
> appropriate rigging aids.

Which is true of any big wing glider, including the LAK-12...

Marc

[Chris Reed]

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> Robert Backer wrote:
>
>> I owned a 17 for about 10 years. I can tell you from personal
>> experience that the 17 is very easy to rig IF you have a good system
>> and appropriate rigging aids.
>
>
> Which is true of any big wing glider, including the LAK-12...
>
> Marc

Hear Hear! Also true of my Open Cirrus (only 17.7m, but with *huge*
spars tested to 15g by the German LBA without breaking them).

It takes one minute of handling per wing to get it onto trestles
(maximum). Then a further minute to line everything up (no lifting
here), at which point it all slides into place. No-one runs away when
I'm rigging.

I can't believe that even 15m pilots don't have two wing stands - some
don't even have one!

A simple dolly to take the wing root while you're swinging the wing
round means that I don't have to lift the heavy end for more than 10
seconds at a time.

By the way, aluminium step ladders with a piece of pipe insulation taped
to the top hoop make excellent, light and stable stands for very little
money.

This lot can't cost more than 50 bucks max, plus a couple of hours to
make the dolly.

[Don Johnstone]

To add to that there is no lifting of the main panels
except to put them in the wing dolly which then swivels
and is at the right height to 'drive' it into the fuselage.
A small lift then to get it onto the trestle to free
the dolly for the other wing. I can rig my 17 on my
own with very little difficulty although I admit it
is easier with 2.
I admit the cockpit of the 17 is on the small size,
as are most AS gliders but I am 6'1' 210 lbs and with
a slim seat back I am very cosy. The thing that swings
it for me is the stunning handling with a good performance,
again common to all Gerhard Waibel designed gliders.

A real bonus, it will climb in the rain, which the
Kestrel would not.

At 19:42 18 July 2005, Chris Reed wrote:
>Marc Ramsey wrote:
>> Robert Backer wrote:
>>
>>> I owned a 17 for about 10 years. I can tell you from
>>>personal
>>> experience that the 17 is very easy to rig IF you
>>>have a good system
>>> and appropriate rigging aids.
>>
>>
>> Which is true of any big wing glider, including the
>>LAK-12...
>>
>> Marc
>
>Hear Hear! Also true of my Open Cirrus (only 17.7m,
>but with *huge*
>spars tested to 15g by the German LBA without breaking
>them).
>
>It takes one minute of handling per wing to get it
>onto trestles
>(maximum). Then a further minute to line everything
>up (no lifting
>here), at which point it all slides into place. No-one
>runs away when
>I'm rigging.
>
>I can't believe that even 15m pilots don't have two
>wing stands - some
>don't even have one!
>
>A simple dolly to take the wing root while you're swinging
>the wing
>round means that I don't have to lift the heavy end
>for more than 10
>seconds at a time.
>
>By the way, aluminium step ladders with a piece of
>pipe insulation taped
>to the top hoop make excellent, light and stable stands
>for very little
>money.
>
>This lot can't cost more than 50 bucks max, plus a
>couple of hours to
>make the dolly.
>

[Ian]

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:45:40 -0700, Robert Backer wrote:

> I owned a 17 for about 10 years. I can tell you from personal
> experience that the 17 is very easy to rig IF you have a good system and
> appropriate rigging aids. There is no reason to be holding a 17 inner
> panel for any longer than it takes to get it on a nice stable wing
> stand.

I owned a share in a Nimbus 2 for many years. Despite it's excellent
ability to get home in the last lift of a dying day, I carried it out of
plowed fields enough times to make me happy that it was not an ASW 17.
Rigging aids don't offer much assistance in this situation.

On one occasion my partner landed out late on a Sunday afternoon.
I went to fetch him but we could not get the Nimbus to the trailer.
Eventually, in desperation, long after sunset, I drove into the local
town, I found a group of folk outside a church and negotiated the
assistance of a couple of large gentlemen for a couple of hours in return
for a donation to the congregation.

Another time, after landing in a large soft field, the helpful farmer
offered to tow the Nimbus out with a tractor. He sent his worker to fetch
the "small" tractor, but it would not budge the Nimbus, so he sent the
worker back to fetch the "large" one. In the meantime I got the outer wing
panels, tailplane and canopy off, and I recruited a group of his farm
labourers and briefed them to lift under the leading edges of the wing
roots to take some of the weight off wheel when the tractor was ready to
pull. When the big tractor arrived it did move glider which made the
farmer happy and I was happy to note how strong the Nimbus under carriage
is.

Open class is fun, but it has it's disadvantages.


Ian

[rich]

Thanks for all the feedback people, the 12s do seem to offer a lot for
the buck. I also remember struggling with the tips on Butlers 17/23m
in a breeze, while the 15m folks hooked up and waved goodby. Time to
think.
Rich