PW-6 family fun ------

[Charles Yeates]

Rod Morris, a PW-6 private owner operating out of Invemere in the
British Columbia Rocky Mountains, just messaged ---

"With both kids now flying, the plane gets a great deal of use. Plus I
have been allowing some junior club memebers and other pilots to get
checked out on it so they can transition to the PW5 Trevor has. I am
hoping to spend 10 days the first part of July in Invermere with Roger
flying full time as well since he is hoping to go solo this summer, at 14!
Daughter Kenna went solo last fall in it and I am sure she is going to
want to do a bunch more flying throughout June before leaving for a YMCA
camp in early July. Anyway, this is shaping up to be the busiest flying
season I have had. Plus I have some personal goals of flying south to
the "Steeples" that I hope to accomlish in June and July.

The positive side to all this is that the PW6 has worked out better than
I had ever imagined as a family plane."

--
Charles Yeates

ZS "Jezow" PW-6U & PW-5
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html

[Knacklappen]

And this was so d*mn important that we all should know about it,
exactly why..?

[snoop]

I thought it was a good story related to soaring. What's your beef?

[bumper]

"Knacklappen" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> And this was so d*mn important that we all should know about it,
> exactly why..?


Haven't had our morning coffee, eh?

Snippy posts, like yours, don't do much to make RAS a friendly place.
Personally, any posts about kids flying make me smile.

bumper

[Bob Whelan]

Knacklappen wrote:
> And this was so d*mn important that we all should know about it,
> exactly why..?
>

Because it was a positively-framed input about soaring? Sheesh...

Regards,
Bob W.

[Knacklappen]

Rrrright. To me it looks like a shameless plug for a PW 6...

I guess you take commercials on tv for friendly stories of neighbors
who happen to make good use of commercially available quality products,
eh..?

Good grief, the PW/6 guys are more irritating than all the Linux
zealots of the world combined...

/K

>
> Because it was a positively-framed input about soaring? Sheesh...
>
> Regards,
> Bob W.

[Burt Compton - Marfa]

I like the PW-6. It flys nice. Have you flown a PW-6? Have you
taught people how to fly in one? It's a good first step to the PW-5,
and any other sailplane for that matter.
I hope Charles (the dealer) will bring it back to the scenic
artist-community of Marfa, Texas and fly with us during the SSA
sanctioned PW-5 World Class Nationals this June 20-29, 2006.

OOPS! Just promoted at least two soaring businesses, the PW-5, the
PW-6, a national contest at a legendary site, the SSA, a small town of
2,000 souls, soaring fun, etc. Is this not allowed?

Supporting those who (barely) make a living at instructing, selling
soaring supplies or importing and certifying your gliders also supports
the sport of soaring in general.

You can probably imagine that it's not easy running a soaring business.
(Look at the ads in a SOARING magazine from 5 or 10 years ago and see
how many businesses are GONE!) You try it for 5 years and see how it
goes. You'll love the work, but you'll also wake up in the middle of
the night occasionally to worry about how you'll pay your bills. No
corporate paycheck at the end of the week, and no easy way to obtain
health insurance either. No franchise support, just a tiny niche
market, that can be highly regulated and taxed, with small profit
margins. When you decide to operate a soaring business, you are really
on your own. Like blue thermals - not always sure where the next bit
of lift (income) will be, but you manage somehow to make the telephone
ring, or get another potential customer to send you an email inquiry.
Your passion for the sport prevails, in spite of the questions from
your family, friends, accountant and banker.

So soaring businesses are occasionally mentioned on this newsgroup,
facilitating your needs, fulfilling your dreams, shipping glider parts
to you overnight, and keeping the towplane ready for you.

If I was trying to sell you a boat or offer you a mortgage, I would
agree that's "off-topic".

Soaring business promotion on this newsgroup also informs the new
enthusiasts that our resources and free professional advice are readily
available.

Soaring businesses - always ready to serve you, the soaring community.

Well, it's another good soaring day here, and I gotta go teach three
new soaring enthusiasts to fly. I love my job. (Can YOU say that?)

Burt
Marfa Gliders, west Texas USA
www.flygliders.com

[Shawn]

Knacklappen wrote:
> Rrrright. To me it looks like a shameless plug for a PW 6...
>
> I guess you take commercials on tv for friendly stories of neighbors
> who happen to make good use of commercially available quality products,
> eh..?
>
> Good grief, the PW/6 guys are more irritating than all the Linux
> zealots of the world combined...

I dunno, there are a lot more Linux zealots out there.

Shawn

[[email protected]]

Interesting how, at least to me, the PW-6 looks like an interesting
glider (I tried to get our club to get one to replace a crashed Grob
103), but the PW-5 still looks a bit goofy.

I do think that (irrational comments about looks aside) the pair make
an interesting setup for club and commercial operations - a natural
successor to the 2-33 and 1-26 pair that has been the standard in the
US for way too long!

I hope we start seeing more of these ships in the US, and maybe more
newly minted glider pilots will want to stay in soaring and perhaps
move up to higher performance gliders, instead of dropping out after a
couple of years of tin-bashing in a nasty old 2-33 or 1-26 - you know
the one - the airspeed indicator is in MPH, the vario doesn't work, or
if there are two of them, they disagree, you can't reach the trim when
strapped in (or it doesn't work in the 1-26) etc....

Watch the next time you are at the gliderport and pilots are fidding
with their ships - glass ships get caressed often, as their curves and
finishes just beg for touching. Do that to the average 2-33 and you'll
need some bandaids!

Having said all that, CH and I spent a wonderful hour and a half
boating around in a (well, it was actually a pretty nice one) rental
2-33 at Turf yesterday and had a lot of fun - theoretical vario and
all. We just left the trim all the way back (neither of us is exactly
svelt..) and kept the bank angle steep and she climbed just fine.

Very retro - just like the bad old days, etc...

Cheers
66

[Keith]

I am one of the pilots who was fortunate enough to use Rod 's PW-6 to
transistion from a 2-33 into a PW-5. Rod took me along on a few flights
and I totalled up 6+ hours in the front seat of the PW-6. Rod was then
kind enough to allow the CFI and I to go up in his glider for a few
flights before I was finally put into the PW-5. The front seat of a
PW-6 , and the cockpit of a PW-5 are almost exactly the same and it was
a very smooth transition with only slight differences in the control
response. I flew the PW-5 for the last few months of 2003, and the
first 1/2 of the 2004 season and then switched into an Astir CS. I am
not sure if I would have made it into a glass ship that year if Rod had
not been kind enough to offer his ship to me for the checkouts. This
would have kept me in the trainer for the remainder of that season, and
the beginning of the next season as well. I am not sure if my soaring
would have advanced as fast as it has to date.... I flew the PW-5 to
get my Silver Duration and Altitude with a flight of 309 kms, and
later the silver declared distance . Although I flew the Astir last
year and was able to come in first place in the Novice Div. in the
Canadian OLC I still go back and fly the PW-5 on accasion and have some
fun flights.


The rude statement made earlier in this thread is totally uncalled for
... Perhaps Mr knowledgelakking should refrain from blurting out
comments and exposing his true intelligence.

Keith Watson
Canadian Rockies Soaring Club
Invermere BC.


--
Keith
Posted at www.flight.org

[Knacklappen]

Keith wrote:
>
> The rude statement made earlier in this thread is totally uncalled for
> .. Perhaps Mr knowledgelakking should refrain from blurting out
> comments and exposing his true intelligence.
>

So, my criticism of the post itself (which was not even a post of Rod
Morris himself, but of a dealer of these ugly PW-5/6 ships) was
answered by name-calling and questioning of my intelligence. Well, I'm
not surprised, after all this is rec.aviation.soaring ...

Go and read the original post again. Good grief... Over & out.

[Knacklappen]

Agreed :)
But they have calmed down a bit over the years. :))

[Michel Talon]

Knacklappen > wrote:
> Agreed :)
> But they have calmed down a bit over the years. :))
>

Well let us revive the flam. A peewee is to a real glider what Microsoft
Windows is to a real OS. Conversely you have to know how to handle an ASW20,
the same you need how to cope with a Unix system.


--

Michel TALON

[Stewart Kissel]

Although anonymous posters seem to have good reason
to conceal their identity...I'll bite.

Since you have such a problem with this glider combination...what
would your suggested alternative be?

[Knacklappen]

Well, I'll bite, too. In retrospect, I guess my intial reaction was due
to a coincidence of two irritating moments:
(1) A shameless plug from a dealer for a certain plane, with absolutely
no valuable information at all. It could have been an ETA, a Duo
Discus, an ASH-25 or whatever, and I would still have criticised the
original post as the covert advertisement it is.
(2) The shameless plug actually promoted a PW-5/6, which in my very
humble opinion (though shared by many others) is a couple of
offensively ugly gliders. This probably made my initial statement a bit
more "spicy" than necessary. ;-)

Answering your question, I would recommend a combination of ASK-21 and
LS-4, both quite versatile gliders, usable for teaching but also in
competitions.

And no, these are not the only gliders I have flown in my life. And
yes, these are the gliders I have been trained on, and I still think it
was an excellent choice of our gliding club to transition from BF
III/IV + K8.

For XC-teaching we have come to use Duo Discus, which for the student
is the 2nd two seater glider he/she will learn to fly. The Duo is of
course far superior for XC than the ASK-21 and at the same time offers
the student the possibility to hone his/her gliding skills: Starting
and landning is less easy than ASK-21, but the reward is far better
performance.

[Stewart Kissel]

At 18:54 05 March 2006, Knacklappen wrote:
>Well, I'll bite, too. In retrospect, I guess my intial
>reaction was ..


Well I tend to agree with you...in that if I had a
choice between a used LS4 or a new PW5 for club training
I would pick the former. But there is a signifigant
price difference between PW6, Duo and ASK21...so I
suggest you are comparing apples to oranges.

Last time I checked....the options for basic training
two-place ships less then $100k is rather limited.

[Knacklappen]

Hmm... $100k sounds very much. I guess the transport costs distort the
prices, over here in Europe you can get some nice ships for that amount
of money...

[Knacklappen]

Except that you can download some nice themes for Windows that makes it
*look* quite neat. Try that to a PW... :)) Hehe...

[GK]

> (2) The shameless plug actually promoted a PW-5/6, which in my very
> humble opinion (though shared by many others) is a couple of
> offensively ugly gliders. This probably made my initial statement a bit
> more "spicy" than necessary. ;-)
>
> Answering your question, I would recommend a combination of ASK-21 and
> LS-4, both quite versatile gliders, usable for teaching but also in
> competitions.

Agreed on pewee 5, but how exactly is Ask-21 better than Pewee 6?
Other than brand new price tag being doubled or so. Same 1:31 gliding
ratio according to SM testing, so you hypothesis is based on the same
idea people go and buy MB cars thinking they've just got a better
build, reliable flashy vehicle soon thereafter they realize it's a
flashy Ford quality money pit. My club picks would be Pewee 6 - for
a price of 20 year old Ask-21 used in a club you can get a new one and
Ls-4.

[Knacklappen]

Hmmm, I don't know the price tag in the US (assuming you have a north
american perspective on things)... but over here in Europa the ASK-21
is not that expensive and it's a very sustainable strategy for a bigger
gliding club to actually by a new ASK-21 when the old one has reached a
certain flight time limit, and to sell off the old one for a good price
on the second hand market.
However, I do share your opinion on the MB... :)

[Charles Yeates]

PW-6 is approved for IMC and performs aerobatics except continuous
inverted flying and full rolls -- most owners never need these.

Knacklappen wrote:
> As a friend of mine just pointed out, I have missed to highlight that
> there is a certain difference in g-load capability between the PW6 and
> ASK21, which will limit the use of the PW6 for Aerobatics and IMC
> training:
> http://jarek24.w.interia.pl/pw/pw6e.htm
> http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/englisch/produkte/ask21/e_ask21_daten.htm
>

[GK]

As my old instructor once replied after I asked him if we could invert
the 23 year old,club operated Grob 103 - "...fine, just drop me off
before you'll do that...".

[Ben Flewett]

But yet you fly a Jantar...?


At 23:54 06 March 2006, Gk wrote:
>As my old instructor once replied after I asked him
>if we could invert
>the 23 year old,club operated Grob 103 - '...fine,
>just drop me off
>before you'll do that...'.
>
>

[Ben Flewett]

The answer is simple. The ASK 21 is a quality glider.
The PW6 is a lower quality glider built to a price.
Comparing these two gliders is like comparing a BMW
and a Hyundai.

If you are struggling with the answer to your question
I suggest you take a closer look at the two aircraft.
If you can't see the difference in build quality then
you have even less engineering awareness than me –
and that’s saying something.

Check the tailplane hookup arrangement. Note that
when you sit in the back of the 21 you actually have
instruments.

Also, check the finish of a 5 year old 6 vs a 5 year
old 21.

There's nothing wrong with the PW6 if you are buying
to a price. It lower quality and therefore cheaper.

You always get what you pay for.

B


At 13:42 06 March 2006, Gk wrote:
>
>> (2) The shameless plug actually promoted a PW-5/6,
>>which in my very
>> humble opinion (though shared by many others) is a
>>couple of
>> offensively ugly gliders. This probably made my initial
>>statement a bit
>> more 'spicy' than necessary. ;-)
>>
>> Answering your question, I would recommend a combination
>>of ASK-21 and
>> LS-4, both quite versatile gliders, usable for teaching
>>but also in
>> competitions.
>
> Agreed on pewee 5, but how exactly is Ask-21 better
>than Pewee 6?
>Other than brand new price tag being doubled or so.
>Same 1:31 gliding
>ratio according to SM testing, so you hypothesis is
>based on the same
>idea people go and buy MB cars thinking they've just
>got a better
>build, reliable flashy vehicle soon thereafter they
>realize it's a
>flashy Ford quality money pit. My club picks would
>be Pewee 6 - for
>a price of 20 year old Ask-21 used in a club you can
>get a new one and
>Ls-4.
>
>

[Charles Yeates]

Interesting --- paying German workers incredibly high hourly rates means
the quality of their work is higher too? Both ships are designed to the
same European Union standards.

Ben Flewett wrote:
> The answer is simple. The ASK 21 is a quality glider.
> The PW6 is a lower quality glider built to a price.
> Comparing these two gliders is like comparing a BMW
> and a Hyundai.
>
> If you are struggling with the answer to your question
> I suggest you take a closer look at the two aircraft.
> If you can't see the difference in build quality then
> you have even less engineering awareness than me –
> and that’s saying something.
>
> Check the tailplane hookup arrangement. Note that
> when you sit in the back of the 21 you actually have
> instruments.
>
> Also, check the finish of a 5 year old 6 vs a 5 year
> old 21.
>
> There's nothing wrong with the PW6 if you are buying
> to a price. It lower quality and therefore cheaper.
>
> You always get what you pay for.
>
> B
>

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
Ben Flewett > wrote:

> If you can't see the difference in build quality then
> you have even less engineering awareness than me –
> and that’s saying something.

Hey Ben. Nice TV segment tonight. And good "this is an Xtreme Sport"
plug at the end.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

[Knacklappen]

There are no "European Union quality standards". The EASA authority is
mostly concerned with performance limits, like g-loads. How the gelcoat
is degrading over time is not regulated anywhere, and it would be a
ridiculous overregulation if it were.

[Charles Yeates]

Yes -- overregulation is a real and creeping problem.

Knacklappen wrote:
> There are no "European Union quality standards". The EASA authority is
> mostly concerned with performance limits, like g-loads. How the gelcoat
> is degrading over time is not regulated anywhere, and it would be a
> ridiculous overregulation if it were.
>

[Charles Yeates]

Lots of truth there but remember -- the LBA has approved the PW-6
production arrangements. Surely they don't condone lesser quality.

Knacklappen wrote:

> Regarding supposedly high labour cost in Germany vs. supposedly lower
> labour costs in Eastern Europe I recommend reading this from a
> competitor of Schleicher:
> http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/kosten-e.html
>

[GK]

One of your competitiors had some interesting comments about the
quality of the LS glider he was using; grid mechanic was running the
other way each time he seen him and his quality built glider...

[Willie]

Ben Flewett wrote:
> The answer is simple. The ASK 21 is a quality glider.

I have to agree with that. The K-21 is a quality glider.

> The PW6 is a lower quality glider built to a price.

I'd like you to explain just exactly how it is lower quality.
Materials, finish, design, ergonomics, L/D, what?

> Comparing these two gliders is like comparing a BMW
> and a Hyundai.

In the United States, BMW sales numbers are declining.
They haven't been in the top ten in build quality for at
least the last five years. Maybe you meant to say a
Honda or Toyota, huh?

Hyundai cars seem to be getting better every year as
evidenced by their 10 year/100,000 mile warrenty, new
models and consistantly increasing sales in the U.S.

> If you are struggling with the answer to your question
> I suggest you take a closer look at the two aircraft.
> If you can't see the difference in build quality then
> you have even less engineering awareness than me -
> and that's saying something.

Again, I'm curious about your comment. Please enlighten
me with your specific details about build quality.

I see by your previous post that you don't like Jantars
either. Is there a problem with their build quality also?

I can see you making a positive comment about the
K-21 if you prefer it, but I don't understand why you
get any satisfaction from putting down other people's
ships.

These two place ships are mostly bought by clubs and
most clubs, at least here in the U.S. are on a budget.
So, Yes a $40,000 price difference plus lower refinish
costs and lower parts costs are a very good incentive
to purchase a PW-6.

> Check the tailplane hookup arrangement. Note that
> when you sit in the back of the 21 you actually have
> instruments.

I looked at the PW-6 website and it looks to me like the
PW-6 has an altimeter, airspeed indicator, two varios,
a turn and bank and a compass in the back seat.

You have another look:
http://jarek24.w.interia.pl/pw/pw6/pw6-photo-html/pw6-19.htm

Just how many more instruments do you need?

> Also, check the finish of a 5 year old 6 vs a 5 year
> old 21.

Let's see, a polyurethene paint job versus a gel coat refinish.
Hmmmm, which costs a lot more?

> There's nothing wrong with the PW6 if you are buying
> to a price. It lower quality and therefore cheaper.

Again, could you please be more specific about this
quaility issue.

> You always get what you pay for.

That is not necessarily true.

I'd like to add the comment that if not for lower cost
alternatives from Checz, Italy or Poland (ie. competition)
the German gliders would cost even more.

Willie G.

[phil collin]

Having sort of followed this little thread and having just followed the
url you posted I would like to know if there is somewhere I can find out
more about the PW6. Aesthetically it's a real looker so I would like to
read some more tech spec please.

Thanks in advance, Phil
CFI 8Ball soaring association UK

Willie wrote:
> Ben Flewett wrote:
>> The answer is simple. The ASK 21 is a quality glider.
>
> I have to agree with that. The K-21 is a quality glider.
>
>> The PW6 is a lower quality glider built to a price.
>
> I'd like you to explain just exactly how it is lower quality.
> Materials, finish, design, ergonomics, L/D, what?
>
>> Comparing these two gliders is like comparing a BMW
>> and a Hyundai.
>
> In the United States, BMW sales numbers are declining.
> They haven't been in the top ten in build quality for at
> least the last five years. Maybe you meant to say a
> Honda or Toyota, huh?
>
> Hyundai cars seem to be getting better every year as
> evidenced by their 10 year/100,000 mile warrenty, new
> models and consistantly increasing sales in the U.S.
>
>> If you are struggling with the answer to your question
>> I suggest you take a closer look at the two aircraft.
>> If you can't see the difference in build quality then
>> you have even less engineering awareness than me -
>> and that's saying something.
>
> Again, I'm curious about your comment. Please enlighten
> me with your specific details about build quality.
>
> I see by your previous post that you don't like Jantars
> either. Is there a problem with their build quality also?
>
> I can see you making a positive comment about the
> K-21 if you prefer it, but I don't understand why you
> get any satisfaction from putting down other people's
> ships.
>
> These two place ships are mostly bought by clubs and
> most clubs, at least here in the U.S. are on a budget.
> So, Yes a $40,000 price difference plus lower refinish
> costs and lower parts costs are a very good incentive
> to purchase a PW-6.
>
>> Check the tailplane hookup arrangement. Note that
>> when you sit in the back of the 21 you actually have
>> instruments.
>
> I looked at the PW-6 website and it looks to me like the
> PW-6 has an altimeter, airspeed indicator, two varios,
> a turn and bank and a compass in the back seat.
>
> You have another look:
> http://jarek24.w.interia.pl/pw/pw6/pw6-photo-html/pw6-19.htm
>
> Just how many more instruments do you need?
>
>> Also, check the finish of a 5 year old 6 vs a 5 year
>> old 21.
>
> Let's see, a polyurethene paint job versus a gel coat refinish.
> Hmmmm, which costs a lot more?
>
>> There's nothing wrong with the PW6 if you are buying
>> to a price. It lower quality and therefore cheaper.
>
> Again, could you please be more specific about this
> quaility issue.
>
>> You always get what you pay for.
>
> That is not necessarily true.
>
> I'd like to add the comment that if not for lower cost
> alternatives from Checz, Italy or Poland (ie. competition)
> the German gliders would cost even more.
>
> Willie G.
>

[--=JJay=--]

phil collin napisał(a):
> Having sort of followed this little thread and having just followed the
> url you posted I would like to know if there is somewhere I can find out
> more about the PW6. Aesthetically it's a real looker so I would like to
> read some more tech spec please.
>
> Thanks in advance, Phil

Hi
Take a look here http://www.szdjezow.com.pl/
and here http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html



regards
--
--=JJay=--
www.aeroklub.deblin.pl, my photos at airfoto.pl - http://tiny.pl/xlkk
Get smart - http://www.GetFireFox.com

[[email protected]]

Hi Phil,

I was unable to bring the PZL Swidnik web site. Swidnik is the "old"
manufacturer of the PW5/6 line. My understanding is that the production
has moved to SZD Jezow. Here is the link to those gliders
http://www.szdjezow.com.pl/szybowcepw_pol.html
It is in polish, I couldn't find the English version but going through
the numbers will give you a pretty good idea about the glider(s).

I can't understand Knacklappen comments: ASK-21...and PW-6U...well,
PW-6U has polyurethane finish, not a gel. Its finish is actually better
then the K-21. There are few K-21 flying here in the western U.S. and I
flew in couple of them...the finish on the K-21 is not that
great...PW-6U finish is much better....and I don't know if having a
choice of brand new PW-6U and K-21, taking in consideration all the
costs associated with a purchase of a glider,....well, I know I would
not buy a K-21. Well, Mr. Knacklappen...are you bias in your opinions
or simply don't know what you are talking about? And I absolutely agree
with comments posted by Willie G. There are better cars then Mercedes
and BMW. Toyota, Honda, and a Hyundai...they keep making better and
better cars. And the same applies to gliders. If the Germans were the
only glider manufacturers in the world they would sell them for much,
much more. Having said that, are Germans manufacturing any basic
trainers? And then any basic gliders? And then gliders for recreational
casual pilot? And don't give me any #@%$&^@ about used, tired, old
LS-4. Lets keep the discussion on a new glider subject. On another
note, with all do respect for Ben...Jantars are built like a tanks.
They will keep on flying for many more years. They are good solid
ships. I really would like to encourage people buying gliders in
Poland, made by SZD Bielsko, in business for many years, made by LAK,
made by LET and HPH, made by Windward Performance of Bend, Oregon. In
addition, maybe there is some backyard shop with some new design idea
having totally fresh look at soaring. In the mean time don't bash
existing glider manufacturers. They are trying hard. And if you keep
bringing just the German ships, well.....our sport is on its way to be,
just like the dinosaurs, extinct.

Jacek Kobiesa
Washington State

[Knacklappen]

Well Jacek, at least we appreciate your enthusiasm. And please don't
let facts blind you, ever. Best Regards and may you live a happy and
peaceful life in your little bubble.

/K

[Stewart Kissel]

So Knack...just out of curiousity, you don't double
as your club's recruiting officer do you? :)

[bagmaker]

thanks for the interesting link explaining DG pricing, very good! I reckon the best way to reduce hardware cost is to make loads of it, meaning we need LOTS more pilots.
Think of how much a car cost 50 years ago and what you got for that money.
Now think of the current crop of computered, airbagged, luxurios, economical, quiet smooth vehicles available from all over the world -THAT is what we want in a glider.
There will always be a market for top class gliders, producing more of them will make them cheaper, not producing lower class gliders for the masses, that is short term at its worst.

Please dont come back extolling the virtues of your '71 buick vs a new hyundai -in reality you wish to be pilotting a new ASG or DG808, not a KA6. Think laterally, the more pilots, the more demand, the more gliders, the cheaper the build price and the cheaper the second hand market for good gliders (creating easier access for more pilots) and forward we go.

Dont re-invent the wheel

[Knacklappen]

No, I'm afraid my qualities are not in diplomacy...
as everyone undoubtedly has understood by now... :)

Just hope that no one will take my comments as general statement
against polish gliders. I have looked at some and some indeed seem to
be nice ships. I just happen to find joy in putting off PW-zealots...
Naughty me...

Actually I thought that post #29 would be my last in this thread, but
Jacek seemed to beg for a comment. Well, maybe now I can find some
rest... :))

[[email protected]]

Ohhhh...woooowww!!!!!!

[bumper]

I don't think the glider manufacturing industry will ever lend itself to the
automation and volume necessary to see the price versus quality ratio change
very much. Gliders will remain much like the hand crafted Italian sports
cars . . . and in price too.

bumper

"bagmaker" > wrote in message
...
>
> thanks for the interesting link explaining DG pricing, very good! I
> reckon the best way to reduce hardware cost is to make loads of it,
> meaning we need LOTS more pilots.
> Think of how much a car cost 50 years ago and what you got for that
> money.
> Now think of the current crop of computered, airbagged, luxurios,
> economical, quiet smooth vehicles available from all over the world
> -THAT is what we want in a glider.
> There will always be a market for top class gliders, producing more of
> them will make them cheaper, not producing lower class gliders for the
> masses, that is short term at its worst.
>
> Please dont come back extolling the virtues of your '71 buick vs a new
> hyundai -in reality you wish to be pilotting a new ASG or DG808, not a
> KA6. Think laterally, the more pilots, the more demand, the more
> gliders, the cheaper the build price and the cheaper the second hand
> market for good gliders (creating easier access for more pilots) and
> forward we go.
>
> Dont re-invent the wheel
>
>
> --
> bagmaker

[Ben Flewett]

Rightly so... That's why I'm a Schempp boy.


At 14:06 07 March 2006, Gk wrote:
>One of your competitiors had some interesting comments
>about the
>quality of the LS glider he was using; grid mechanic
>was running the
>other way each time he seen him and his quality built
>glider...
>
>

[Ben Flewett]

>> Comparing these two gliders is like comparing a BMW
>> and a Hyundai.
>
>In the United States, BMW sales numbers are declining.
>They haven't been in the top ten in build quality for
>at
>least the last five years. Maybe you meant to say a
>Honda or Toyota, huh?
>Hyundai cars seem to be getting better every year as
>evidenced by their 10 year/100,000 mile warrenty, new
>models and consistantly increasing sales in the U.S.
>What quality differences are you talking about?

Oh, come on. Our club PW5s and 6s are only a few years
old but they look worse than my fathers 30 year old
Cirrus.

>I can see you making a positive comment about the
>K-21 if you prefer it, but I don't understand why you
>get any satisfaction from putting down other people's
>ships.

It amuses me how tetchy people get when people make
observations about their gliders. I have a D2... I
can't close the canopy if I wear thick shoes! I don't
get emotional about others making comments on this
- the glider has it's short-comings. I'm not putting
down the PW6 - just discussing the differences.

>These two place ships are mostly bought by clubs and
>most clubs, at least here in the U.S. are on a budget.
>So, Yes a $40,000 price difference plus lower refinish
>costs and lower parts costs are a very good incentive
>to purchase a PW-6.

My point exactly. Different strokes etc...

>> Also, check the finish of a 5 year old 6 vs a 5 year
>> old 21.
>Let's see, a polyurethene paint job versus a gel coat
>refinish.
>Hmmmm, which costs a lot more?

Again, my point exactly. You seem to have answered
your own questions regarding quality.

Cheers,

B

[Ruud]

On 7 Mar 2006 08:03:58 GMT, Ben Flewett
> wrote:


>
>There's nothing wrong with the PW6 if you are buying
>to a price. It lower quality and therefore cheaper.
>
John Ruskin (19th century) already knew it:

"There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a
little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider
price only are this man's lawful prey."

To get back to the original thread "family fun".
It's great to share soaring with family and friends.
That's why I sold my V2cT a few years ago and bought a Duo.
Of course you can also have great fun with a PW6.

[Pilot Bald]

At 07:06 08 March 2006, Ben Flewett wrote:
>Oh, come on. Our club PW5s and 6s are only a few years
>old but they look worse than my fathers 30 year old
>Cirrus.
>

Ben,

Many congrats. on your GP win.

With regard to your club's PW5's & 6's - this is not
an uncommon fate of club gliders - especially if regularly
flown to high altitudes.
Also - these were Swidnik-made machines - a somewhat
different kettle of fish from Bielsko-produced gliders.

We shall see how ZS Jezow performs in this respect
- but I am optimistic - since these are Bielsko-trained
people, with long experience in glider manufacture.
I am quite sure that the factory will put on any finish
that the customer requests.
Vorgelat T35 seems popular at this time.
We'll see how it performs.

I know that SZ Jezow is seeking constructive comments/criticisms
from owners of these gliders and would very much welcome
a feedback from your club.
If you - or any suitably qualified member of your club
- would care to produce a report/critique, I am sure
that Mr. Henryk Mynarski would be most grateful.

This could be mailed to him directly - or, if more
convenient - via me (at the 'pilotbald' address above).
I know the man personally and would happily pass the
information on.

Bald Pilot.
UK.

[Tony Verhulst]

> "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a
> little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider
> price only are this man's lawful prey."

"It's like oats…..if you want good, clean fresh oats, you have to pay a
fair price for them. If you can be satisfied with the oats that have
already gone through the horse, they come cheaper."

[Tony Verhulst]

Ben Flewett wrote:
> Rightly so... That's why I'm a Schempp boy.

I always liked Curly better :-)

Tony V.

[Mark Lenox]

> PW-6 is approved for IMC and performs aerobatics except continuous
> inverted flying and full rolls -- most owners never need these.
>

If you're going to learn to fly acro. You need to learn how to do those
maneuvers. So if someone is actually buying one of these aircraft to do
acro, they need them whether they know it or not. This is similar to the
limitations on the L-13 while flying dual, and it isn't widely advertised,
or used as an aerobatic ship... The L-13AC is. Of course, if they are
not flying acro, they have no need...

In order to not be misleading, that statement really should be that the PW-6
performs limited positive G aerobatic maneuvers only. Personally, as
someone who flies acro on a regular basis, I would not consider doing so in
a ship not rated for negative maneuvers. It's too easy to screw things up
and inadvertently apply considerable negative G forces in such a way to
break something.



Mark Lenox

[[email protected]]

Very good statement.