Discus verus Discus 2, LS8, ASW 28

[Roger[_5_]]

How do these two gliders compare to one another? Is there a Discus 2x?
How does the original compare in todays competition world, LS8, Discus
2, ASW-28. Does the oringinal Discus give away any performance to the
current crop of gliders. Interesting to note that the LS8 is an LS6
with fixed flaps, therefore, it is still of the same generation of the
oringinal Discus, or is it?!

[Mike the Strike]

The Discus 2 and ASW 28 are essentiall identical in performance,
followed by the LS-8 and finally original Discus. Check the handicaps!

Everyone agrees that the Discus 2 is the prettiest, though, although I
am biased!

Mike

On Oct 22, 3:31 pm, "Roger" > wrote:
> How do these two gliders compare to one another? Is there a Discus 2x?
> How does the original compare in todays competition world, LS8, Discus
> 2, ASW-28. Does the oringinal Discus give away any performance to the
> current crop of gliders. Interesting to note that the LS8 is an LS6
> with fixed flaps, therefore, it is still of the same generation of the
> oringinal Discus, or is it?!

[Kilo Charlie]

"Mike the Strike" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> The Discus 2 and ASW 28 are essentiall identical in performance,
> followed by the LS-8 and finally original Discus. Check the handicaps!
>
> Everyone agrees that the Discus 2 is the prettiest, though, although I
> am biased!
>
> Mike

Not sure which list you are looking at WA but the Discus 2B (your glider)
handicap is 0.926 and the handicap is for the ASW-28 and LS-8 is 0.925. I
would call those identical for all practical purposes. Whether you believe
those or not I would guess that all that have flown them in or against them
in competition think that they are all within a percentage point of
performance....much less than being able to tell due to pilot variability.
Check http://www.ssa.org/members/contestreports/scoring.asp for the handicap
list.

Having said that I do think that the Discus 2 has slightly better high speed
performance but once again a barely perceptable difference. I really
dislike the ergonomics or lack thereof in the Discus.....I can barely raise
of lower the gear and have heard that complaint from pilots of all sizes
(I'm 5' 10"). The LS-8 gear is the easiest to operate of any sailplane I've
flown. The visibility is also far better in the LS-8....I can easily see my
tail. I can also turn my oxygen on or off during flight.

Now re "prettiest" I do think that the Discus is nice but beauty is in the
eye of the beholder and at least for me I would fly a pig if it had better
performance or better ergonomics!

Final line is that you can't go wrong with any of those choices.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix
(in Mike's club or what's left of it ;-)

[Mike the Strike]

KC is right - there's nothing between the top three he mentions.
(Except my Discus 2 has about a 10% extra handicap in the pilot, which
easily cancels any advantage in the aircraft itself)

I can't disagree about the ergonomics either - the Discus gear does
take a knack to raise, which some find difficult. Rear visibility is
probably best in the ASW-28. Being a broader person, I find the
LS-8/LS-6 cockpit a bit tight. Both the Discus and ASW-28 are fine for
me.

II also prefer the ergonomics of the Scleicher and LS front-hinged
canopies, but at least the side-hinged Schemmp-Hirth doesn't whack you
on the head if you jettison it in flight.

I still think the the Discus 2 is the prettiest!

Mike

> > MikeNot sure which list you are looking at WA but the Discus 2B (your glider)
> handicap is 0.926 and the handicap is for the ASW-28 and LS-8 is 0.925. I
> would call those identical for all practical purposes. Whether you believe
> those or not I would guess that all that have flown them in or against them
> in competition think that they are all within a percentage point of
> performance....much less than being able to tell due to pilot variability.
> Checkhttp://www.ssa.org/members/contestreports/scoring.aspfor the handicap
> list.
>
> Having said that I do think that the Discus 2 has slightly better high speed
> performance but once again a barely perceptable difference. I really
> dislike the ergonomics or lack thereof in the Discus.....I can barely raise
> of lower the gear and have heard that complaint from pilots of all sizes
> (I'm 5' 10"). The LS-8 gear is the easiest to operate of any sailplane I've
> flown. The visibility is also far better in the LS-8....I can easily see my
> tail. I can also turn my oxygen on or off during flight.
>
> Now re "prettiest" I do think that the Discus is nice but beauty is in the
> eye of the beholder and at least for me I would fly a pig if it had better
> performance or better ergonomics!
>
> Final line is that you can't go wrong with any of those choices.
>
> Casey Lenox
> KC
> Phoenix
> (in Mike's club or what's left of it ;-)

[Andy[_1_]]

I've flown my 28 against well flown D2's and LS8's. My feeling is
that, at the same wing loading, the 28 has a very slight disadvantage
in climb over the D2 in weak conditions but runs better than either at
high speed.

There's not enough difference in performance to influence the choice.
Other factors may be more important.

I chose the 28 over the LS8 for cockpit design, decent sized main gear
and wheel, and good wheel brake. I'll probably never buy a Ventus or
Discus because the rear visibility for tall pilots is appalling.

Andy

[Roger[_5_]]

Oh, but how does the oringinal Discus or for that matter the ASW 24 go
against the newer offerings? Do new glass have more performance?

On Oct 22, 9:18 pm, "Andy" > wrote:
> I've flown my 28 against well flown D2's and LS8's. My feeling is
> that, at the same wing loading, the 28 has a very slight disadvantage
> in climb over the D2 in weak conditions but runs better than either at
> high speed.
>
> There's not enough difference in performance to influence the choice.
> Other factors may be more important.
>
> I chose the 28 over the LS8 for cockpit design, decent sized main gear
> and wheel, and good wheel brake. I'll probably never buy a Ventus or
> Discus because the rear visibility for tall pilots is appalling.
>
> Andy

[Jack[_1_]]

Enough already!

How about the DG-303?



Jack

[Marc Ramsey]

Jack wrote:
> Enough already!
>
> How about the DG-303?

You asking or suggesting?

Marc

[Eric Greenwell]

Mike the Strike wrote:

> II also prefer the ergonomics of the Scleicher and LS front-hinged
> canopies, but at least the side-hinged Schemmp-Hirth doesn't whack you
> on the head if you jettison it in flight.

Neither does the ASW 28 canopy. Starting with the ASH 26, Schleicher has
incorporated a Roeger hook or equivalent in it's gliders. I believe the
LS8 has also has one, or DG has made one available for it as a retrofit.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[Kilo Charlie]

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
news:BfY_g.3453$PA3.2721@trndny04...

> Neither does the ASW 28 canopy. Starting with the ASH 26, Schleicher has
> incorporated a Roeger hook or equivalent in it's gliders. I believe the
> LS8 has also has one, or DG has made one available for it as a retrofit.
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

Not sure what a Roeger hook is but the LS-8 has a spring loaded mechanism at
the front of the canopy which releases and at the same time a clamp at the
back of the canopy that latches resulting in the canopy getting blown up at
the nose and over the back. Sounds like a much better way to exit than
anything else I've heard of.....other than an ejection seat of course!

Casey

[Eric Greenwell]

Kilo Charlie wrote:
> "Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
> news:BfY_g.3453$PA3.2721@trndny04...
>
>> Neither does the ASW 28 canopy. Starting with the ASH 26, Schleicher has
>> incorporated a Roeger hook or equivalent in it's gliders. I believe the
>> LS8 has also has one, or DG has made one available for it as a retrofit.
>> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
>
> Not sure what a Roeger hook is but the LS-8 has a spring loaded mechanism at
> the front of the canopy which releases and at the same time a clamp at the
> back of the canopy that latches resulting in the canopy getting blown up at
> the nose and over the back. Sounds like a much better way to exit than
> anything else I've heard of.....other than an ejection seat of course!

From the DG website:

"To avoid these situations [canopy not ejecting properly] Prof. Roeger
of the Technical University Aachen many years ago invented a special
hook, since named for him. After the emergency release the hook turns on
the rear canopy frame and prevents it from moving back. The airstreams
flowing into the cockpit cannot escape and therefore lifts the canopy,
which rotates on the Roeger hook and forces the front of the canopy to
lift off and depart rearwards over the tail fin. Such a Roeger hook has
been a mandatory installation in all new sailplanes for some years.
Great, problem solved."

In addition, DG offers these "hooks" as for retrofit into their older
gliders, now including the LS series. Good for them! I urge all pilots
of older DG/LS gliders to install one soon - the cost for the kit is
less than 200 Euro, according to DG's website, and installation
relatively easy.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[Jack[_1_]]

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> Jack wrote:
>> Enough already!
>>
>> How about the DG-303?
>
> You asking or suggesting?


I'd like to see the DG-303 included in these comparisons.


Jack

[[email protected]]

I've flown my Ventus 2C alongside the Discus 2, ASW-28, and LS-8, and
if I chose to go with the flapless crowd, my first choice would be the
LS8/18, based upon its performance, cockpit ergonomics, ease of
assembly, and bang for the buck.

The LS-8s I fly with (against?) in Arizona -- at least four of them --
I've only been able to beat in high-speed glides. I think they are
amazing sailplanes.

But those three gliders are all close enough in quality and performance
that if I were buying in the used market, I would take the first good
value that came along.

~ted/2NO

[Marc Ramsey]

Jack wrote:
> Marc Ramsey wrote:
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Enough already!
>>>
>>> How about the DG-303?
>>
>> You asking or suggesting?
>
> I'd like to see the DG-303 included in these comparisons.

I owned a DG-303 Acro and raced it in standard class in a couple of
regionals. I've also flown a Discus 1 and an ASW-24 on a number of
occasions. The three gliders are almost indistinguishable in performance
at equivalent wing loadings. I could usually outclimb a 24, and hold my
own with a Discus. Above 80 knots (wet), a 24 was noticeably faster, I
could usually stay with a Discus. In my opinion, the Discus is the
nicest handling of the three, and the DG is a bit easier to fly well
than the 24. The DG is the most comfortable of the three for me (5'11,
200 lbs, long legs), and has the best visibility. The gelcoat on the
303 is a lot better quality than what was used on the Discus and 24.
You can get a used 303 for about the cost of a Discus or 24 that is
twice the age.

Where the newer standard class ships shine is at the higher end of the
speed range, in 90+ knot head to head runs with D2s between thermals,
I'd usually end up at the next one several hundred feet below. The
difference was a bit less dramatic with the LS8 and ASW-28. I never
felt any performance disadvantage at all relative to the Discus 1 or ASW-24.

Marc

[Papa3]

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> Jack wrote:
> > Marc Ramsey wrote:
> >> Jack wrote:
> >>> Enough already!
> >>>
> >>> How about the DG-303?
> >>
> >> You asking or suggesting?
> >
> > I'd like to see the DG-303 included in these comparisons.
>
> I owned a DG-303 Acro and raced it in standard class in a couple of
> regionals. I've also flown a Discus 1 and an ASW-24 on a number of
> occasions. The three gliders are almost indistinguishable in performance
> at equivalent wing loadings. > Marc

My sense after flying wingtip-to-wingtip on ridge and thermal with all
of these ships (excpept the 303) over several years is that the
variation in individual ships is way larger than the theoretical
performance variation. In other words, there are probably some D2s
that are WAY better than some LS8s; conversely, there are some LS8s
that are way better than some D2s. Things like wing smoothness
(Monday gliders), sealing, and CG seem to be much bigger factors than
the basic aircraft.

As an example, a friend of mine recently redid his ASW-27 wings; he
found waviness approaching 6 thou in several areas. He profiled and
smoothed down to less than 3 thou everywhere. If you believe
Johnson's tests, 4 thou or so is the maximum acceptable to prevent
peformance degredation.

I will admit that it seems to me like a well flown D2a is the best of
the bunch at cruise and climb (dolphin) flying, especially at high
speed. However, over a long contest with some weak weather thrown in,
I feel like my LS8 is just as good if not a little bit better. Then
again, I might be biased :-)

Erik Mann
LS8-18 P3

[Nigel Pocock]

Uk handicaps
LS8 100
ASW28 100
Discus 2 100
Discus 98
DG303 98
ASW24 97

Interestingly the first 14 places in the last world
championships were Discus 2 or LS8. First and third
were LS8s.

In the real world pilot capabilities are far more variable
than glider performance. I have seen an ex world champion
in a club class DG101 without water beat most standard
class gliders in a competition.

There is no substitute for skill.
Nigel

[[email protected]]

It's not even winter yet in the Northern Hemisphere and we're already
starting the "which glider is best?" stuff.

Variability among different serial numbers of the same glider is much
less than it used to be but it's still there due to wing waviness,
winglets, CG, sealing, etc. Probably more of a factor is the pilot,
certainly in climb and even in cruise/pull ups to a certain extent.

Based on comparison flying, if I were after the absolute best
performance, I might slightly favor the Discus 2a--several of them have
given me fits in thermals and I watched Chip Garner and a few other
drivers do amazing things this summer. But I can't fit into one (I'm
6'3"). Moreover, I strongly prefer Schleicher's safety features
(crashworthy cockpit, energy-absorbing landing gear) which is what
pushed me in that direction nearly 15 years ago after a long love
affair with LS.

In considering used ships, gel coat condition should always be a major
consideration, maybe more so than any differences among models. That
said, based on my experience and just to keep the discussion going, I
believe a good used ASW 24 with aftermarket winglets represents a great
value.

My ASW 24 with Hank Nixon's winglets will climb with nearly any glider
and better than many (the stories about the '24's climb "problem"
started in its pre-winglets life). And at Uvalde this summer carrying
full water, I didn't give away much, if anything, at high speed to most
other gliders [would that the same could be said about the piloting].
It's difficult to make absolute statements about performance because
almost no one but a professional leech tucks in right behind another
glider and locks on.

If you're seriously considering any of the Discus 2, LS-8 or ASW 28,
talk to the owners. Like the '24 and the original Discus, each of these
has little things that will annoy you as well as remarkable performance
and handling.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"

[Stewart Kissel]

At 21:36 22 October 2006, Roger wrote:
>How do these two gliders compare to one another?

Ah yes, winter is upon us. This sort of discussion
seems to boil down to a lot of anectodal evidence from
matching airspeed and glides and the such...out of
curiousity I might try to query further into what your
desires are.

1.) Money is no object...that extra point or two of
L/D is worth thousands?

2,) Looking cool on the ground or in the trailer is
a factor?

3.) How much is this bird going to get flown, or better
yet...raced?

4.) John Cochrane has some excellent writing on how
incremental improvements in piloting allows one to
skip a generation of gliders and still keep up...is
this a factor?

I am not posting to hurl stones here...I spent endless
hours comparing gliders before I bought my previous
two. And I think analysis is important...but defining
ones' needs is sometimes equally as significant.

Has anyone generated a graph of cost/LD when comparing
these ships? In today's market I would assume a fairly
clean Discus is 1/2 the cost of a new ship.

[Chris Rollings]

Slightly off topic, but addresses your last point.

'Rollings Law of Price and Performance (for NEW gliders)'

Performance varies with the square root of wing-span;
price varies with the square of wing-span.


At 00:06 24 October 2006, Stewart Kissel wrote:
>At 21:36 22 October 2006, Roger wrote:
>>How do these two gliders compare to one another?
>
>Ah yes, winter is upon us. This sort of discussion
>seems to boil down to a lot of anectodal evidence from
>matching airspeed and glides and the such...out of
>curiousity I might try to query further into what your
>desires are.
>
>1.) Money is no object...that extra point or two of
>L/D is worth thousands?
>
>2,) Looking cool on the ground or in the trailer is
>a factor?
>
>3.) How much is this bird going to get flown, or better
>yet...raced?
>
>4.) John Cochrane has some excellent writing on how
>incremental improvements in piloting allows one to
>skip a generation of gliders and still keep up...is
>this a factor?
>
>I am not posting to hurl stones here...I spent endless
>hours comparing gliders before I bought my previous
>two. And I think analysis is important...but defining
>ones' needs is sometimes equally as significant.
>
>Has anyone generated a graph of cost/LD when comparing
>these ships? In today's market I would assume a fairly
>clean Discus is 1/2 the cost of a new ship.
>
>
>
>

[Bill Daniels]

"Chris Rollings" > wrote in message
...
> Slightly off topic, but addresses your last point.
>
> 'Rollings Law of Price and Performance (for NEW gliders)'
>
> Performance varies with the square root of wing-span;
> price varies with the square of wing-span.


The first is aerodynamically correct. The second is market observation.

The cost of materials varies by the weight of the bare airframe. All else
like instruments are the same for all gliders. Labor for a given production
technique probably related to surface area.

The biggest determinant of the final price is production volume. Or, more
correctly, the volume anticipated at the start of production. If a
manufacturer knew from the start that the final production numbers would
exceed say, 3000 gliders, investments in labor saving tooling would make
sense. This, in turn, would increase the production run yet more since
lower prices would eintice still more buyers.

But of course, how do you know you are going to produce a lot of gliders?

Bill Daniels

[Nyal Williams]

Ernie Schweizer was heard to say that production costs
could be calculated from the empty weight.

At 14:54 24 October 2006, Bill Daniels wrote:
>
>'Chris Rollings' wrote in message
...
>> Slightly off topic, but addresses your last point.
>>
>> 'Rollings Law of Price and Performance (for NEW gliders)'
>>
>> Performance varies with the square root of wing-span;
>> price varies with the square of wing-span.
>
>
>The first is aerodynamically correct. The second is
>market observation.
>
>The cost of materials varies by the weight of the bare
>airframe. All else
>like instruments are the same for all gliders. Labor
>for a given production
>technique probably related to surface area.
>
>The biggest determinant of the final price is production
>volume. Or, more
>correctly, the volume anticipated at the start of production.
> If a
>manufacturer knew from the start that the final production
>numbers would
>exceed say, 3000 gliders, investments in labor saving
>tooling would make
>sense. This, in turn, would increase the production
>run yet more since
>lower prices would eintice still more buyers.
>
>But of course, how do you know you are going to produce
>a lot of gliders?
>
>Bill Daniels
>
>
>

[Ben Flewett]

It depends what you want the glider for...

Discus 2a – Definitely the best performer but you pay
the price in comfort. I am 6 foot 2 inches and have
to wear thin shoes and no jersey if I want to close
the canopy. You need 200 hours in it before you start
to get it to perform.

Discus 2b – Next best performer… and good for the
larger American. Again, you need 200 hours in it before
you get it to perform primarily because you have to
learn exactly how much to slip it in the climb.

LS8 - Next best performer after the D2b. You don’t
have to learn how to fly it and it’s roomy. However,
it pushes your toes together if you are tall which
gives you sore knees – this is not a problem for most
but a very serious problem for some.

ASW28 – Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
(including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
it’s performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
to the D2 and LS8. However, it’s VERY crashworthy
which is excellent.

Discus (1) – you can’t compare it with the above gliders
for performance, particularly at high wing loadings.

If you want to become a serious competition pilot buy
a D2. If you want an excellent performing glider that
is easy to fly buy an LS8 (but check it doesn’t give
you sore knees first). Don’t buy an ASW28 if you are
interested in competitions or if you crash often.

By the way – there is no such thing as D2x. The changes
on the V2x were basically a retro fit of the D2 advancements
to the V2.

Cheers,

Ben


At 21:36 22 October 2006, Roger wrote:
>How do these two gliders compare to one another? Is
>there a Discus 2x?
> How does the original compare in todays competition
>world, LS8, Discus
>2, ASW-28. Does the oringinal Discus give away any
>performance to the
>current crop of gliders. Interesting to note that
>the LS8 is an LS6
>with fixed flaps, therefore, it is still of the same
>generation of the
>oringinal Discus, or is it?!
>
>

[Andy[_1_]]

Ben Flewett wrote:
ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
(including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
to the D2 and LS8.


I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
conclusion.

Andy

[Bruce Greef]

Andy wrote:
> Ben Flewett wrote:
> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
> to the D2 and LS8.
>
>
> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
> conclusion.
>
> Andy
>
Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86 - highest
IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European contests in Discus 2s

I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.

A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
“It’s so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider type, not
pilot skill.” The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."

From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.

just my 2c worth...

For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits for Ben
Flewett.
http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183

http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
http://www.gliding.co.nz/

[Robert Danewid]

Perhaps pilot skill was involved in the results (especially
for SS)??

Just my 3c worth....

Robert

Bruce Greef wrote:
> Andy wrote:
>
>> Ben Flewett wrote:
>> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
>> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
>> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
>> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
>> to the D2 and LS8.
>>
>>
>> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
>> conclusion.
>>
>> Andy
>>
> Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86 -
> highest IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European
> contests in Discus 2s
>
> I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
>
> A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
> http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
> “It’s so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider
> type, not pilot skill.” The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."
>
> From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.
>
> just my 2c worth...
>
> For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits
> for Ben Flewett.
> http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183
>
>
> http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
> http://www.gliding.co.nz/

[Ruud[_1_]]

On 25 Oct 2006 14:27:33 GMT, Ben Flewett
> wrote:

>It depends what you want the glider for...
Plus the type of weather in which you're flying most of the time.

>ASW28 – Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
>does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
>(including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
>it’s performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
>to the D2 and LS8. However, it’s VERY crashworthy
>which is excellent.

If you fly your glider in weak lift conditions most of the time, the
picture will be a complete different one.
Additional advantages of the ASW28 are better visibility from the
cockpit and a much better overall finish than the D2 and LS8.

BTW, there are only few ASW28 for sale, while you can fill oceans with
second hand LS8 and D2.
If you´re looking for a ASW28, look have a look at:
http://home.planet.nl/~holsw007/asw28/
;-)

[clydebh]

Robert Danewid wrote:
> Perhaps pilot skill was involved in the results (especially
> for SS)??
>
> Just my 3c worth....
>
> Robert
>
> Bruce Greef wrote:
> > Andy wrote:
> >
> >> Ben Flewett wrote:
> >> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
> >> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
> >> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
> >> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
> >> to the D2 and LS8.
> >>
> >>
> >> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
> >> conclusion.
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> > Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86 -
> > highest IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European
> > contests in Discus 2s
> >
> > I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
> >
> > A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
> > http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
> > "It's so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider
> > type, not pilot skill." The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."
> >
> > From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.
> >
> > just my 2c worth...
> >
> > For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits
> > for Ben Flewett.
> > http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183
> >
> >
> > http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
> > http://www.gliding.co.nz/

[clydebh]

Robert Danewid wrote:
> Perhaps pilot skill was involved in the results (especially
> for SS)??
>
> Just my 3c worth....
>
> Robert
>
> Bruce Greef wrote:
> > Andy wrote:
> >
> >> Ben Flewett wrote:
> >> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
> >> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
> >> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
> >> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
> >> to the D2 and LS8.
> >>
> >>
> >> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
> >> conclusion.
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> > Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86 -
> > highest IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European
> > contests in Discus 2s
> >
> > I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
> >
> > A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
> > http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
> > "It's so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider
> > type, not pilot skill." The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."
> >
> > From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.
> >
> > just my 2c worth...
> >
> > For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits
> > for Ben Flewett.
> > http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183
> >
> >
> > http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
> > http://www.gliding.co.nz/

[clydebh]

Robert Danewid wrote:
> Perhaps pilot skill was involved in the results (especially
> for SS)??
>
> Just my 3c worth....
>
> Robert
>
> Bruce Greef wrote:
> > Andy wrote:
> >
> >> Ben Flewett wrote:
> >> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
> >> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
> >> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
> >> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
> >> to the D2 and LS8.
> >>
> >>
> >> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
> >> conclusion.
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> > Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86 -
> > highest IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European
> > contests in Discus 2s
> >
> > I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
> >
> > A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
> > http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
> > "It's so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider
> > type, not pilot skill." The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."
> >
> > From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.
> >
> > just my 2c worth...
> >
> > For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits
> > for Ben Flewett.
> > http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183
> >
> >
> > http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
> > http://www.gliding.co.nz/

[[email protected]]

Why has nobody included in any comparisons the Diana 2, Lak 17 and 19,
SZD-56-2, and the 304CZ (or any other Eastern European products of
comparable performance I might have missed) - maybe about 10k-20k
cheaper than the German sailplanes so far discussed in this thread?

Chris N. (Vested interest - Lak 17 owner)

[[email protected]]

> Why has nobody included in any comparisons the Diana 2, Lak 17 and 19,
> SZD-56-2, and the 304CZ ...

Because the discussion was originally about a few specific 15M standard
class ships, and has mostly stayed on topic. A broader comparison of
gliders would need its own news group!

~ted/2NO (former 304CZ owner)

[Bruce Greef]

Robert Danewid wrote:
> Perhaps pilot skill was involved in the results (especially for SS)??
>
> Just my 3c worth....
>
> Robert
>
> Bruce Greef wrote:
>
>> Andy wrote:
>>
>>> Ben Flewett wrote:
>>> ASW28 - Contrary to all the hype the ASW28 definitely
>>> does not perform as well as either the D2 or the LS8
>>> (including high speed range). In fact, I would rate
>>> it's performance as surprisingly poor in comparison
>>> to the D2 and LS8.
>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder what data, or observations, you used to arrive at that
>>> conclusion.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>> Having won the Omarama Grand Prix, with a current world ranking of #86
>> - highest IGC ranking of #7 I believe. Contested World and European
>> contests in Discus 2s
>>
>> I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
>>
>> A quote from Pete Harvey - UK Racing pilot - on losing day 2 at
>> http://www.gp06.com/race_diary/diary_day2.htm
>> “It’s so frustrating to be beaten at the last moment by the glider
>> type, not pilot skill.” The Discus overtakes the LS8 on final glide."
>>
>> From the results "SS" - ASW28 never got close.
>>
>> just my 2c worth...
>>
>> For Referrence - a simple google search would get you to a ~2700 hits
>> for Ben Flewett.
>> http://www.glidingteam.co.uk/competitions/2006/nzgrandprix/viewnewsarticle.php?id=183
>>
>>
>> http://www.fai.org/gliding/ben_flewett
>> http://www.gliding.co.nz/
>
>
Agreed - on the SS part I can't comment because I do not know Ms Pederson's
skill level. This was not a bunch of beginners (like me) though - so I am sure
she is a very competent contest pilot to have made the selection process...

So - skill probably dominates, and conversely the best pilots tend to choose the
best equipment for the conditions. If it is about speed, the Discus appears to
have a miniscule edge. When seconds count this is important.

Personally - For most people it is more important how you and the machine work.

[Nick Olson]

At 20:55 26 October 2006, Ruud wrote:
'BTW, there are only few ASW28 for sale, while you
can fill oceans with second hand LS8 and D2.'

Could have something to do with how many have been
produced!
Roughly twice as many Discus 2's as ASW28's , and probably
3 times as many LS8's. (all models).
Seem to be quite a few 28's for sale on segelflug.de
at the moment!

Face it the 28 has just not had the contest success
of the Discus 2 or LS8 - even Waibel admitted it's
intial sales were a disappointment (but improved by
the addition of the 28-18 model).

[Nick Olson]

At 20:55 26 October 2006, Ruud wrote:
'BTW, there are only few ASW28 for sale, while you
can fill oceans with second hand LS8 and D2.'

Could have something to do with how many have been
produced!
Roughly twice as many Discus 2's as ASW28's , and probably
3 times as many LS8's. (all models).
Seem to be quite a few 28's for sale on segelflug.de
at the moment!

Face it the 28 has just not had the contest success
of the Discus 2 or LS8 - even Waibel admitted it's
intial sales were a disappointment (but improved by
the addition of the 28-18 model).

[Papa3]

I spoke to a former World Champion for his observations prior to buying
my LS8. His comment was that forgiving handling, comfort, and good
performance over a wide range of conditions was the primary
consideration for serious competition. A national or World competition
is a pretty draining experience, and I'm partial to LS for the great
and forgiving handling. I do tend to agree that it gives up a little
bit to a well flown D2A on the high speed end during dolphin flight or
"whifferdilling" (though curiously not on the ridge, where I can run
right with them at 100kts or more; maybe a function of my "superior"
wingloading over the guys who can typically squeeze into an A model
:-). But, since most contests are won and lost on the weak days, I
have to say that I would favor the ship that does best there. I will
have a chance to fly a D2B model soon, and it'll be interesting to see
how that feels compared to my trusty steed.

Erik Mann
LS8-18 (P3)




Owain Walters wrote:
>
> I own a Discus 2a but I am yet to learn how to fly
> it properly (I think Ben says you need 200 hrs to be
> kind as he knows I have about 100 hrs and I fly it
> terribly!). I fly in the UK and have on occasion (!)
> flown in some pretty weak conditions. The ASW28 is
> the only new glider that I have not struggled to out
> climb. I feel the LS8 is the best weak weather Std
> Class glider. I think that the D2a is noticeably better
> than any other Std class glider at high speed.
>

> Owain
>
> PS. Why are people so interested with looking at their
> tail?
> PPS. You will notice I say "think" and "feel" a lot.
> I have not measured anything but my views are from
> my experience and anecdotal evidence.

[Robert Danewid]

There are about 120 000 glider pilots in the world.

At the last WGC in Sweden (where I was the comp director)
there were 116 pilots from 25 nations competing. Let us
assume that there are 500 serious competition on an average
in these 25 countries. That gives us a total of 12 500
pilots who are serious comp pilots or about 10% of the whole
gliding community - and I amsure this is an overestimation.
Now I ask my self why the other 90% would prefer a glider
with a little preformance advantage in which you are not
even able to wear your shoes to fit in.

I think what you really should look for is not only
performance, but flight characteristic, comfort, pilot
safety, craftmanship etc etc.

On the other hand, we glider pilots have always been a
liitle bit crazy.

But presonally I will never take of my shoes just to fit in
a glider! Sorry Ben.

Robert


Owain Walters wrote:
>>If you fly your glider in weak lift conditions most
>>of the time, the
>>picture will be a complete different one.
>
>
> I own a Discus 2a but I am yet to learn how to fly
> it properly (I think Ben says you need 200 hrs to be
> kind as he knows I have about 100 hrs and I fly it
> terribly!). I fly in the UK and have on occasion (!)
> flown in some pretty weak conditions. The ASW28 is
> the only new glider that I have not struggled to out
> climb. I feel the LS8 is the best weak weather Std
> Class glider. I think that the D2a is noticeably better
> than any other Std class glider at high speed.
>
>
>>BTW, there are only few ASW28 for sale, while you can
>>fill oceans with
>>second hand LS8 and D2.
>
>
> I think that is a factually incorrect and certainly
> misleading. There does appear to be a glut of LS8's
> at the moment but I know of only 1 D2a. On the flipside
> of that, I know of at least 3 ASW28's that have been
> for sale for over a year. Why is that?
>
> I think they are overpriced and underperforming.
>
>
>>If you´re looking for a ASW28, look have a look at:
>>http://home.planet.nl/~holsw007/asw28/
>>;-)
>
>
> They need all the help you can give them.......;-)
>
> Owain
>
> PS. Why are people so interested with looking at their
> tail?
> PPS. You will notice I say “think” and “feel” a lot.
> I have not measured anything but my views are from
> my experience and anecdotal evidence.
>
>
>
>

[Tom Smith]

Jack

http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/03/carreragt06_11.jpg

http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/turd.jpg

I hope my visual comparison is helpful.

Tom

At 14:42 23 October 2006, Jack wrote:
>Marc Ramsey wrote:
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Enough already!
>>>
>>> How about the DG-303?
>>
>> You asking or suggesting?
>
>
>I'd like to see the DG-303 included in these comparisons.
>
>
>Jack

[Marc Ramsey]

Tom Smith wrote:
> Jack
>
> http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/03/carreragt06_11.jpg
>
> http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/turd.jpg
>
> I hope my visual comparison is helpful.

Thanks for pointing this out 8^)

It does bring up an something I learned, though, during the period when
I found racing gliders to be enjoyable. The difference in performance
between, say, a DG-303 and a Discus 2A, is not enough to overcome poor
piloting skills on a given day. On those days when things were clicking
for me, and I was making the "right" choices, my turd could stay with or
outrun everyone else in the standard class field. On a more typical
day, I could be flying the only Discus 3 around, and still end up at the
back of the pack. In my opinion, most of those obsessed with
determining the "best" standard (or any) class glider, would be better
off figuring out what they would be most comfortable flying,
independent of whatever slight deficit in performance they might suffer
from...

Marc

[Jack]

Tom Smith wrote:
> Jack
>
> http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/03/carreragt06_11.jpg
>
> http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/turd.jpg
>
> I hope my visual comparison is helpful.


Tom,

I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303 is incomparably
better than the rest of the standard class field, and that any disparity
in competition achievement is probably due to the relative quality of
the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.

Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in their respective
fields was apt indeed, though the "turd" reference was perhaps a little
harsh on the competition.

I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what material does one
usually build a glider in your corner of the universe?


Jack

---------------------------------------
> At 14:42 23 October 2006, Jack wrote:
>> Marc Ramsey wrote:
>>> Jack wrote:
>>>> Enough already!
>>>>
>>>> How about the DG-303?
>>> You asking or suggesting?
>>
>> I'd like to see the DG-303 included in these comparisons.
>>
>>
>> Jack
>
>
>
>
>

[Tom Smith]

>Tom,
>
>I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303
>is incomparably
>better than the rest of the standard class field, and
>that any disparity
>in competition achievement is probably due to the relative
>quality of
>the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.

Jack,

You’re clearly suffering from a serious case of delusion!

>Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in
>their respective
>fields was apt indeed, though the 'turd' reference
>was perhaps a little
>harsh on the competition.
>
>I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what
>material does one
>usually build a glider in your corner of the universe?

Funny you should ask; the rest of the universe has
been wondering the same thing about your corner. We
had concluded that your glider manufacturers had discovered
how to isolate and work the ugly atom. Perhaps you
could confirm or dispel these rumours.

Many thanks,

Tom

[Andy[_1_]]

Bruce Greef wrote:
>
> I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.

But I still don't know what his observations were, only what his
conclusion is. Has he flown multple contests with top ranking pilots
flying ASW28's or is the conclusion based on just flying with one
unknown pilot at his/her local airport. I'm not trying to be
difficult. I'd really like to know how he reached this conclusion
particularly as it does not agree with my observations based on several
hundred hours in type.


Andy

[Jack]

Tom Smith wrote:
>> Tom,
>>
>> I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303
>> is incomparably
>> better than the rest of the standard class field, and
>> that any disparity
>> in competition achievement is probably due to the relative
>> quality of
>> the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.
>
> Jack,
>
> You’re clearly suffering from a serious case of delusion!
>
>> Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in
>> their respective
>> fields was apt indeed, though the 'turd' reference
>> was perhaps a little
>> harsh on the competition.
>>
>> I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what
>> material does one
>> usually build a glider in your corner of the universe?
>
> Funny you should ask; the rest of the universe has
> been wondering the same thing about your corner. We
> had concluded that your glider manufacturers had discovered
> how to isolate and work the ugly atom. Perhaps you
> could confirm or dispel these rumours.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Tom


See:

http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/

http://www.glidersport.net/

http://www.continuo.com/marske/

http://www.agcsc.org/sgs_1_34_info.html

http://www.windward-performance.com/

http://www.ssa.org/JohnsonLWBX/Genesis2%202000-03.pdf


The problem is not a lack of appreciation for either aerodynamics or
aesthetics, but a matter of production costs and exchange rates. Those
challenges will be overcome.


Jack

[bagmaker]

Bruce Greef wrote:

I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.

But I still don't know what his observations were, only what his
conclusion is. Has he flown multple contests with top ranking pilots
flying ASW28's or is the conclusion based on just flying with one
unknown pilot at his/her local airport. I'm not trying to be
difficult. I'd really like to know how he reached this conclusion
particularly as it does not agree with my observations based on several
hundred hours in type.


Andy

Mr Flewett won the most recent GP in NZ against the worlds best pilots.
Find the google valve, Andy, and release some air into the vacuum around
your part of the world, you may find it refreshing.

Bagmaker

[Shawn]

Jack wrote:
> Tom Smith wrote:
>>> Tom,
>>>
>>> I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303
>>> is incomparably better than the rest of the standard class field, and
>>> that any disparity in competition achievement is probably due to the
>>> relative
>>> quality of the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.
>>
>> Jack,
>>
>> You’re clearly suffering from a serious case of delusion!
>>
>>> Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in
>>> their respective fields was apt indeed, though the 'turd' reference
>>> was perhaps a little harsh on the competition.
>>>
>>> I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what
>>> material does one usually build a glider in your corner of the universe?
>>
>> Funny you should ask; the rest of the universe has
>> been wondering the same thing about your corner. We
>> had concluded that your glider manufacturers had discovered
>> how to isolate and work the ugly atom. Perhaps you
>> could confirm or dispel these rumours.
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Tom
>
>
> See:
>
> http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/
>
> http://www.glidersport.net/
>
> http://www.continuo.com/marske/
>
> http://www.agcsc.org/sgs_1_34_info.html
>
> http://www.windward-performance.com/
>
> http://www.ssa.org/JohnsonLWBX/Genesis2%202000-03.pdf
>
>
> The problem is not a lack of appreciation for either aerodynamics or
> aesthetics, but a matter of production costs and exchange rates. Those
> challenges will be overcome.

We're sure taking care of the exchange rate portion of the problem :-p


Shawn


P.S. Happy Halloween! Of all the hijacked religious holidays, this one
has the best movies. :-)

[Jack]

Shawn wrote:
> Jack wrote:
>> Tom Smith wrote:
>>>> Tom,
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy to see that you share my view that the DG-303
>>>> is incomparably better than the rest of the standard class field, and
>>>> that any disparity in competition achievement is probably due to the
>>>> relative
>>>> quality of the pilots and/or numbers of aircraft built.
>>>
>>> Jack,
>>>
>>> You’re clearly suffering from a serious case of delusion!
>>>
>>>> Your equating the DG-303 with the 2006 Carerra GT in
>>>> their respective fields was apt indeed, though the 'turd' reference
>>>> was perhaps a little harsh on the competition.
>>>>
>>>> I note that you are not a member of SSA. From what
>>>> material does one usually build a glider in your corner of the
>>>> universe?
>>>
>>> Funny you should ask; the rest of the universe has
>>> been wondering the same thing about your corner. We
>>> had concluded that your glider manufacturers had discovered
>>> how to isolate and work the ugly atom. Perhaps you
>>> could confirm or dispel these rumours.
>>>
>>> Many thanks,
>>> Tom
>>
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/
>>
>> http://www.glidersport.net/
>>
>> http://www.continuo.com/marske/
>>
>> http://www.agcsc.org/sgs_1_34_info.html
>>
>> http://www.windward-performance.com/
>>
>> http://www.ssa.org/JohnsonLWBX/Genesis2%202000-03.pdf
>>
>>
>> The problem is not a lack of appreciation for either aerodynamics or
>> aesthetics, but a matter of production costs and exchange rates. Those
>> challenges will be overcome.
>
> We're sure taking care of the exchange rate portion of the problem :-p


Not, obviously, by direct assault. Nanotech might do it, unless you
actually wanted a glider big enough for your body.


Jack

[Bruce Greef]

Andy wrote:
> Bruce Greef wrote:
>
>>I would apportion a certain amount of weight to Ben's observations.
>
>
> But I still don't know what his observations were, only what his
> conclusion is. Has he flown multple contests with top ranking pilots
> flying ASW28's or is the conclusion based on just flying with one
> unknown pilot at his/her local airport. I'm not trying to be
> difficult. I'd really like to know how he reached this conclusion
> particularly as it does not agree with my observations based on several
> hundred hours in type.
>
>
> Andy
>
Andy, you don't get in the top 100, let alone the top 10 IGC rank without doing
an enormous amount of very competitive flying. The differences between the top
aircraft is very small - far less than that between pilots. Various people
maintain that the variation within a production run of a particular glider is
larger than the nominal difference between different makes.

So again - my observation is that when it comes to those aspects of performance
that favour top contest pilots in winning contests it appears that the D2 and
LS8 have the current edge. This is partially a self perpetuating thing, as they
build confidence and experience in and demand for these models - the up and
comings look at their choices when deciding what to fly to be competitive (as
evidenced in this discussion)and go out and fly what the winners are flying. In
the broader type of flying that the average pilot will do it is not nearly as
clear which glider is better - because the question becomes "Better at what?".

So for example - my personal aircraft is the Standard Cirrus that cleaned up in
the Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and South African contest scene in 1970-71
in the hands of Ted Pearson. Top pilot, and the best glider at the time for
winning contests. As a current club class 36 year old, with me in the seat (less
competitive, less experienced, less talented, more fun XC oriented) there are
many of the aircraft it beat then, that are easier to live with. I even got
beaten by a Phoebus IIb in the last regionals. Bottom line - you have to be a
bit better to extract the most from the racing oriented design, but it does have
a little more to give. If you are able to extract that last 1% and the
compromises required to get it don't phase you then you know which is the "best"
design.

Flying against some other (newer) Std Cirri has shown wide variances, some are
worse, some are so much better as to make one wonder if this is the same design.

Off the point I suppose. Ben and others' view is that the Discus 2a is the best
design available for Standard Class racing. Given that this has to be at least
partially a subjective view, one can't really differ. If you vary the metric to
include any subset of
the best finish, or
longevity, or
ergonomics or
value for money or
safety or
comfort or
manufacturer support

or any other thing that is relevant to your decision then you can make a
meaningful comparison.