I think that the strong criticism of the Puch is totally unwarranted.
Puchacz was designed as a initial training ship but also one which can
fly many more aerobatic maneuvers then some other gliders. Puch can fly
rolls, loops, spins, hammerheads, snaps, you can teach inverted flight
in it, etc. It is called "advanced aerobatic trainer". It is quite a
remarkable glider. Of course the Germans will never admit it, so they
going to insist on their DG's. The point here is, after reading the
accident report it indicates to me a pilot error. Each glider has a
different characteristics. Some of them will recover with the stick in
the full aft position and some will not. Plain and simple. Each glider
comes from the factory with its manual. And that manual will tell you
how to fly specific ship. This is the same as comparing 7ECA Citabria,
which will recover from a spin with full aft elevator, to a Sukhoi 26:
this one needs to be recovered with the stick forward to break the
stall. You see, pilots flying aerobatics are aware of the handling
characteristics of the planes they fly. If I will be teaching a student
spins, I will be at 5000 + AGL. Why? Because if something goes to crap
I still have time to get out. They were flying spins at 1500. So, you
might say it is legal because the FARs are saying "no aerobatic
maneuvers below 1500' " . But is this really smart? Anyway, we can beat
the horse to death and everybody will have a different opinions. I
flown in SZD-50-3 Puchacz in the early and mid eighties with test pilot
January Roman with saddle bags filled with led near its tail to
simulate the aft C.G. without any problems. In addition we have done
those spins inverted as well...no problems. And we have done several
times. Puchacz is a trainer but it is also more then a trainer.
Approach it properly, with good manners and everything will be fine,
screw with it and it will bite. But the same is true for other gliders
and airplanes. Even for the DG. Everything else is in the pilot hands.