I would add that the wings of my N2C are carbon and thus much lighter than
the earlier versions and MUCH lighter than the other two glider listed. The
inner wing panels are light enough that I can actually lift one myself if I
grip it at the spanwise CG. The weight of the parts isn't the difficulty,
it's just the number of them. My assembly "to-do" list has 55 items and
takes about 45 minutes if I'm in a hurry.

Once you have it together, it's a beaut to fly. Dry, it's a little over 6
Lbs wing loading and will soar in weakest conditions and land VERY slowly.
Ballast up to the limit (over 10Lbs/sq ft) and runs like a cruise missile.
The N2C could be improved considerably with a few modifications. First on
my list would be a tail tank since the wing ballast tanks are well ahead of
the desired CG followed by winglets and root fillets.

Bill Daniels

"Ian" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:09:36 -0700, SoaringXCellence wrote:

There are at least one of each of the following gliders for sale
currently:
Jantar 2
Nimbus 2
ASW-17
At about the same cost for each, after delivery.

I'm interested in the comparison of these three ships (and only these
three ships!) by individuals that have actually flown them or at least
one of them, for handling, comfort, idiosyncrasies, and any other
details you feel are pertainent.

I owned a share in a Nimbus 2 and flew many hundreds of hours in it,
including competitions, an FAI 750km triangle and a 1000km Diploma. As
they say "TINFOS". I have flown with ASW17's and helped derig them.

The Nimbus inner wing section is lighter than the heaviest wing section
of the other two you list. This is particularly significant if you land
out in a soft plowed field. You need four strong fit men to carry the
Nimbus out of a field but it is doable and if you done it you wont be too
scared to get into that situation again. This is important. There is no
point in flying open class unless you intend to use the performance for
what it is intended for! With the others you will need even more or
stronger man power and once experienced it might put the brakes on future
cross country aspirations.

Performance wise, the Nimbus has a lower wing loading than the 17 when
flying empty, which gave it an advantage in weak weather. It was
particularly good at sneaking back home after everything else had landed.
The 17's might have gone a bit better in strong weather - maybe because
they managed to load them up heavier. (But it was quick to full the
Nimbus tanks and I regularly carried water.)

Whatever you chose, you have to be committed to fly open class.
Everything takes more time and effort. Rigging, cleaning, pushing,
polishing even towing. There is a learning curve required to, but when
you get on top of it you will fly a lot further and a little faster than
the 15m pilots.

(Now days I fly an LS3a, it handles beautifully, it climbs, runs, can be
landed in a tiny field and it is easy to de-rig and tow home afterwards.
It is really nice on our ridges. All very different to an open class
glider - but I do a lot less cross country millage now than I did in the
Nimbus.)

Have Fun


Ian