Tom,

With all due respect ;-), I believe the Lak17b's you flew against in Uvalde were Lak17b FES models (Front Engine Sustainer, http://lak.lt/index.php?option=com_c...&Itemi d=136).

The 17b FES has a folding propeller system on its nose which, even though fairly slick, still has a few square inches of square structure in the airflow as well as two 18' propeller blades. This is especially disruptive when at higher speeds in flying locations such as Uvalde Texas.

The FES version of the 17b should actually have a decent handicap for this reason, not a penalty over a pure glider as the US rules currently. The US handicap committee has not thought this one out very well in my opinion. The 17b FES should have a fairly decent handicap advantage over the pure version, not vice versa based purely on the gross weight.

The pure version of the 17b would produce a different story from you I imagine. I believe it would give a 29 a hell of a problem based on the way the Lak17a performs against them this year at the US Nationals, 5th place... (http://www.ssa.org/ContestResults.as...ter+Nationals).

Also the pilots flying the 17b's in Uvalde were, admittedly, not the "creme of the Uvalde crop." They were there to have fun mainly and to show off the new FES system. If you put two evenly matched pilots into a 29 and a pure 17b, I imagine it would come down to the pilot and not the glider. Not a bad thing considering the Lak17b is a far less expensive glider, even with the impressive FES system added.

Its all about fun, and arguing about glider performance for me is just that, fun. So don't take this too seriously. I think the Lak is not given a fair shake by many. It is a very nice glider for the money and worth serious consideration by those looking for a versatile 15/18 and now even a 21 meter glider which has the option to use FES.

Sean
F2


On Monday, November 4, 2013 5:00:38 AM UTC-5, Tom Claffey wrote:
I flew beside the two Lak17Bs at Uvalde.

In my opinion the ASG29 (thanks Al) I flew was better.

I am not an Aeronautical engineer but to my eye the winglet and

winglet/wing interface just looked wrong. Dr Maughmer or others could

probably fix that.

A 21M version at the right wing loading would be possibly good per $ but

the

EB29 will eat it up in weak weather and the JS1 eat it up everywhere else..

IMO

Tom











t 21:35 20 October 2013, Sean F F2 wrote:

Damn right it will be! =20



I finished 5th overall in a lak17a (that's right, lak17"A"!) this year at

1=

8m nationals. I am a very average, inexperienced and essentially new

conte=

st pilot. I seemed to keep up with 29's pretty well. I imagine the 17b

(w=

ith its ability to to up to 1300 gross weight) will be far, FAR more

"even"=

with the 29 that the 17a is. The 17a was initially designed as a 15m

and

=

is therefore limited to 1103 gross weight max.



http://www.ssa.org/ContestResults.asp?

contestId=3D2224&ContestDetailId=3D72=

39&ContestName=3D18+Meter+Nationals



From what I have heard, the 17b is far more advanced than the 17a in

almost=

all key aspects. The wing is entirely redesigned as 15/18 and not just

15=

with 18 extensions as an afterthought as the 17a was... The airfoils

are

=

similar to the Diana 2. So I think it will do extremely well in 18 meter

c=

ompetition when in the hands of a strong pilot. =20



In 15 meter configuration, the 17a is very good, similar to an ASW 27

which=

it was designed to beat. The 17b is almost certainly better 15 meter

conf=

iguration that the 17a with an entirely new wing winglets, new airfoils,

a

=

redesigned vertical stab, rudder and all new horizontal stab. =20



In 21 meter I suspect it will be very good (60:1, similar to the JS1)

other=

wise why would they bother? Will it compete with a Quintus or a

Concordia?=

I highly doubt it, but it would be a hell of a glider for the $$$...



Sincerely,



Sean Fidler

F2, Lak17a #114