Flapped Glider Recommendations...

Hi All,

Assuming a budget of under $30k, I'm looking at upgrading my Russia
AC-4. She's an excellent ship and I could do a whole lot more with
her... But with our weak conditions locally, I find myself itching for
a few more points of glide (currently about 31:1) and a lower min-sink
(currently somewhere around 130-140 fpm). A promotion will be
forthcoming soon, and I've decided to take some of those dollars and
sink them into a better toy (to the detriment of my retirement fund,
I'm sure *chuckle*).

I fly in the Seattle area, where we regularly see cloud-bases of about
4k AGL, and only 2-4 knot lift. Winds tend to be only moderate, so
I'm more interested in a "floater" than a heavy/fast ship. I will be
doing little (if any) competitive flying; I just want to have fun, go
on decent X/C flights, and not get shot down on weak days when the
thermals are a few miles apart... Hypothetical situation: I fly 4
miles to check out potential lift and I have to bail back to my
starting point. Over that 8 miles I give up ~600 ft more altitude
than a decent 15m ship. If my starting altitude is only 3k - 4k, that
extra 600 ft means a lot!

BUT, I must say that the quick rigging of the Russia and its automatic
control hookups are really, really nice (as is its maneuverability and
other handling qualities). Many of the ships I'm looking at lack
those qualities, so I'm hesitant. If the Dollar wasn't so weak vs.
the Euro, I'd look seriously at buying an Apis kit...

Bottom line: I want a 15m ship, and want it to be easy to rig and fly
(so I fly it more often). It has to be a good weak-weather performer,
and cost less than $30k (preferably closer to $25k).

The top names that spring to mind a Mini-Nimbus, Mosquito, LS-3.
(And yes I've read the Moffat article, Johnson Reports, and done a
crap-load of research online about these planes)

I've long liked the Mini's lower sink rate, lighter weight, and
automatic hookups. However, the seating ergonomics and visibility look
(from photos) like they're not as good as the other two. Its also not
as pretty of a ship, but that's a seriously minor concern (hell, I fly
a RUSSIA right now, remember!). The other selling point of the Mini
is that "b" and "c" models (with the improved tail) can be had for
around $20k - $24k.

The Mosquito is slightly heavier than the Mini (though it has the same
wing). This translates into a slightly higher min-sink rate. But it
appears to have better ergonomics, better visibility, and a reputation
for high-quality construction. Unfortunately this costs $$ - with
Mosquitos seemingly selling for near $30k.

The LS-3 is around $25k, has some of the best performance numbers, and
is reportedly very good in climb. However, it has NO automatic
hookups and the wings are a fair bit heavier to handle than the other
two gliders. It has the highest min-sink by a small margin.
Ergonomics are supposedly good (other than the flap & airbrake handles
having to be operated together); but I've never seen one in person.
The high weight and lack of automatic hookups bug me, but the price-
performance point is nice.

I've chatted with Mini and Mosquito pilots (its surprisingly hard to
find someone who's flown both), and am hoping to fly both a Mini and
an LS-3a at Minden this winter/spring (though if I buy one, I think
I'd prefer the flaperon LS-3). No clear decision as of yet...

Anyone care to toss in their opinions and thoughts?

Any alternate suggestions of aircraft I may have overlooked?

Thanks, take care,

--Noel

noel.wade wrote:
The LS-3 is around $25k, has some of the best performance numbers, and
is reportedly very good in climb. However, it has NO automatic
hookups and the wings are a fair bit heavier to handle than the other
two gliders. It has the highest min-sink by a small margin.
Ergonomics are supposedly good (other than the flap & airbrake handles
having to be operated together); but I've never seen one in person.
The high weight and lack of automatic hookups bug me, but the price-
performance point is nice.

One data point: LS-3 wings are heavy because the flaperon design
required a heavy lead mass balance. LS-3a segmented flap/ailerons do
not require the mass balance, so each wing is around 30 to 50 lbs lighter...

Marc

On Jan 7, 8:36*am, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hi All,

Assuming a budget of under $30k, I'm looking at upgrading my Russia
AC-4. *She's an excellent ship and I could do a whole lot more with
her... But with our weak conditions locally, I find myself itching for
a few more points of glide (currently about 31:1) and a lower min-sink
(currently somewhere around 130-140 fpm). *

snip

Any alternate suggestions of aircraft I may have overlooked?

Libelle? Light & easy to rig, not self-conecting but not hard to do,
and in light weather it will be at the top of the heap at our club.
Cheap as well, at least in the UK! Certainly a better glide ratio
than your current ship, and in the UK a guy has done his Diamond 500k
flight in one in 2007.

Cats wrote:

Libelle? Light & easy to rig, not self-conecting but not hard to do,
and in light weather it will be at the top of the heap at our club.

I'd certainly agree with that. I can't wait for my third season in mine
to start.

I can confirm they are light and easy to rig. Its one glider that never
causes other pilots to dive for cover when you want help rigging or
derigging.

Libelles are partly self-connecting: the elevator and brakes
self-connect. The ailerons are not, but only take about 15 seconds each
to connect or disconnect. They are even simpler than Hoteliers and are
easy to check for correct connection. I can't comment about the ballast
system: mine is #82, so precedes the B-series addition of water ballast.

Mine has Streifneder trimmings (sealed surfaces, full span zigzag turbs
on the under surface) and seems to have gained about a point on L/D.

The only possible drawback is that the cockpit is fairly snug and may be
a problem for the larger pilot. The ventilation in hot conditions is
second to none.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Jan 7, 3:36*am, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hi All,

Assuming a budget of under $30k, I'm looking at upgrading my Russia
AC-4. *She's an excellent ship and I could do a whole lot more with
her... But with our weak conditions locally, I find myself itching for
a few more points of glide (currently about 31:1) and a lower min-sink
(currently somewhere around 130-140 fpm). *A promotion will be
forthcoming soon, and I've decided to take some of those dollars and
sink them into a better toy (to the detriment of my retirement fund,
I'm sure *chuckle*).

I fly in the Seattle area, where we regularly see cloud-bases of about
4k AGL, and only 2-4 knot lift. *Winds tend to be only moderate, so
I'm more interested in a "floater" than a heavy/fast ship. I will be
doing little (if any) competitive flying; I just want to have fun, go
on decent X/C flights, and not get shot down on weak days when the
thermals are a few miles apart... *Hypothetical situation: *I fly 4
miles to check out potential lift and I have to bail back to my
starting point. *Over that 8 miles I give up ~600 ft more altitude
than a decent 15m ship. *If my starting altitude is only 3k - 4k, that
extra 600 ft means a lot!

BUT, I must say that the quick rigging of the Russia and its automatic
control hookups are really, really nice (as is its maneuverability and
other handling qualities). *Many of the ships I'm looking at lack
those qualities, so I'm hesitant. *If the Dollar wasn't so weak vs.
the Euro, I'd look seriously at buying an Apis kit...

Bottom line: *I want a 15m ship, and want it to be easy to rig and fly
(so I fly it more often). *It has to be a good weak-weather performer,
and cost less than $30k (preferably closer to $25k).

The top names that spring to mind a *Mini-Nimbus, Mosquito, LS-3.
(And yes I've read the Moffat article, Johnson Reports, and done a
crap-load of research online about these planes)

I've long liked the Mini's lower sink rate, lighter weight, and
automatic hookups. However, the seating ergonomics and visibility look
(from photos) like they're not as good as the other two. *Its also not
as pretty of a ship, but that's a seriously minor concern (hell, I fly
a RUSSIA right now, remember!). *The other selling point of the Mini
is that "b" and "c" models (with the improved tail) can be had for
around $20k - $24k.

The Mosquito is slightly heavier than the Mini (though it has the same
wing). *This translates into a slightly higher min-sink rate. *But it
appears to have better ergonomics, better visibility, and a reputation
for high-quality construction. *Unfortunately this costs $$ - with
Mosquitos seemingly selling for near $30k.

The LS-3 is around $25k, has some of the best performance numbers, and
is reportedly very good in climb. *However, it has NO automatic
hookups and the wings are a fair bit heavier to handle than the other
two gliders. *It has the highest min-sink by a small margin.
Ergonomics are supposedly good (other than the flap & airbrake handles
having to be operated together); but I've never seen one in person.
The high weight and lack of automatic hookups bug me, but the price-
performance point is nice.

I've chatted with Mini and Mosquito pilots (its surprisingly hard to
find someone who's flown both), and am hoping to fly both a Mini and
an LS-3a at Minden this winter/spring (though if I buy one, I think
I'd prefer the flaperon LS-3). *No clear decision as of yet...

Anyone care to toss in their opinions and thoughts?

Any alternate suggestions of aircraft I may have overlooked?

Thanks, take care,

--Noel

Don't discount older standard class ships like ASW-15 , 19, Std
Cirrus, LS1 series. They all have
a good deal more performance and are quite affordable. In the lift
strengths yoy descibe, flapped gliders
don't have a lot of advantage.
UH

noel.wade wrote:
Hi All,



The LS-3 is around $25k, has some of the best performance numbers, and
is reportedly very good in climb. However, it has NO automatic
hookups and the wings are a fair bit heavier to handle than the other
two gliders. It has the highest min-sink by a small margin.
Ergonomics are supposedly good (other than the flap & airbrake handles
having to be operated together); but I've never seen one in person.
The high weight and lack of automatic hookups bug me, but the price-
performance point is nice.

The tail on the LS-3 has the same hookup as the LS-8 and other LS
models. You can't get the wings on unless the spoilers are hooked up,
and unless you hook up the flaps. The only thing that isn't "automatic"
is the ailerons on the "a" model.

Of course, by "automatic" I mean "you can't assemble the glider unless
everything is hooked up." You do have to manually line up a couple of
fittings to get the wings on. It is not a matter of shoving the wings
on and having everything hook up on its own as with newer gliders. But
you do have the safety benefits of "automatic" hookups (except the
ailerons on the "a" model).




I've chatted with Mini and Mosquito pilots (its surprisingly hard to
find someone who's flown both), and am hoping to fly both a Mini and
an LS-3a at Minden this winter/spring (though if I buy one, I think
I'd prefer the flaperon LS-3). No clear decision as of yet...

Anyone care to toss in their opinions and thoughts?

Any alternate suggestions of aircraft I may have overlooked?

Thanks, take care,

--Noel

Good idea, Noel.
Don't be afraid of shifting your portfolio into the "German Plastic"
sector.
Its lots more fun than looking at spreadsheets.
Jim

On Jan 7, 12:36 am, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hi All,

I've decided to take some of those dollars and
sink them into a better toy (to the detriment of my retirement fund,
I'm sure *chuckle*).

--Noel

Noel,

noel.wade wrote:
Hi All,

Assuming a budget of under $30k,
snip
BUT, I must say that the quick rigging of the Russia and its automatic
control hookups are really, really nice (as is its maneuverability and
other handling qualities).
snip
Congratulations - you have one of the most gratifying illnesses known to
mankind: the illness (the decision process) is almost as fun as the cure
(flying your new toy).

Bottom line: I want a 15m ship, and want it to be easy to rig and fly
(so I fly it more often). It has to be a good weak-weather performer,
and cost less than $30k (preferably closer to $25k).

The top names that spring to mind a Mini-Nimbus, Mosquito, LS-3.
(And yes I've read the Moffat article, Johnson Reports, and done a
crap-load of research online about these planes)
snip
I've chatted with Mini and Mosquito pilots (its surprisingly hard to
find someone who's flown both), and am hoping to fly both a Mini and
an LS-3a at Minden this winter/spring (though if I buy one, I think
I'd prefer the flaperon LS-3). No clear decision as of yet...

By my characterization you've listed 3 1st generation glass 15-meter
ships. Though Mini-Nimbii C models do have carbon (I believe), the
basic design is 1st-generation 15-meter. Each on your list pretty much
uses the same Wortmann FX 67K 150/170 airfoils.

Add to that list Slingsby Vegas and Zunis. Both have automatic control
hookups. The Zuni has but one loose (main) pin; I can't remember if
Vegas also have a loose tailplane pin (Zunis do not). While I've seen
neither listed recently in "Soaring", and I'd guess Vegas have higher
asking prices, neither being 'German glass' both probably inhabit price
points below German equivalents. Zunis are Experimental (no ATC).

I've rigged both, and both are as simple as any 15-meter glass ship
(with distinctly lighter-than-LS-3 wing panels. Strictly out of
curiosity, I once went from opening my Zuni trailer to being ready to
pre-flight in 8 timed minutes; 7 minutes reverse...no rushing/BS
allowed - just rigging - and several hours later - derigging.) Risking
offending retired Slingsby employees, I'd describe a Vega's main panels
as essentially Mosquito/Mini-Nimbus-like. Vegas and Zunis can be found
with various amounts of carbon (and Kevlar in Zunis) in them.

FWIW, my somewhat jaundiced view of why 4 of these 5 designs (LS-3
excluded) have discounted prices can in part - be attributed to their
'unconventional' pattern-drag devices. Since 2 such designs are on
*your* short list, I'm guessing you're comfortable with having to ascend
the associated learning curve (to which I add, "Good on you!").

Writing as one who transitioned from 2-33 to 1-26 to C-70 to HP-14 to
Zuni (the latter 3, no-spoiler/large-deflection-flap-only ships), place
me in the religious camp that doesn't believe only fools with a death
wish willingly fly flaps-only ships. The C-70/HP-14 purchase decisions
were cost-driven; the HP-14/Zuni purchase decisions were
flap-preference-driven. (IMHO, there's no such thing as too much
disposable drag come glider landing time! Mosquitoes, Mini-Nimbii and
Vegas have considerably more than Zuni's...and less than my former HP-14.)

Final observation - for the type of flying you described, there's not a
dime's worth of difference in performance between any of these 5 ships
that isn't *far* outweighed by the pilot's
skill/tenacity/mental-airmass-model. Handling differences will of
course be apparent & quantifiable by any competent test pilot, but
(IMHO) the 2 Big Ones (i.e. life-related) to anyone considering moving
to such ships a 1) pitch sensitivity and 2) stall behavior. Having
flown only the Zuni of the 5 ships above, I'd characterize its pitch
feel as: sensitive & numb (side stick implementation; never flown w. a
center parallelogram stick - also to be found), a combo conducive to
alarming & potentially damaging PIO's if flown w/o a decent checkout.
Not a problem otherwise. Once aloft...IMHO, the FX 67K 150/170 airfoil
is pure pussycat.

Buy what you can find/afford/fit-in...then fly every chance you get.
Get good preflight input from someone(s) experienced in type
(important), apply your own considered judgment to said advice, fly
accordingly, and have at it. You won't be sorry!

Regards,
Bob W.

Do not forget the PIK-20 that comes in different versions. It has a similar airfoils as the previously mentionned gliders and performs almost as well as a LS-4. They are available at or below $20K and are, to me, the best value for the money. They also do not have a gel coat finish with the accompanying problems of old age.

Mine is a 20B with the carbon spar option, which saves about 30 Lbs per wing. There is no self rigging but is easy and fast to set up.

I fly in Eastern Canada with conditions similar to what you describe, most of the time, and I have a ton of fun. It climbs as well as anything we have in the club with the main difference being the pilot. I still have many years of fun learning ahead of me.

Richard F.

Originally Posted by Bob Whelan[_3_]

Noel,

noel.wade wrote:
Hi All,

Assuming a budget of under $30k,
snip
BUT, I must say that the quick rigging of the Russia and its automatic
control hookups are really, really nice (as is its maneuverability and
other handling qualities).
snip
Congratulations - you have one of the most gratifying illnesses known to
mankind: the illness (the decision process) is almost as fun as the cure
(flying your new toy).

Bottom line: I want a 15m ship, and want it to be easy to rig and fly
(so I fly it more often). It has to be a good weak-weather performer,
and cost less than $30k (preferably closer to $25k).

The top names that spring to mind a Mini-Nimbus, Mosquito, LS-3.
(And yes I've read the Moffat article, Johnson Reports, and done a
crap-load of research online about these planes)
snip
I've chatted with Mini and Mosquito pilots (its surprisingly hard to
find someone who's flown both), and am hoping to fly both a Mini and
an LS-3a at Minden this winter/spring (though if I buy one, I think
I'd prefer the flaperon LS-3). No clear decision as of yet...

By my characterization you've listed 3 1st generation glass 15-meter
ships. Though Mini-Nimbii C models do have carbon (I believe), the
basic design is 1st-generation 15-meter. Each on your list pretty much
uses the same Wortmann FX 67K 150/170 airfoils.

Add to that list Slingsby Vegas and Zunis. Both have automatic control
hookups. The Zuni has but one loose (main) pin; I can't remember if
Vegas also have a loose tailplane pin (Zunis do not). While I've seen
neither listed recently in "Soaring", and I'd guess Vegas have higher
asking prices, neither being 'German glass' both probably inhabit price
points below German equivalents. Zunis are Experimental (no ATC).

I've rigged both, and both are as simple as any 15-meter glass ship
(with distinctly lighter-than-LS-3 wing panels. Strictly out of
curiosity, I once went from opening my Zuni trailer to being ready to
pre-flight in 8 timed minutes; 7 minutes reverse...no rushing/BS
allowed - just rigging - and several hours later - derigging.) Risking
offending retired Slingsby employees, I'd describe a Vega's main panels
as essentially Mosquito/Mini-Nimbus-like. Vegas and Zunis can be found
with various amounts of carbon (and Kevlar in Zunis) in them.

FWIW, my somewhat jaundiced view of why 4 of these 5 designs (LS-3
excluded) have discounted prices can in part - be attributed to their
'unconventional' pattern-drag devices. Since 2 such designs are on
*your* short list, I'm guessing you're comfortable with having to ascend
the associated learning curve (to which I add, "Good on you!").

Writing as one who transitioned from 2-33 to 1-26 to C-70 to HP-14 to
Zuni (the latter 3, no-spoiler/large-deflection-flap-only ships), place
me in the religious camp that doesn't believe only fools with a death
wish willingly fly flaps-only ships. The C-70/HP-14 purchase decisions
were cost-driven; the HP-14/Zuni purchase decisions were
flap-preference-driven. (IMHO, there's no such thing as too much
disposable drag come glider landing time! Mosquitoes, Mini-Nimbii and
Vegas have considerably more than Zuni's...and less than my former HP-14.)

Final observation - for the type of flying you described, there's not a
dime's worth of difference in performance between any of these 5 ships
that isn't *far* outweighed by the pilot's
skill/tenacity/mental-airmass-model. Handling differences will of
course be apparent & quantifiable by any competent test pilot, but
(IMHO) the 2 Big Ones (i.e. life-related) to anyone considering moving
to such ships a 1) pitch sensitivity and 2) stall behavior. Having
flown only the Zuni of the 5 ships above, I'd characterize its pitch
feel as: sensitive & numb (side stick implementation; never flown w. a
center parallelogram stick - also to be found), a combo conducive to
alarming & potentially damaging PIO's if flown w/o a decent checkout.
Not a problem otherwise. Once aloft...IMHO, the FX 67K 150/170 airfoil
is pure pussycat.

Buy what you can find/afford/fit-in...then fly every chance you get.
Get good preflight input from someone(s) experienced in type
(important), apply your own considered judgment to said advice, fly
accordingly, and have at it. You won't be sorry!

Regards,
Bob W.

My LAK 12 has a combination of automatic and manual control hook-ups.
The maual ones fit easily and are a pleasure to use - tha automatic
ones rely on the wings (flaps) and elevators being lined up perfectly
before the final push. If everything in not perfectly lined - the
links tend to damage the sockets into which they fit and the whole
wing does not go on - not an ideal situation. Modern automatic hookups
look fantastic but poorly designed ones are no easier than manual hook-
ups.

Clinton
LAK 12