Checklist for new ship selection

Hi folks,

Thanks a lot for all your input.
Actually Chris Reed was the one who read and answered the question I
put up most adequately. I've thanked him already for that.

We are considering renewal by DDX or DG1000 or K21.

And I am pretty convinced of what's it gonna be.

Actually, there is no choice.


Again, thank you all.

Hans






(Hans Cuppen) wrote:

Hi,

Our club has decided to replace its training fleet of K13's by new
ships.
In order to structure the selection process and to avoid that
everybody starts yelling and defending their favourite brand I need a
kind of list of criteria by which to match available ships in the
market.
Therefore I need a longlist that covers all (or most important)
aspects to consider before making a final choice.
Obvious main areas a safety (like (how) does it spin?), price, ease
of ground handling, flexibility in club operations, expected
maintenance cost, supplier reliability, etc.
Maybe other clubs have gone through a similar process and are willing
to share the list of hard demands and soft wishes they used.
My intention is not to start a thread on the why's of our decision.
Just a list of aspects.

After scimming and searching a few thousand headings, I could not find
any related postings in RAC.

You can email your list, or a place where I can find one, to my
address (discarding the "nospam" part off course.)



Thanks in advance

Hans Cuppen
GOZC
The Netherlands


Hans Cuppen
DG-400 Charly Pappa
The Netherlands
"It aint much, if it aint Dutch"
When responding, replace "nospam.com" from my address by .nl (dot nl)


Hans Cuppen
DG-400 Charly Pappa
The Netherlands
"It aint much, if it aint Dutch"
When responding, replace "nospam.com" from my address by .nl (dot nl)

Ian,

35 years ago, our club made a landslide decisison to replace the
wooden oldies fleet by the latest and hottest K13's.

Since then they sat on their butts and watched the world go by.

Now, 2006, a same same window of opportunities opens itself.

I have shown our (150!) members that, although we can make it
affordable, it's not a matter of money but a matter of guts and
innovation!!

Just Do It. (As we did 35 years ago.)

Now what would YOU do?

grtzzz

Hans



And now we do, the 1000 seems the only option for us.



"India November" wrote:

Hans

My club also is debating whether to replace K13s.

Opinion is split between those who want to stay with K13s, and those
who agree the K13 was a fine aircraft but it's time for something newer
and more modern.

Therefore I am interested in hearing the reasons why you have decided
to replace yours.

Ian Grant
Gatineau GC

PS the alternative our analysis showed as best bang for the buck in
Canada is the L23 Blanik.

Hans Cuppen wrote:
Hi,

Our club has decided to replace its training fleet of K13's by new
ships.
In order to structure the selection process and to avoid that
everybody starts yelling and defending their favourite brand I need a
kind of list of criteria by which to match available ships in the
market.
Therefore I need a longlist that covers all (or most important)
aspects to consider before making a final choice.
Obvious main areas a safety (like (how) does it spin?), price, ease
of ground handling, flexibility in club operations, expected
maintenance cost, supplier reliability, etc.
Maybe other clubs have gone through a similar process and are willing
to share the list of hard demands and soft wishes they used.
My intention is not to start a thread on the why's of our decision.
Just a list of aspects.

After scimming and searching a few thousand headings, I could not find
any related postings in RAC.

You can email your list, or a place where I can find one, to my
address (discarding the "nospam" part off course.)



Thanks in advance

Hans Cuppen
GOZC
The Netherlands


Hans Cuppen
DG-400 Charly Pappa
The Netherlands
"It aint much, if it aint Dutch"
When responding, replace "nospam.com" from my address by .nl (dot nl)


Hans Cuppen
DG-400 Charly Pappa
The Netherlands
"It aint much, if it aint Dutch"
When responding, replace "nospam.com" from my address by .nl (dot nl)

My point is that there are other ships in existence that spin
effectively so as to allow the teaching of spins and spin recovery that
don't have a reputation of killing people. Anyone can "spin in" if they
screw things up at low altitude. Masak appears to be an example of this
unfortunately. However, if you polled the glider community I don't
think anyone would come forward and say Blaniks, DGs, LSs, Schleichers,
or Schempp gliders have a particular tendency to spin in. This is the
case with the Puchacz and it seems to stand out in this regard.

Gary Emerson wrote:
My point is that there are other ships in existence that spin
effectively so as to allow the teaching of spins and spin recovery that
don't have a reputation of killing people. Anyone can "spin in" if they
screw things up at low altitude. Masak appears to be an example of this
unfortunately. However, if you polled the glider community I don't
think anyone would come forward and say Blaniks, DGs, LSs, Schleichers,
or Schempp gliders have a particular tendency to spin in. This is the
case with the Puchacz and it seems to stand out in this regard.

The Puchacz does have very powerful air brakes and, because it doesn't
drop its nose when they are deployed, the unwary can lose a lot of
airspeed when they are deployed. This is rather like selecting landing
flap in an ASW-20.

This tendency to shed speed when the brakes are deployed is at odds with
a G103 (which speeds up) or and ASK-21 (which shows very little speed
change). I wonder if this is where its 'bad reputation' comes from?


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