DG-300 or LS-3?

On Apr 23, 12:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

Noel,

John Cochrane makes a good point in his paper "a little faster please"
I don't have it in front of me, but basically he say's the top pilots
will always finish in the top spots even if they flew 20 year old
sailplanes. So save yourself some money and implement the concepts
he's put forth.

Ron sure does well in that LS-3, but, he also did really well in his
LS-1. With the legs the LS-3 has over the LS-1 it is becoming obvious
to all of us that fly with him that indeed it is a big asset. I think
you might want to fly with him and see how the DG-300 compares to the
LS-3.

My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!

Brad

On Apr 23, 5:04*pm, Brad wrote:

My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!

Yeah, but even your 13M ship has a flap handle... I want one of
those!! I feel so inadequate without one... ;-)

--Noel
P.S. I slacked off at work today and correlated data from Idaflieg and
various Johnson Reports. At 80 knots the DG-300 achieves a glide-
ratio of about 27:1. By comparison, the LS-3 can get 31:1. When
Moffat and Johnson and others wrote a lot of their reports back in the
1970's and 1980's, the idea of high wing-loadings for faster
competition flying was not yet in-vogue... so they didn't cover it
much. But in strong conditions (i.e. Ephrata or other competition
sites in the western USA), the benefits of a heavier flapped ship like
the LS-3 are pretty significant (on paper at least).

On 4/23/2010 5:39 PM, noel.wade wrote:
On Apr 23, 5:04 pm, wrote:

My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!

Yeah, but even your 13M ship has a flap handle... I want one of
those!! I feel so inadequate without one... ;-)

--Noel
P.S. I slacked off at work today and correlated data from Idaflieg and
various Johnson Reports. At 80 knots the DG-300 achieves a glide-
ratio of about 27:1. By comparison, the LS-3 can get 31:1.


That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.



When
Moffat and Johnson and others wrote a lot of their reports back in the
1970's and 1980's, the idea of high wing-loadings for faster
competition flying was not yet in-vogue... so they didn't cover it
much. But in strong conditions (i.e. Ephrata or other competition
sites in the western USA), the benefits of a heavier flapped ship like
the LS-3 are pretty significant (on paper at least).

On Apr 23, 5:47*pm, Greg Arnold wrote:

That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.


Greg -

Yes, it does seem like a paltry difference in altitude-per-mile.

But when you look at it in terms of competition flying, it equates to
a good 5 - 7 knots faster during inter-thermal cruising, for the same
sink-rate.

If you figure that 70% of a task is spent in cruise, that's a nice
advantage! Flying 85 knots versus 80 knots yields a 6% speed
difference in cruise. If you assume a similar climb rate (I know,
they may not be similar) and you assume that you spend 70% of your
flight in cruise, then the total performance advantage is 4%. But the
handicap difference between the DG-300 (0.95) and the LS-3 (0.937) is
only 1.4%

I know that the pilot matters more than the ship. I come from the
world of auto-racing and have experience in competition where bad
people think that fancy equipment will solve all of their
deficiencies. That's not the issue here... The issue for me is
whether its worth it to get the good ship *now* and have it for
several years, versus "practicing" with the DG-300 for a few years and
then moving over once I am "close" to winning...

--Noel

Noel:

Screw the glider....

Get the one that has the better trailer!


Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

If I were purchasing one of these two gliders, it would depend how
well I
fit in the cockpit, auto hook-ups, good trailer, instrumentation. If
you plan
to use your trailer a lot to store your glider after each flight and
to travel
to other good soaring locations, make sure you have a good trailer and
that all the equipment is in good shape. The LS3 wings are heavy and
a one-man-rigger should be considered.

Randy

http://talihinasoaring.com/

On 4/23/2010 6:10 PM, noel.wade wrote:
On Apr 23, 5:47 pm, Greg wrote:

That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.


Greg -

Yes, it does seem like a paltry difference in altitude-per-mile.

But when you look at it in terms of competition flying, it equates to
a good 5 - 7 knots faster during inter-thermal cruising, for the same
sink-rate.

If you figure that 70% of a task is spent in cruise, that's a nice
advantage! Flying 85 knots versus 80 knots yields a 6% speed
difference in cruise. If you assume a similar climb rate (I know,
they may not be similar) and you assume that you spend 70% of your
flight in cruise, then the total performance advantage is 4%. But the
handicap difference between the DG-300 (0.95) and the LS-3 (0.937) is
only 1.4%

I know that the pilot matters more than the ship. I come from the
world of auto-racing and have experience in competition where bad
people think that fancy equipment will solve all of their
deficiencies. That's not the issue here... The issue for me is
whether its worth it to get the good ship *now* and have it for
several years, versus "practicing" with the DG-300 for a few years and
then moving over once I am "close" to winning...


What contest class do you want to fly it in? Sports class: I suspect the
handicaps are closer to correct than you would think from your
calculations. 15 M: the newer gliders like the ASW 27 are much better
than the LS3. Standard class: you can't fly the LS3 in Standard.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

Aaand it turns out to be a moot point. The LS-3 I had my eye on is
being sold for nearly $42k firm, no negotiation. Even though it's
been refinished and is a great ship, there's no way I'm paying that
kind of money for a 1970's airframe/design!

--Noel
(continuing as a DG-300 pilot for now)

On Apr 24, 11:24*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Aaand it turns out to be a moot point. The LS-3 I had my eye on is
being sold for nearly $42k firm, no negotiation. *Even though it's
been refinished and is a great ship, there's no way I'm paying that
kind of money for a 1970's airframe/design!

--Noel
(continuing as a DG-300 pilot for now)

Become a Master of the DG-300 Noel.

You have a great ship. It was in Moriarty for a while and I remember
it as an excellent sailplane.

On Apr 24, 11:11*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 4/23/2010 6:10 PM, noel.wade wrote:





On Apr 23, 5:47 pm, Greg *wrote:

That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.

Greg -

Yes, it does seem like a paltry difference in altitude-per-mile.

But when you look at it in terms of competition flying, it equates to
a good 5 - 7 knots faster during inter-thermal cruising, for the same
sink-rate.

If you figure that 70% of a task is spent in cruise, that's a nice
advantage! *Flying 85 knots versus 80 knots yields a 6% speed
difference in cruise. *If you assume a similar climb rate (I know,
they may not be similar) and you assume that you spend 70% of your
flight in cruise, then the total performance advantage is 4%. *But the
handicap difference between the DG-300 (0.95) and the LS-3 (0.937) is
only 1.4%

I know that the pilot matters more than the ship. *I come from the
world of auto-racing and have experience in competition where bad
people think that fancy equipment will solve all of their
deficiencies. *That's not the issue here... *The issue for me is
whether its worth it to get the good ship *now* and have it for
several years, versus "practicing" with the DG-300 for a few years and
then moving over once I am "close" to winning...

What contest class do you want to fly it in? Sports class: I suspect the
handicaps are closer to correct than you would think from your
calculations. 15 M: the newer gliders like the ASW 27 are much better
than the LS3. Standard class: you can't fly the LS3 in Standard.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarmhttp://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Expanding on Eric's point for a minute. If you're looking to fly in
Sports Class primarily, then the observations on wingloading and
ballast you made earlier are irrelevant - Sports Class (at least here
in the US) is flown dry. So, the handicaps as established will be
close enough to "correct" that it's a toss-up as to which is more
competive. If that's the case, then I think there might be a slight
nod toward an LS3 in very good condition. Flaps are nice, especially
if you routinely fly in an area where you need to go fast (ridge or
strong conditions) or land in small spaces. I fly at a field that
has at least a half-dozen LS3s based there, and it's fun to watch the
good guys come in over the trees and get stopped in very short order
(it's no ASW20 mind you, but it's still pretty good at getting
down).

Now, if you're thinking that you'll also attend the local Regional in
the respective FAI class from time to time, then I firmly believe the
nod goes to the DG. Especially if you fly in the East and/or in a no-
water regionals, the DG300 is "pretty close" to current ships. Not
quite there of course, but not so far from the D2, LS8, or ASW28 that
you'll always be left in the dust. There's a well-flown DG 300
campaigning in Standard Class here on the East Coast, and he routinely
finishes in the top half or better of races.

The LS3 IMO is a wonderful ship, but it seems to be relatively less
competitive within 15M. The ASW20, LS6, and of course current
generation ships all have a significant advantage over the LS3 at the
higher end. I say "seems", because there are folks who have shown
that a well-prepared LS3 is pretty much as good as an ASW20 (google
this group for some threads on that topic, especially relating to wing
profiling). I've only got two flights in an LS3, but it handles like
a dream and is just so pleasant to fly. Then again, maybe I'm biased,
having owned an LS4 and now an LS8.

Erik Mann
LS8-18 (P3)