PW-6U by Jezow being delivered

bagmaker wrote:
I must disagree, respectably, with your opinion Mark.

You wont find a 2-33 in a German club, you will find new shiny ships
and LOTS of new pilots. Do you get that in the US? Now, are memberships
rising or falling in the US? And in Germany? Ahhhhh, see a link?

Are memberships really rising in Germany? Do you have numbers? If they
are, that would be different from the trend worldwide.

Do you suppose the use of low-cost winch launches might explain a lot of
the difference, along with the much higher cost of powered flight, and
*very* easy access to glider operations because the country is so compact?

So, at the moment, I don't see the link, because these other differences
seem important. In our club, it wasn't the lack of "bling" (we had an
old Blanik) that kept our membership down, it was the lack of
instructors and towpilots. If we had enough of those, we could have
easily doubled our membership and been able to afford the fiberglass two
seater.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On Aug 14, 2:55 pm, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message

...

Charles Yeates wrote:
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html

Gee, only about US $90K delivered. I'm not complaining, it's probably a
bargain compared to a new K-21 or DG-505. I just find it amusing that
some wonder why a lot a clubs stick with their 2-33s...

Marc

2-33's are cheap. Shooting yourself in the foot is also cheap. 2-33's are
cheap for a very good reason - they're terrible gliders.

2-33's have done untold damage to American soaring. Since 2-33's were
introduced as many as a hundred thousand potential glider pilots have walked
away because they were introduced to the sport with a ride in a 2-33. In
the long run, THAT was expensive.

When 2-33's were introduced in the late 1960's they cost $25,000. In todays
Dollars, that's $145,000. by comparison, the PW-6U is a screaming bargan.

Bill Daniels


Bill obviously lives in a different world of gliding than we do in my
club.
Our gliders have to live outside because we don't have a hanger.
Our 2-33's are busy all day most days while the '21 flies much less.
Almost 1/4 of our membership are juniors who could never afford to fly
if we had to support $100,000 2 seaters.
People love to ride in our 2-33's. One out of 4 rides turns into an
introductory training package. Doen't sound like we are scaring them
off.
The missing point is that it is not what you fly- it is that you fly.
There is room in our sport for many approaches without putting down
the other guy.
A little research would show the 2-33 was introduced in about 1972 and
likely is only second in our active fleet to 1-26's.
I think they have served us well.
UH

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 14, 2:55 pm, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message

...

Charles Yeates wrote:
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html

Gee, only about US $90K delivered. I'm not complaining, it's probably
a
bargain compared to a new K-21 or DG-505. I just find it amusing that
some wonder why a lot a clubs stick with their 2-33s...

Marc

2-33's are cheap. Shooting yourself in the foot is also cheap. 2-33's
are
cheap for a very good reason - they're terrible gliders.

2-33's have done untold damage to American soaring. Since 2-33's were
introduced as many as a hundred thousand potential glider pilots have
walked
away because they were introduced to the sport with a ride in a 2-33. In
the long run, THAT was expensive.

When 2-33's were introduced in the late 1960's they cost $25,000. In
todays
Dollars, that's $145,000. by comparison, the PW-6U is a screaming
bargan.

Bill Daniels


Bill obviously lives in a different world of gliding than we do in my
club.
Our gliders have to live outside because we don't have a hanger.
Our 2-33's are busy all day most days while the '21 flies much less.
Almost 1/4 of our membership are juniors who could never afford to fly
if we had to support $100,000 2 seaters.
People love to ride in our 2-33's. One out of 4 rides turns into an
introductory training package. Doen't sound like we are scaring them
off.
The missing point is that it is not what you fly- it is that you fly.
There is room in our sport for many approaches without putting down
the other guy.
A little research would show the 2-33 was introduced in about 1972 and
likely is only second in our active fleet to 1-26's.
I think they have served us well.
UH

I think it's you who's living in the past. I also don't think you are
supporting youth. I think you have conned a bunch of people into
suppoprting a tow plane. The 2-33 excells at that - it falls out of the sky
so it needs a lot of tows. BTW, can't you use your real name?

BTW, the first customer 2-33 I saw was in use in 1967 in Southern
California. My logbook shows I instructed in them in 1970 so your 1972 date
is bogus.

Bill Daniels

"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message
:


I think it's you who's living in the past. I also don't think you are
supporting youth. I think you have conned a bunch of people into
suppoprting a tow plane. The 2-33 excells at that - it falls out of the sky
so it needs a lot of tows. BTW, can't you use your real name?

snip

Bill Daniels




Oh, my, Mr. Daniels! Are you ever in for a walloping! Before this is
over, I bet you will wish you had just slapped your grandmother instead
of posting this!



I am going to just sit back and watch!!!!



Larry

01 "zero one"

Bill Daniels wrote:

BTW, the first customer 2-33 I saw was in use in 1967 in Southern
California. My logbook shows I instructed in them in 1970 so your 1972 date
is bogus.

A lot of us think UH is his real name! But if you don't know him real
well, he also answers to the more formal "Uncle Hank".

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On Aug 15, 5:25 pm, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...





On Aug 14, 2:55 pm, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message

...

Charles Yeates wrote:
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html

Gee, only about US $90K delivered. I'm not complaining, it's probably
a
bargain compared to a new K-21 or DG-505. I just find it amusing that
some wonder why a lot a clubs stick with their 2-33s...

Marc

2-33's are cheap. Shooting yourself in the foot is also cheap. 2-33's
are
cheap for a very good reason - they're terrible gliders.

2-33's have done untold damage to American soaring. Since 2-33's were
introduced as many as a hundred thousand potential glider pilots have
walked
away because they were introduced to the sport with a ride in a 2-33. In
the long run, THAT was expensive.

When 2-33's were introduced in the late 1960's they cost $25,000. In
todays
Dollars, that's $145,000. by comparison, the PW-6U is a screaming
bargan.

Bill Daniels

Bill obviously lives in a different world of gliding than we do in my
club.
Our gliders have to live outside because we don't have a hanger.
Our 2-33's are busy all day most days while the '21 flies much less.
Almost 1/4 of our membership are juniors who could never afford to fly
if we had to support $100,000 2 seaters.
People love to ride in our 2-33's. One out of 4 rides turns into an
introductory training package. Doen't sound like we are scaring them
off.
The missing point is that it is not what you fly- it is that you fly.
There is room in our sport for many approaches without putting down
the other guy.
A little research would show the 2-33 was introduced in about 1972 and
likely is only second in our active fleet to 1-26's.
I think they have served us well.
UH

I think it's you who's living in the past. I also don't think you are
supporting youth. I think you have conned a bunch of people into
suppoprting a tow plane. The 2-33 excells at that - it falls out of the sky
so it needs a lot of tows. BTW, can't you use your real name?

BTW, the first customer 2-33 I saw was in use in 1967 in Southern
California. My logbook shows I instructed in them in 1970 so your 1972 date
is bogus.

Bill Daniels- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
I stand properly corrected on introduction of 2-33.
Not hiding behind the name. UH has been Hank Nixon for more than 30
years and on this site fairly regularly.
As to supporting youth, over my career I and my wife have personally
provided nmore than 30 cost free scholarships to young people. I have
soloed about 25 on their 14th birthday and at least 4 times that many
in their mid teens.
Many of these are now aviation professionals.
I provide a glider to our club juniors at no cost to them except they
keep it clean.
Founding member of a club that has support of youth soaring as on of
its purposes in our bylaws.
Founded our local club out of my wife's and my pocket.
Tim Mara did pretty much the same thing at his club.
Others I don't know have done the same thing
Will wait and see if this sounds like the profile of a con man.
2-33's stay up at our site pretty much anytime the other ships stay
up. They just don't go cross country on less than 2 kt climbs.
Your zeal to promote ground launching is a good thing. There is a lot
of opportunity for this to help grow soaring where sites permit. Many
are smaller multiple use sites like public airports where it simply
won't work. It vey much depends on where you are.
True we could go buy some land in the lower Hudson valley of NY and
set up a winching operation.
Let's examine the tradeoffs:
Sell 2 tugs and raise about $75K
Buy enough land for winching gliderport- About $1.5MM-2MM
No more Friday afternoon tows where only the tow pilot has to show up
at lunch time.
Oh Yea- forgot. Sell the 2-33's for 24 K and go buy a couple 21's for
200K.
maybe this sounds like a winner to you but it makes less than no sense
to me.
As I said in my earlier comment, there are many ways to provide
soaring and they all should be used where they apply best.
The 15 year old girl that did her first 2 hr soaring flight last
weekend in my 1-26 off a $13 tow did not think she was getting taken
by a con man.
Your apology accepted in advance.
UH- You know who this is.

I know "UH" or Uncle Hank (Nixon) well enough to know that he is not only a
great sponsor of youth in soaring but a supporter of soaring in all aspects.
Hank does and has supported soaring like few others, he not only is an
instructor of many decades, but also has created and maintained his own
clubs operation, does glider and airplane repairs for himself, his club and
members as well.
What the sport needs more than anything else is more support from people
like UH, people willing to take on the responsibility of instructing,
encouraging and maintaining soaring clubs. It matters little if your
students fly 2-33's or any other glider to learn the sport, and if we don't
constantly tell them the 2-33 is a thing of the past they probably will
still show up and have fun learning.
In our club we have a K7 as our only club 2 seater for training...it does a
great job and does it cheap (We get $5.00 a flight for the K7 and K8) We
also have a Twin Grob on the field that is privately owned but can be used
by members as well...... the K7 is busy nearly every day we fly, while the
Grob typically sits in the back of the hangar... We bought a K8 a year ago
as our only other "Club glider"...students and new pilots love this
glider....it is to them their hot rod.....(again, don't tell them it's old
and a "thing of the past" we like to keep this as a secret...)
The philosophy is simple....provide training and club
gliders.....cheap....everyone has contributed to acquiring these
gliders....if someone wants a newer higher performance glider then "great
for them".....they can buy it with their money, not rob everyone else's
pockets for their personal wants...we have partnerships in the club so for
low cost members can buy into a Club Libelle or Pegasus and not expect
everyone else to be their "sugar daddy" if they can't afford a newer glider
themselves.
But back to the point, we're evolving further into the "me generation" if
you want to see soaring grow or sustain itself it takes more than fancy
gliders, it takes commitment and effort by people like UH that have, and
still do the grunt work. Become an instructor, take some time from personal
endeavors and give something back .. after all, it was somewhere in your and
my history a CFI did what was necessary to get us where we are today as
well.
Tim Mara
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com


A little research would show the 2-33 was introduced in about 1972 and
likely is only second in our active fleet to 1-26's.
I think they have served us well.
UH

I think it's you who's living in the past. I also don't think you are
supporting youth. I think you have conned a bunch of people into
suppoprting a tow plane. The 2-33 excells at that - it falls out of the
sky so it needs a lot of tows. BTW, can't you use your real name?

BTW, the first customer 2-33 I saw was in use in 1967 in Southern
California. My logbook shows I instructed in them in 1970 so your 1972
date is bogus.

Bill Daniels

Earlier, Hank Nixon wrote:

A little research would show the 2-33 was introduced in about 1972...

Heh, and a little more research would show that the 2-33 actually
dates to five years earlier, in 1967.

The original 2-33 was certificated on 10 Feb 1967, followed by the
2-33A on 7 March 1968 and the kit version 2-33AK on 19 April 1973.
When I worked at Sky Sailing in the early 1980s our 2-33 fleet had
several pre-A models in it, so there was definitely a substantial
number built prior to the Feb 1968 A-model introduction.

Here's the TCDS in .pdf from faa.gov:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/84b126f9575b545d85256721004ee3d9/$FILE/G2ea.PDF

(Would you like TLAs with that?

Personally, I like the 2-33 as a basic trainer because its simple and
rugged, with lots and lots of crash-protection iron. Bill has a point
that it is a distinctly unsexy aircraft. However, in my experience
rugged unsexy trainers outperform broken trainers on most days of the
week.

Thanks, Bob K.

On Aug 15, 11:57 pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
Personally, I like the 2-33 as a basic trainer because its simple and
rugged, with lots and lots of crash-protection iron. Bill has a point
that it is a distinctly unsexy aircraft. However, in my experience
rugged unsexy trainers outperform broken trainers on most days of the
week.

TBH, if you're breaking gliders, you're doing something wrong, and
fixing that should be a higher priority than what kind of gliders to
use :-).

I'd disagree that older gliders are tougher than GRP. The K21 is
immensely strong with a high G rating - much higher than the K13, for
example - and the DG1000 is stronger still (I don't know about the
PW6U though). Both the DG and the K21 have cockpits designed for crash
protection with areas designed to maintain their shape in a crash
(double-wall fuselage, strong canopy frames, roll-over bar) and other
parts that deform to absorb energy - in an older steel-framed glider,
you become the energy absorbing part. That's not good.

Modern GRP gliders tend to have bigger main wheels with good shock
mounting and also nose wheels, which absorb far more energy in a heavy
landing than a nose skid does. That can save your life and certainly
your ability to walk.

On the other hand, repairs to GRP generally cost more than fixing
wood, metal and fabric. But as I said at the top, if you're having to
fix broken gliders, you're doing something wrong.


Dan

Bob Kuykendall wrote:

Personally, I like the 2-33 as a basic trainer because its simple and
rugged, with lots and lots of crash-protection iron. Bill has a point
that it is a distinctly unsexy aircraft. However, in my experience
rugged unsexy trainers outperform broken trainers on most days of the
week.

When I started to take an interest in soaring,(around 23 y/o with a little
extra cash to spare) I went out to the gliderport, looked at all of the
lovely white glass ships and just marveled at them.
On the field also was a little yellow 1-26 and an old Blanik. But mostly
private/syndicate operated glass planes.
I was struck and had to get into one of those things.
I was afraid of needing to train in that clunky looking Blanik and that put
me off a bit.
No problem as all training was done in a couple of K-21s and a G-103. After
getting my license, I happened to be out on Long Island. Terribly bored on
vacation, I saw a tow going on and had to investigate.
I happened upon a little operation that had a 2-33 and a single seat glass
plane. One flight in the 2-33 was interesting to say the least.
Not a horror, but not anywhere near a Pegasus or even a K-21.

I just didn't want to do it again as I needed a few flights to be checked-out
for the solo-seater. Ugh..I decided to wait until I went back home.
Just for me, I was put off by the tube-n-rag slug. I suspect it may be true
for others of my ilk.

fwiw

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...aring/200708/1