Suggestions for a specification for the ideal training glider

Excellent points, may I suggest a slight change...

must be capable of spinning, but not so spin prone that it's dangerous.

Obviously, you want a glider that will spin for spin training. If it
spins with little warnin, or doesn't like to recover, then it's dangerous.

NigelPocock wrote:
There has been a lot of discussion in our club recently about what makes the
ideal training glider
We have been using ASK13s for years but the design is now 30 years old and we
would like to think that using modern materials something can be designed to
take us forward into the 21st century.

A number of points have already come up-
* must be capable of spinning
* Robust for club use
* Easily repaired
* Safety cell
* Good visibility
* light, good handling
* Spacious cockpit
* Wide pilot weight limits (100 to 300 pounds!)
* capable of sensible cross country flights
and finally must look good. We want to attract potential members and customers

None of the current crop of two seaters fulfill all of these requirements. Can
anyone add to this list or suggest anything suitable?
Nigel

There was a side-by-side two seat fibreglass glider designed
in Australia by Harry Schneider during the 1980s (I think).
One prototype was built and is still flying. Unfortunately
no finance was forthcoming to put this glider into
production. Whether it met all of your requirements, I
don't know, but all the comments I have heard from people
who have flown it have been very positive. I presume the
drawings and maybe the moulds would still exist somewhere.
Cheers, John G.

"NigelPocock" wrote in message
...
| There has been a lot of discussion in our club recently
about what makes the
| ideal training glider
| We have been using ASK13s for years but the design is now
30 years old and we
| would like to think that using modern materials something
can be designed to
| take us forward into the 21st century.
|
| A number of points have already come up-
| * must be capable of spinning
| * Robust for club use
| * Easily repaired
| * Safety cell
| * Good visibility
| * light, good handling
| * Spacious cockpit
| * Wide pilot weight limits (100 to 300 pounds!)
| * capable of sensible cross country flights
| and finally must look good. We want to attract potential
members and customers
|
| None of the current crop of two seaters fulfill all of
these requirements. Can
| anyone add to this list or suggest anything suitable?
| Nigel

What about cost? You seem to have forgotten this.

Cost to buy, cost to run, cost to repair (time and money), cost to overhaul
when this is eventually necessary?
Or is Lasham so rich this does not matter to you?

What about the standing of the manufacturer and the agent?

When Lasham tried the demonstration K21 for the first time (I personally
arranged the demonstration) Derek Piggott (then the Chief Flying Instructor)
rejected it because it was not satisfactory for teaching the stall/spin,
whereas the K13 was. This is still true, and this was also the opinion of
Graham McAndrew (C.F.I. until less than a year ago). Tim Macfadyen (CFI
at Nympsfield) agrees (and so do I).

Why should the age of the design be a problem? Lasham has just spent a lot
of money on the complete overhaul of two tugs, DR400-180R G-BJUD and
PA18-180 G-ATRG which are older than any of the K13s, and why not? They
look magnificent, and they do the job as well as they ever did.

Surrey Club (who own the single seaters for club use at Lasham) has been
buying ASW19s, how old are they? What matters is condition and history,
and it is a very sensible choice for S. & H.

In my view the best two-seaters for Lasham a

For air experience and first flights: K21.

For main training to "off checks" stage and through to Bronze: K13.

For early post-solo training for soaring, cross-country and conversion to
glass single seaters (and aerobatics): K21.

For advanced training for cross-country and competition: Duo-Discus.

For field landing and navigation training: Motor-Falke.

Funny old thing, this is much what Lasham has today. Money burning a hole
in your pockets, or just boredom because the season is over?

As someone pointed out on Lasham's Yahoo chat board, you do not use BMW 5
series to teach people to drive, even if it is what they want to have when
they have learnt.

There is no single machine which will cover the full spectrum at present
covered by K13, K21 and Duo-Discus, and I doubt if there can be.
Lasham is lucky to be big enough to have the correct machine for each job
without having to compromise. Your next purchase should be a second Duo, I
think there are some for sale from people who have one but are buying a
turbo.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"NigelPocock" wrote in message
...

There has been a lot of discussion in our club recently about what makes
the ideal training glider.

We have been using ASK13s for years but the design is now 30 years old and
we would like to think that using modern materials something can be
designed to take us forward into the 21st century.

A number of points have already come up-
* must be capable of spinning
* Robust for club use
* Easily repaired
* Safety cell
* Good visibility
* light, good handling
* Spacious cockpit
* Wide pilot weight limits (100 to 300 pounds!)
* capable of sensible cross country flights
and finally must look good. We want to attract potential members and
customers

None of the current crop of two seaters fulfil all of these requirements.
Can anyone add to this list or suggest anything suitable?

Nigel.

Derek Piggott has flown this glider (the Platypus) and has always raved
about it. A great pity it did not reach production.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"John Giddy" wrote in message
...

There was a side-by-side two seat fibreglass glider designed
in Australia by Harry Schneider during the 1980s (I think).
One prototype was built and is still flying. Unfortunately
no finance was forthcoming to put this glider into
production. Whether it met all of your requirements, I
don't know, but all the comments I have heard from people
who have flown it have been very positive. I presume the
drawings and maybe the moulds would still exist somewhere.

Cheers, John G.

The 2-33 meets a lot of these requirements. The ones
it isn't good at a poor X-country, the canopy needs
attention to confirm it is locked, and the new pilot
cannot just immediately transition to a ballasted/flapped
ship. The Grob 103 and the Blanik can give some additional
value to training, but as has been pointed out, different
gliders teach different things. I'm a big fan of the
2-33 since I have seen power pilots transition to it
in four flights to solo. It doesn't do much for X-C,
but a 2-33 is cheap, weathers well outdoors, has a
big ol cockpit, crashes benignly, and is doggy in pitch
and roll for most CG loadings.

Mark Boyd

NigelPocock wrote:

There has been a lot of discussion in our club recently about what makes the
ideal training glider

Reading through your list, I would say that you're looking for a DG
1000. It fulfills all points except the 300 lb requirement, but I guess
you could arrange even this with the manufactorer, as I doubt the 110 kg
certification limit is the structural limit. It isn't cheap, though.

* must be capable of spinning

I fear this will start a whole discussion on its own, as always, when
this point comes up. Personally, I think a primary two-seater trainer
not only should be capable of spinning, but it should be *prone* to do
so, so the student learns early (and with an instructor in the back
seat!) how to avoid and handle spins. Much better than getting checked
out in an ASK 21 and then being surprized by the first spin in a single
seater, as I did. But there are exactly two opinions on this.

Stefan

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:46:22 +0200, Stefan "stefan"@mus. INVALID .ch
wrote:

I fear this will start a whole discussion on its own, as always, when
this point comes up. Personally, I think a primary two-seater trainer
not only should be capable of spinning, but it should be *prone* to do
so, so the student learns early (and with an instructor in the back
seat!) how to avoid and handle spins. Much better than getting checked
out in an ASK 21 and then being surprized by the first spin in a single
seater, as I did. But there are exactly two opinions on this.

You mean that if the student pilot makes a mistake on one of his early
solo flights, he SHOULD spin in?

Pretty hard way to teach him not to stall that glider at low altitude.
isn't it?



Bye
Andreas

M B wrote in message ...
The 2-33 meets a lot of these requirements. The ones
it isn't good at a poor X-country, the canopy needs
attention to confirm it is locked, and the new pilot
cannot just immediately transition to a ballasted/flapped
ship. The Grob 103 and the Blanik can give some additional
value to training, but as has been pointed out, different
gliders teach different things. I'm a big fan of the
2-33 since I have seen power pilots transition to it
in four flights to solo. It doesn't do much for X-C,
but a 2-33 is cheap, weathers well outdoors, has a
big ol cockpit, crashes benignly, and is doggy in pitch
and roll for most CG loadings.

Mark Boyd

Let's see...

* must be capable of spinning : Yes
* Robust for club use : Yes
* Easily repaired : Yes
* Safety cell : Yes
* Good visibility : No
* light, good handling : No
* Spacious cockpit : No
* Wide pilot weight limits (100 to 300 pounds!) : Yes
* capable of sensible cross country flights : No
and finally must look good. : No No No!

So the 33 only scores 5/10. Not too impressive. Back to the aluminum
recycling factory.

NigelPocock wrote:
*There has been a lot of discussion in our club recently about what
makes the
ideal training glider
We have been using ASK13s for years but the design is now 30 years
old and we
would like to think that using modern materials something can be
designed to
take us forward into the 21st century.

A number of points have already come up-
* must be capable of spinning
* Robust for club use
* Easily repaired
* Safety cell
* Good visibility
* light, good handling
* Spacious cockpit
* Wide pilot weight limits (100 to 300 pounds!)
* capable of sensible cross country flights
and finally must look good. We want to attract potential members and
customers

None of the current crop of two seaters fulfill all of these
requirements. Can
anyone add to this list or suggest anything suitable?
Nigel *

I agree with Dave Martin. I really dont think you can go past a PUCHACZ
as the logical successor to the Blanik and the K13.
Of Course you can go up market and obtain fancier machines, but in some
cases their "spinability" has to enhanced by tail weights etc
a bothersome business. Some have to have "Whiskers" fitted, also
bothersome. I have many hundreds of instructing hours in Puchii, and
find them reliable, easily maintained, robust and eminently spinnable.

From an instructional viewpoint, (re spinning), most other training A/C
will exit the spin when back pressure is released or centralised.
The Puchacz will have none of this and will continue to spin until the
correct technique is used. A regards "not wanting an aircraft that is
too spinnable" I do not agree. For instance a person trained in a non
spinnable aircraft would be in real bother if he entered a spin in say
an Is 29 and just let go the controls. The GFA in Australia emphasises
spin training and recovery and Pilots are subjected to regular spin
recovery checks.
As regards the aircraft itself, FRP, two part paint
It is a delight to ground handle, assumes a nose down attitude on to
the nose wheel at rest, but one hand placed under the nose is
sufficient to raise it on to the main wheel for manouevring.
The airbrakes are massive, landing distances short, disc wheel brake
effective for short fielders, thermals very effectively, two up, at 45
knots, climbs well, one piece canopy, good visibility, instructor has
good visibility forward, front and rear instruments, dual canopy
latches (overcentre) effective flying trim tabs, stick pressures
light,but rudder (massive) tends to stiffness, full airbrake extension
in front cockpit awkward (elbow contacts shroud over instructors
feet)but brakes are so powerful that seldom are fully deployed. Bungee
undercarriage, with replaceable bungees. Low hours solo pilot can
easily convert to FRP single seater. (e.g.) Jantar Junior) Aerobatic,
Spins,1/2 flick rolls, loops, inverted,etc.
A very useful aeroplane and relatively cheap. Our club has two, one
about 10 years old and no significant problems.
No-- I am not an agent for the aircraft
Cheers
Henell


--
henell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly -

Chris Reed said,Re Puchacz
Bad points a

1. Our wheel brake is appalling, but apparently Henell's machine is
better -
worth checking out.

2. Some parts (especially wheels and tyres) are poor quality, and need
regular attention

Re 1. Wheel brake is contracting, twin, full circle discs,(mechanical)
operated by an adjustable, helical, multi start thread. It is crucial
to keep the grease on the multi start thread soft and pliable.If not
the brake locks up when the pull cable is released.Also when applying
the brake, not to hold it hard on, but to apply it gently and in "jabs"
as this form of disc heats up quickly. If the brake does lock up, move
backwards and it generally unlocks. If this occurs it generally means
that the brake system needs servicing.
Compared to your lush green soft landing runs, ours are generally
(during the summer) bare grass roots and dust and an extremely hard
surface, which ensures an extended ground run. In a tight outlanding
this could be disadvantageous, hence the need for good brakes
Re 2. It has been found with the nose wheel, that it needs pressure
checks every Daily Inspection. It can be quite flat, and not noticed as
the walls are so hard. If operated in this condition running under load
the webbing threads inside the tyre separate from the matrix and abrade
the tube so that both are U/S. Simply check the pressure each morning.
Since we commenced doing this we have had no further problems.

As regards being a "Polish Death Machine" it is possible that people
were lulled into a false sense of security with their spin recovery
techniques, after flying docile Blaniks and K13's etc. where usually
one only had to "let go" and the thing recovered. We have had them for
over 10 years and treated right they show no viciousness.
Anyhow that is my two bobs worth.

Cheers
Henell


--
henell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly -