How similar are the 1-34 and 2-32 to fly?

Just wondering how similar these two ships are to fly. Performance
numbers seem to be in the same neighborhood. I've been flying our
club's 1-34 and have gotten comfortable with it. What should I expect
if I were to step into the 2-32?

Thanks.

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 08:27:43 -0700, wrote:

Just wondering how similar these two ships are to fly. Performance
numbers seem to be in the same neighborhood. I've been flying our
club's 1-34 and have gotten comfortable with it. What should I expect
if I were to step into the 2-32?

Basically higher roll and yaw inertia. Rolling into and out of turns
takes a little longer, with higher aileron forces, and you do more
work on the rudder to keep the yaw string straight. It will gain
airspeed a shade faster with the nose down. All told, an easy
transition, much easier than your first flight in a single-place.

rj

On Jul 16, 11:27 am, wrote:
Just wondering how similar these two ships are to fly. Performance
numbers seem to be in the same neighborhood. I've been flying our
club's 1-34 and have gotten comfortable with it. What should I expect
if I were to step into the 2-32?

Thanks.

My quick response is "not very". The 2-32 is a truck; I compare it
to the Cessna 1-82. I personally like it, and I've even done some XC
in them. But, nobody is ever going to describe it as nimble or easy
to thermal (though it's certainly not bad). There are some quirks,
specifically the tendency to spin like a top with a very pronounced
wing drop if you get slow and a little uncordinated. Also, as with
anything that has that much mass, it tends to want to go in whatever
direction it's pointed. I'm thinking in terms of landing and rollout,
for example.

In my experience, not too many places seem to let low or moderate time
pilots fly 2-32s. They're very valuable for the ride business given
the ability to carry 2 pax plus a pilot. Most of them spend their
life flying "mile high" rides within 3 miles of the airport. Check
for solidified vomit deposits.

Erik

Your responses are interesting. The reason I posted this question is
because it was recommended (by a CFIG and former LS1f owner) that the
2-32 would be a good ship to use for transitioning to my new (to me)
LS1f. It doesn't sound like it will handle much like the LS1f. I've
spoken to many current and former LS1f drivers, and they all tell the
same story regarding it's handling. Light, responsive, excellent
control harmony, docile and a joy to fly. This doesn't sound like your
descriptions of how the 2-32 flies.

The things I'm most concerned about climbing into the LS1f is the CG
tow hook (take-offs) and energy management during the landing phase.
My own approach to transition was to get some time in a G103 or an
ASK21.

What do you guys think? 2-32, or something glass like the 103 or 21?


Thanks.

On Jul 16, 1:41?pm, wrote:
Your responses are interesting. The reason I posted this question is
because it was recommended (by a CFIG and former LS1f owner) that the
2-32 would be a good ship to use for transitioning to my new (to me)
LS1f. It doesn't sound like it will handle much like the LS1f. I've
spoken to many current and former LS1f drivers, and they all tell the
same story regarding it's handling. Light, responsive, excellent
control harmony, docile and a joy to fly. This doesn't sound like your
descriptions of how the 2-32 flies.

The things I'm most concerned about climbing into the LS1f is the CG
tow hook (take-offs) and energy management during the landing phase.
My own approach to transition was to get some time in a G103 or an
ASK21.

What do you guys think? 2-32, or something glass like the 103 or 21?

Thanks

Either the 103 or K-21 would be a much better choice. I certainly
agree with the other posts about flying the 2-32. A flying truck is a
perfect description. My preference to transition would be the
ASK-21...much better rudder feel than the Grob.

Gary Adams
GE8

wrote:
Either the 103 or K-21 would be a much better choice. I certainly
agree with the other posts about flying the 2-32. A flying truck is a
perfect description. My preference to transition would be the
ASK-21...much better rudder feel than the Grob.

I'd agree that the ASK021 may be better if the G103 is an early model
(Twin Astir or G103A Acro II). Those will teach you a lot about speed
control/energy management but their roll rate leaves a lot to be desired
and both are under-ruddered.

However, if you can find an Acro III (G103C - the one with a Discus-like
wing) that's the one to go for. I flew one for the first time a couple
of weeks ago and liked it a lot, especially flown solo. It retains the
speed management issues of the G103A but is much more responsive in roll
and has a more powerful rudder, which both make it nicer to fly and
closer in feel to single seat glass.


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

wrote in message
ups.com...
Just wondering how similar these two ships are to fly. Performance
numbers seem to be in the same neighborhood. I've been flying our
club's 1-34 and have gotten comfortable with it. What should I expect
if I were to step into the 2-32?

In certain respects, particularly energy management in the pattern, the
1-34 and the 2-32 are very similar. To me, flying a 2-32 is much like driving
around in a big 'ole 1969 Caddy. It can be a comfortable experience, you have
plenty of room in the cockpit, you have a cushy ride, you have that 1960's
ambience, but don't expect it to handle like a sports car because that ain't
what it is.

On final the 2-32 can be really fun, pull the spoilers all the way out and
you suddenly have about the same L/D as a real 1969 Caddy.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Your responses are interesting. The reason I posted this question is
because it was recommended (by a CFIG and former LS1f owner) that the
2-32 would be a good ship to use for transitioning to my new (to me)
LS1f. It doesn't sound like it will handle much like the LS1f. I've
spoken to many current and former LS1f drivers, and they all tell the
same story regarding it's handling. Light, responsive, excellent
control harmony, docile and a joy to fly. This doesn't sound like your
descriptions of how the 2-32 flies.

The things I'm most concerned about climbing into the LS1f is the CG
tow hook (take-offs) and energy management during the landing phase.
My own approach to transition was to get some time in a G103 or an
ASK21.

What do you guys think? 2-32, or something glass like the 103 or 21?


Thanks.


Definitely not a 2-32!

Our club has 2 ASK21's and we had an AcroII that we sold. We have a G102
Club III and a LS4(with CG hook)

Our pilots who are competent in the K21 have no problem transitioning to the
102 or the LS4, with a proper briefing. Be sure you are briefed by a CFIG
who flies a CG hook equipped glider on aerotow. The K21s have a CG hook but
it is possible to burn the rope in two by the nosewheel--we tried it a few
times and gave up!

The briefing needs to emphasize two points, and a dual flight is helpful to
practice these.

On takeoff, the glider needs to be kept on a short leash!---In other words,
scrupulous attention to correct tow position, laterally and vertically. Trim
properly and let the glider lift off on its own. The more sensitive single
place will balloon much more easily than the K21.
There is much less tendency for auto correction of malposition than with a
nose hook, but the pilot can correct position easily.

On landing---nail the glidepath solidly with small timely corrections on the
spoilers, and keep the airspeed nailed with the elevator. Then, on roundout,
transition gently to the landing attitude (about same as Vminsink) and keep
it there--(this minimizes airspeed excursion and ballooning). The stick is
much more sensitive on landing, so its use must be minimized. Adjust the
touchdown point with the spoiler.


That's about it----have fun!

Hartley Falbaum
CFIG USA

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

Your responses are interesting. The reason I posted this question is
because it was recommended (by a CFIG and former LS1f owner) that the
2-32 would be a good ship to use for transitioning to my new (to me)
LS1f. It doesn't sound like it will handle much like the LS1f. I've
spoken to many current and former LS1f drivers, and they all tell the
same story regarding it's handling. Light, responsive, excellent
control harmony, docile and a joy to fly. This doesn't sound like your
descriptions of how the 2-32 flies.

The things I'm most concerned about climbing into the LS1f is the CG
tow hook (take-offs) and energy management during the landing phase.
My own approach to transition was to get some time in a G103 or an
ASK21.

What do you guys think? 2-32, or something glass like the 103 or 21?


Thanks.

OK, that puts a different perspective on it. As I said, the transition
to a 2-32 is easy -- too easy if glass is your destination. Better to
go to a Grob 103.

I didn't know there were any 2-32's left in rental/club service...last
I heard, a chain of tourist ride operations had bought up the whole
2-32 fleet. Lots of clubs, including mine, skinned them pretty good
on the price...;-)

rj

"Ralph Jones" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

Your responses are interesting. The reason I posted this question is
because it was recommended (by a CFIG and former LS1f owner) that the
2-32 would be a good ship to use for transitioning to my new (to me)
LS1f. It doesn't sound like it will handle much like the LS1f. I've
spoken to many current and former LS1f drivers, and they all tell the
same story regarding it's handling. Light, responsive, excellent
control harmony, docile and a joy to fly. This doesn't sound like your
descriptions of how the 2-32 flies.

The things I'm most concerned about climbing into the LS1f is the CG
tow hook (take-offs) and energy management during the landing phase.
My own approach to transition was to get some time in a G103 or an
ASK21.

What do you guys think? 2-32, or something glass like the 103 or 21?


Thanks.

OK, that puts a different perspective on it. As I said, the transition
to a 2-32 is easy -- too easy if glass is your destination. Better to
go to a Grob 103.

I didn't know there were any 2-32's left in rental/club service...last
I heard, a chain of tourist ride operations had bought up the whole
2-32 fleet. Lots of clubs, including mine, skinned them pretty good
on the price...;-)

rj

None of the Schweizers are a good transition trainers to an LS-3. In fact,
they may introduce habits that would be counterproductive. If you plan to
fly glass, avoid them.

The LS-3 is a docile, pleasant handling glider with plenty of performance.
If you can fly any of the glass 2-seaters comfortably, you will not likely
have any problems.

The CG hook and flaps are the only complications. If you have been trained
from the beginning on aero-tow, you may not notice the CG hook but be
careful to stay in position behind the tug - if you get seriously out of
position, you WILL notice the CG hook. The flaps just make the glider more
pleasant to fly. Get a good briefing from someone who had flown the glider
and go have fun.

Bill Daniels