Best cross country ship class

I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This is my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.

An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is nice, but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.

All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country flights?

Thanks!

It's like stick shift vs. automatic. No significant performance difference unless you are a pro. Most of the time your flap settings will inevitably be sub-optimal, but it is fun to fool yourself that you can go a wee bit faster.

On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 2:29:01 PM UTC-7, Seattle wrote:
I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This is my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.



An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is nice, but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.



All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country flights?



Thanks!

On 10/15/2013 3:29 PM, Seattle wrote:
I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This is
my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.

An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight
goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is nice,
but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.

All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or
non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country
flights?

Thanks!


Remember Bill Murray in "Meatballs"? (It doesn't matter. It just doesn't
matter. It REALLY doesn't matter!!!...)

"Pilot, know thyself!" applies, e.g. your comment, "...I doubt I want to deal
with 18 m of wings" suggests to me you're pondering these sorts of aspects. In
performance terms, there's no practical difference between flapped/unflapped
15-meter ships, for where you are on soaring's grand and endlessly long
learning curve (hence the Bill Murray reference)...and there won't be for
years, if you're "a typical human glider pilot." (You'll know if and when
you've reached "the detectable performance difference" stage.)

Find something within your budget and geographic convenience parameters, in
which you can fit, that has "a decent trailer" (your definition), have someone
more knowledgeable than you co-inspect it and its paperwork if you wish, buy
it, and then go and have even more fun than looking for it was!

Lettuce know what you eventually get!

Bob W.

Perhaps a better movie analogy would be "show me the money!". Your choice in gliders will be dictated by how much you want to spend on one. Once you have a dollar figure in mind, you can narrow down your options.
Craig

Craig,

I hear you. However, I can pick a budget of $30k and usually pick between a flapped and non-flapped (flapless?) for close to that budget. The same seems true for $50k and $70k.

Based on the replies, now I'm trying to understand why anyone bothers to make flapped sailplanes if there is no measurable difference in having them...

On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:53:11 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Based on the replies, now I'm trying to understand why anyone bothers to make flapped
sailplanes if there is no measurable difference in having them...

In my experience owning various flapped and unflapped gliders, with flaps, you have a better view over the nose and can make a slower approach than is typical of equivalent unflapped gliders. If you always land at airports, it won''t make much difference, but I made my share of mistakes while learning cross-country flying, flaps saved my bacon more than once. I also found it advantageous to crank in full thermal flap (and sometimes more) when climbing full of water in the kind of small tight cores we sometimes need to deal with out here on the west coast. And, if you're cruising at 90+ knots with water, negative flaps do make a noticeable difference.

On the other hand, the work load in a flapped glider is noticeably higher than without flaps, for that reason alone I'll probably do without in my next glider...

At 21:29 15 October 2013, Seattle wrote:
I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This is
my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.

An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight
goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is
nice,
but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.

All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or
non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country
flights?

Thanks!

Had both. Flapped gliders are more complicated than standard class gliders.
If you want to learn cross country flying then there is plenty to be
getting on with without the complication of flaps. You are also more likely
to make good field landings in an unpowered unflapped glider.

IMO best first gliders are either LS4/8 or Discus. These types have very
good performance, are strong, reasonably priced, and are great platforms
for developing your cross country skills. When you have done a few 500s you
can then trade up to a 15M or 18M class ship and push further and faster.

All the reply's you have had are really relevant, in the short term you
will find it easier to get the performance out of a non flapped glider,
however flaps are a bonus especially in strong conditions.

I fly a 27 and absolutely love it. It has no real vices and is easy to
handle and goes very well. You will get to grips with the flaps quite
quickly, but it will take a little longer to get the best out of it.

I am also lucky to have about 300 hours in an LS8 which is also a stunning
glider, however when I get into the LS8 now, I really miss having the
flaps.

Flaps.....push the handle forward = go faster......pull it back = slow
down.

Forgive me if this is a simplistic view, but they are really not difficult.


In summary, I guess what I am saying is that you will be happy for a very
long time in a 27. If you can afford a 27...go for it and have fun.

JC



At 21:29 15 October 2013, Seattle wrote:
I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This is
my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.

An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight
goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is
nice,
but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.

All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or
non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country
flights?

Thanks!

Oh....discuss with your CFI he / she will be best placed to advise you

At 08:16 16 October 2013, Justin Craig wrote:
All the reply's you have had are really relevant, in the short term you
will find it easier to get the performance out of a non flapped glider,
however flaps are a bonus especially in strong conditions.

I fly a 27 and absolutely love it. It has no real vices and is easy to
handle and goes very well. You will get to grips with the flaps quite
quickly, but it will take a little longer to get the best out of it.

I am also lucky to have about 300 hours in an LS8 which is also a
stunning
glider, however when I get into the LS8 now, I really miss having the
flaps.

Flaps.....push the handle forward = go faster......pull it back = slow
down.

Forgive me if this is a simplistic view, but they are really not
difficult.


In summary, I guess what I am saying is that you will be happy for a very
long time in a 27. If you can afford a 27...go for it and have fun.

JC



At 21:29 15 October 2013, Seattle wrote:
I'm in the market for a standard class or 15 meter flapped ship. This
is
my first ship, and I doubt I want to deal with 18 m of wings.

An example would be a Discus 2 vs ASW 27. Currently most of my flight
goals are simple: get as high up, and far out as possible. Speed is
nice,
but I'm doubtful I'll be comfortable in a competition for many seasons.

All other things being equal, which is the better type (flapped or
non-flapped) for staying up a long time and, eventually, cross country
flights?

Thanks!

On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:53:11 PM UTC-5, wrote:

Based on the replies, now I'm trying to understand why anyone bothers to make flapped sailplanes if there is no measurable difference in having them....

Well, when you top out that last thermal with a good final glide home, it sure is nice to push the flaps up and walk away from your buddy in his un-flapped glider...

Seriously, there is a small but significant difference in performance with flaps. But it depends a lot on where and how you fly - Eastern US, fun flying, not so much (except on the ridge?). Out West, racing or pushing hard, it can be significant. Same can be said about water - both are a bit addictive when sampled in the right conditions (120+ knot final glides, for example!)

For some, the slower landing speed of flapped gliders is appealing.

Me, I like having something useful to do with my left hand!

Kirk
66
LS6-b