Ventus 2CT or 2CM or DG 808b or ASH26E or LS8t

I intend to buy a state of the art new glider and I was looking at this
choice.

My main priority is to enjoy the flying and so I want good performance, nice
handling and safe behaviour (no incipient spin tendency to keep me on edge).
I am not sure if I will loose a lot of climb performance if I go for a self
launcher as they are clearly heavier than a turbo, is the convenience worth
loosing the advantage of the low min weight? I Am flying in the UK mainly
and so small feeble thermals are the rule.

Can those who have flown these aircraft please let me have their comments
and help with my decision.

Thanks.

John is going to fly in the UK where altitude is not
an issue and a turbo can be flown by any glider pilot,
unlike an SLMG, so that was the relevant market for
his posting. Turbos sell very well in Europe.

BTW I didn't notice any problem with our Duo turbo
engine in test runs at 6,500 ASL in the Pyrenees with
airfield (2300 feet elevation) ground temperature in
the mid 30s C. That can't be very different from the
likely altitude and temperature of saves in your area.
Its climb rate is under 2 knots at STP and it drops
off as you get hotter and higher but a pilot would
have to fly totally irresponsibly to get into a situation
he could not get out of with the turbo. It won't stop
someone from flying into a mountain side or crashing
at low level in a microburst but not much else will
either.

The true climb rate advantage of a motor glider is
the rate of climb (poor in the Duo but OK in the single
seat turbos) plus the sink rate of the equivalent non-powered
glider at around best LD. Our previous Discus BT had
a still air climb rate of about 290 fpm so it was gaining
about 420fpm compared with how things would have been
without the engine. A 10 minute burn would make me
relatively 4,200 feet better off than without the engine
- whatever the sink rate of the air. Less in the Western
USA no doubt but it is surprising how little engine
time is needed to utterly transform a situation.

Many single seat Schempp-Hirth turbos have the little
exhaust outlet restrictors removed and that makes a
big difference to the performance - not that I would
put that in writing. Oops.

John Galloway


At 20:48 06 October 2003, Marc Ramsey wrote:

'John Galloway' wrote...
Another major consideration is that when you come
to
sell your glider the market for a SLMG is very much
smaller than that for a turbo.

This depends on what market you're talking about.
In the western US, for
instance, there is essentially no market for turbos
(given the altitudes and the
common sink rates, they just don't work), but there
is a very strong market for
SLMGs...

Marc

I would not know how to address the "turbo" sustainer vs Self Launch
decision making process. For me it was a no brainer... here in Hawaii
I have no option it is either self launch or shuffleboard.

I had many of the same questions that you had... I joined the users
group for the design and followed the comments of the users. Also I
spoke with High Country Soaring which has become known as specializing
in repairing motor gliders. The technician mentioned that for a number
of reasons that stuff falls off of the 2 stroke engines mostly from
vibration issues. All of the designs work well from what I can see,
some designs will need constant maintenance or more tweeking to keep
flying than others. It appears from what I was able to research that
the ASH 26 E with the wankle engine is quite a bit less trouble.
Probably part in due to less vibration, it does have some heat issues
in some conditions but overall seems to be best of breed from what
research I have done.

I was told that when you see the quality of an ASH 26 E you will
"Know"... and yes I saw the design and for me it was apparent. I
ordered one.

By the way... when I was at Minden recently I saw a lot of self
launchers take off while I was waiting for a tow plane. I think that
they may know something.

All the ships look beautiful from the air... the closer you get to the
-26 E the prettier it gets in fact I think it is the second most
beautiful sight I have seen "my better half being the first".

Back to the sustainer issue... in marginal conditions you do have the
option of taking out the engine. I hear it takes about an hour. But in
real life I have a feeling that in light air the thermalling speed
difference of 47 kts to 51 for the higher wing loading with the engine
in place that the extra weight would not be the end of the world. I
also think that 10 minutes of power to get back up... for every down
cycle would be worth the price of admission.

Steve



"John Mason" wrote in message ...
I intend to buy a state of the art new glider and I was looking at this
choice.

My main priority is to enjoy the flying and so I want good performance, nice
handling and safe behaviour (no incipient spin tendency to keep me on edge).
I am not sure if I will loose a lot of climb performance if I go for a self
launcher as they are clearly heavier than a turbo, is the convenience worth
loosing the advantage of the low min weight? I Am flying in the UK mainly
and so small feeble thermals are the rule.

Can those who have flown these aircraft please let me have their comments
and help with my decision.

Thanks.

"John Mason" wrote in message ...
I intend to buy a state of the art new glider and I was looking at this
choice.

My main priority is to enjoy the flying and so I want good performance, nice
handling and safe behaviour (no incipient spin tendency to keep me on edge).
I am not sure if I will loose a lot of climb performance if I go for a self
launcher as they are clearly heavier than a turbo, is the convenience worth
loosing the advantage of the low min weight? I Am flying in the UK mainly
and so small feeble thermals are the rule.

Can those who have flown these aircraft please let me have their comments
and help with my decision.

Thanks.

John,

Turbo in my opinion is good for most requirements. It will get you
home if you miss the last thermal in the evening. It will get you
across a blue patch or will get you to those Cu you can only see in
the distance. No use in strong winds or downwinds you may have in
mountains or in wave, getting you through rainshowers but neither will
the SLMG. With the comps rules now changed in the UK you are no longer
penalised when having a Turbo. Increase in Wingloading is negligible
in a 18m ship and if the thermals are so weak that you are not able to
climb you still can pop out the Turbo. If you are looking at buying a
new glider my practically new ship is for sale
http://www.tcw.ie/for_sale.htm

Regards
Bruno

John,

The Discus 2CT isn't intended to improve on the Ventus
- they are different model lines, one derived from
the 15m racing class Ventus, and the other from the
standard class Discus 2. The Discus 2 is not 'club
class' but winner of the first three places in the
recent world championship standard class. You already
have a non-flapped standard class derived 18m glider
in your list (LS8t) so the D 2CT would be directly
comparable to that.

All of these 18 meter gliders have such good performance
and handling that unless you are at world championship
standard the differences in performance are unimportant
and the glider that feels best and most comfortable
to you and does the things you want it to do would
be best.

It sounds like the Antares electric self launcher might
interest a man of your means if you want the absolute
leading edge of technology:

http://www.lange-flugzeugbau.de/english/english.html

John Galloway


At 12:48 07 October 2003, John Mason wrote:

'John Galloway' wrote in
message ...
? add Discus 2CT (18m turbo) to your list. Of course
it hasn't flown yet but will do fairly soon and deliveries
start next year.

The D2CT basically seems to be a single seat Duo in
that it shares very similar wing design in wing section,
swept plan form, and polydihedral and there seems
to
be every reason for it to share the Duo's exceptionally
sensitive and benign handling characteristics. It
also seems to have the new Maughmer winglets that
seem
pretty successful on the Ventus 2CX. These are my
own thoughts and not based on any comments from the
factory.

Thanks for this information.

The question does follow though: What improvement
the Discus 18m can give
on the flapped Ventus and why if it is a better aircraft
than the Ventus
that the factory consider it worth developing a new
model rather than
improve the Ventus?

I suspect it is the case that the new Discus is really
made to be a 15m club
class option and they thought they could just stick
on some wing extensions
for those people who don't like flaps or for those
15m pilots to have the
option of 18m as a low cost extra. If this is the
case it doesn't sound
like a solution designed for the job I need, which
is a no compromise top
performing ship.


IMHO the benefits of a self launcher over a turbo
are
far outweighed by the extra cost, weight and maintenance
demands of the SLMG. In the UK just take a winch
launch and pop the engine out if you need more height
instead of wasting money on an aerotow.

For me weight is the only issue. I can afford the
extra costs and can pay
the extra for maintenance, I am not too bothered by
the resale issue. I
have a current PPL and so the SLMG PPL is no big deal.
I do like the idea
of being independent and not needing a club launch
with its inevitable
waiting around. For me this is the main trade off.
Does the weight
disadvantage of a self launcher compared to a turbo
offset the advantages of
time saving, independence and climb rate that you have
with the self
launcher?

So really I have a two part question.

1. Turbo vs Self Launcher?

2. Which ship?

Cheers,
John