are wooden gliders worthwhile building ?

If you do that wth a Ka6, you won't walk away. In terms of shock absorption,
a wooden glider is the worst you can get.

Bert
"Ian" wrote in message
...
On 4 Feb, 15:47, BB wrote:

... but I would never send
my son up in something that turns to splinters if he has a rough
landing.

I have never seen or heard of a wooden glider turn to splinters as a
result of a "rough landing". Can you give examples? I have seen the
result of a Pirat flying into a corrugated iron fence at about 40kt:
huge dent in the fence, broken canopy and squashed glider nose. The
pilot walked away and the glider flew again.

Ian

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 07:44:02 -0800 (PST), Adam
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:16*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:
serious question.
in this day and age where the slippery glass reigns supreme are there
any wooden gliders actually worth building ?

if your son was on the way to a glider instructors rating, as mine is,
is there a wooden glider design that would be worth building ?
something with reasonable performance that would be a sheer pleasure
to fly.

something a dad could spring on the kid.

Stealth Pilot

This fellow thinks so!
http://members.aol.com/woodglider/mattart1.htm

http://web.media.mit.edu/~tim/pix/oshkosh03_3/0896.jpg

/Adam

appreciate the photo!
the woodstock was/is a serious contender.
Stealth Pilot

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:51 -0800 (PST), wrote:



http://web.media.mit.edu/~tim/pix/oshkosh03_3/0896.jpg

/Adam


Well thats cool. I never saw that photo and that's my glider! Cam
Martin brought me to Oshkosh to display and talk about the Woodstock.

To the original poster, the Woodstock is a very fine ship. Of all the
wood homebuilts it might not be the best performing in terms of L/D
but it is very well designed. I think that a lot that was learned
from the Cherokees, BGs, Terns, Dusters, that came before was applied
to the Woodstock. When Bob Wander wanted to build a wood glider he
chose the Woodstock after a lengthy study. The credientials of the
designers are impeccable. The performance may not be impressive on
paper but in the sky it never ceases to amaze me and anyone else
flying nearby. L/D isn't everything. Yes, it's very lightweight but
it has a fast wing and is very rugged. It will do much more than
simply float around the airport.



Matt Michael
Ames Iowa

matt
do you still fly your woodstock?
how robust has it proven to be over the years?
have you had anything that has broken or needed repairing?

I'm building a Druine Turbulent at present but it could very well be
the next aircraft I build.

yours is a georgeous aeroplane. far better I think than a classic
wooden boat.
Stealth Pilot

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 07:47:26 -0800 (PST), BB
wrote:

On Feb 4, 6:16*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:
serious question.
in this day and age where the slippery glass reigns supreme are there
any wooden gliders actually worth building ?

if your son was on the way to a glider instructors rating, as mine is,
is there a wooden glider design that would be worth building ?
something with reasonable performance that would be a sheer pleasure
to fly.

something a dad could spring on the kid.

Stealth Pilot

In one word, no. If he wants to fly, and advance in the world of
soaring, get him a good club-class eligible fiberglass glider with a
well-engineered safety cockpit. I love the grandeur and history of
wooden gliders, I admire the courage and achievements of their pilots,
and I admire the skills of their homebuilders, but I would never send
my son up in something that turns to splinters if he has a rough
landing. Would you home-build him a wooden car?


no, he can and probably will buy the fibreglass ship himself.
I wanted something that was beautiful to look at and fun to fly. the
amazing thing in aviation is that if you can lay hands on the plans
you can build an exact replica of a classic design in modern
materials, and have it perform just like the original.

he is building a Corby CJ1 Starlet which is all wood and I'm
supporting him through the build.

build him a car - no
build him an aeroplane - yes.

Stealth Pilot

On Feb 5, 8:09*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:39:51 -0800 (PST), wrote:

http://web.media.mit.edu/~tim/pix/oshkosh03_3/0896.jpg

/Adam

Well thats cool. *I never saw that photo and that's my glider! *Cam
Martin brought me to Oshkosh to display and talk about the Woodstock.

To the original poster, the Woodstock is a very fine ship. *Of all the
wood homebuilts it might not be the best performing in terms of L/D
but it is very well designed. *I think that a lot that was learned
from the Cherokees, BGs, Terns, Dusters, that came before was applied
to the Woodstock. When Bob Wander wanted to build a wood glider he
chose the Woodstock after a lengthy study. *The credientials of the
designers are impeccable. The performance may not be impressive on
paper but in the sky it never ceases to amaze me and anyone else
flying nearby. *L/D isn't everything. *Yes, it's very lightweight but
it has a fast wing and is very rugged. *It will do much more than
simply float around the airport.

Matt Michael
Ames Iowa

matt
do you still fly your woodstock?
how robust has it proven to be over the years?
have you had anything that has broken or needed repairing?

I'm building a Druine Turbulent at present but it could very well be
the next aircraft I build.

yours is a georgeous aeroplane. far better I think than a classic
wooden boat.
Stealth Pilot- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, it has a boatlike effect. I call it my sky kayak. I have not
flown it very often the last few years due to other commitments
instructing and power flying. 2 flights of note:

Ran wingtip to wingtip with a Folka 4 under a cloud street for about
25 miles late in the day. I went an extra few miles off the end of
the street and ended up scratching like mad while trying to limp
home. Just as I was at pattern altitude for a private strip I caught
the gust front from a minor rain storm that was approaching and
climbed continually for 15 miles arriving home at 9000agl. Spiriled
down, rolled out, and shoved it into the nearest hanger seconds before
the downpour. 10 minutes later there was a big double rainbow over the
hanger. At dinner I kept putting my fork down and saying, "I can't
believe I made it back!"

Last fall the Cherokee Kid (Tony) and I left on a marginal afternoon
headed down wind. He pushed a little too hard and landed out some 40
miles from home. I was orbiting above having managed to hang on to a
little bubble. My Folka pal was in his C140 and offered via radio to
come get me if I landed at the nearby airport. Tony on the other hand
was telling me I should land in the field next to him so we could hang
out and de-rig together. For about 20 minutes I couldn't make up my
mind. There was this nice big paved municipal airport 5 miles
downwind and I decided to land in a farm field! It was a great time
with 2 classic wood gliders, local farmers, sunset. Just the best
kind of time. See a photo he

http://picasaweb.google.com/cherokee...63186748116946

Nothing broken. It looks delicate but it's not. Comparing the
fuselage bulkeads to a K6 you will see that the Woodstock is
considerably more substantial. Jim Maupin and Irv Culver were really
sharp guys and they had already designed a lot of stuff prior. The
light weight makes rigging a dream. Even with the old pins and
safeties to fumble with for control hook-ups it still only takes 15
minutes to rig and you only need another person for 5 minutes. The
horizontal tail stays put which makes for a goofy trailer with
outrigger boxes for the tail. Also, the max weight is under 200 lbs
which eliminates a lot of pilots though the cockpit is not
outrageously tiny. The only tweeking I've done is re-rigging the
ailerons to compensate for a slight rolling tendancy. No big deal.
I'm hoping to complete a sport canopy for it which will make it look
totally vintage plus be fun to fly with of course. You are welcome to
come see mine anytime.

Matt

The next time someone sneers at a wooden sailplane, remind them that it is made of a unidirectional reinforced laminated composite material consisting of micro-tubular fibres embedded in a long chain polymer matrix and having a near infinite fatigue life.

still pretty hard to beat a K6 or any number of these older wood ships as a starter ...... thouse of you who have not ever had an opprtunity to fly some of these classics are missing a great deal of what we do and were we came from..
tim

Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com

"Mike the Strike" wrote in message ...
If you bought him a car kit when he was learning to drive, I suppose a
glider kit might make some sense.

If he just wants to fly, help him buy a nice older glass ship - it'll
be cheaper and quicker, believe me.

Mike

yes.......and many of them (most today) not from these old wood ships....!
tim


Infact looking at the NTSB this type has a lot of fatal's from
structural failure!!

Sobering thought when looking at old wooden / homebuilt gliders.

On 5 Feb, 14:15, Stealth Pilot
wrote:

no, he can and probably will buy the fibreglass ship himself.
I wanted something that was beautiful to look at and fun to fly. the
amazing thing in aviation is that if you can lay hands on the plans
you can build an exact replica of a classic design in modern
materials, and have it perform just like the original.

Please, please, please built him a Minimoa!

Ian

On Feb 5, 1:08*pm, "Tim Mara" wrote:
The next time someone sneers at a wooden sailplane, remind them that it is made of a unidirectional reinforced laminated composite material consisting of micro-tubular fibres embedded in a long chain polymer matrix and having a near infinite fatigue life.

And if you built a new one with modern adhesives the near infinite
fatigue life would be of some value. Many of the older wooden gliders
were retired because the glue holding those wonder composite
components together gave up the ghost.

One of my last woodie flights was in a T21 on aero tow. Despite the
tug flying as slow as possible I sometimes had somewhat alarming
aileron control reversal. Turns out the wings flexed enough that the
ailerons were acting as aileron tabs and twisting the whole wing. I
don't know what happened to it, but I never wanted to fly it again.

On the other hand my only flight in an SHK was a delight.

Andy

On 6 Feb, 00:13, Andy wrote:

And if you built a new one with modern adhesives the near infinite
fatigue life would be of some value. Many of the older wooden gliders
were retired because the glue holding those wonder composite
components together gave up the ghost.

As far as I know, the only major glueing problems have been with pre-
war gliders made with casein glue. Just about everything post-war used
urea-formaldehyde (cascamite) which is effectively eternal. My club is
happily using a Ka2 from 1955 which has had no glue problems.

That's wood-wood glueing, by the way. I know there have been problems
with the Oly wood/metal composite spars.

Ian