Future Club Training Gliders

On Nov 10, 11:41*am, "noel.wade" wrote:
I think you have misunderstood my last comment and the comments of
others here. *No one is saying that you have to buy a DG-1000 or a Duo-
Discus or an Arcus in order to conduct training. *Your example of an
ASK-21 is a sex-machine compared to the Schweizer gliders! *Compahttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eizer2-33C-GWC...
tohttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/SCHLEICHER_ASK_21_....

The point is that even someone who knows nothing about airplanes can
tell which one is more modern and capable.

Absolutely! Even a thirty year old ASK21 or Grob looks (and flies)
fabulous compared to an ASK13 (or 7), Blanik, or 2-33. I think every
club that can possibly swing it financially (including loans) should
upgrade as soon as possible. We switched from Blanik to 17 year old
Grobs in 1995 and I think it was a great move.

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

Another benefit that is maybe seldom considered is that the DG1000 is
surprisingly quick and pleasant to rig and derig. I've done it with
just myself and one other person (but two on the root end is
definitely helpful). We've been taking ours on far more "away"
weekends than we used to do with the Grobs or Janus. People would
mysteriously disappear if you were rigging one of those! (I haven't
tried with an ASK21 so can't comment on rigging one)

A good trailer also makes a huge difference, both to rigging and to
towing. Our Grob literally doubled the fuel consumption of my car,
while the DG1000 seems to add about 25% - 30%.

http://hoult.org/bruce/Subaru_with_TA.jpg

vs

http://twitpic.com/11uvwc

On Nov 10, 5:36*pm, Bruce Hoult wrote:
On Nov 10, 11:41*am, "noel.wade" wrote:

I think you have misunderstood my last comment and the comments of
others here. *No one is saying that you have to buy a DG-1000 or a Duo-
Discus or an Arcus in order to conduct training. *Your example of an
ASK-21 is a sex-machine compared to the Schweizer gliders! *Compahttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eizer2-33C-GWC...
tohttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/SCHLEICHER_ASK_21_....

The point is that even someone who knows nothing about airplanes can
tell which one is more modern and capable.

Absolutely! Even a thirty year old ASK21 or Grob looks (and flies)
fabulous compared to an ASK13 (or 7), Blanik, or 2-33. *I think every
club that can possibly swing it financially (including loans) should
upgrade as soon as possible. We switched from Blanik to 17 year old
Grobs in 1995 and I think it was a great move.

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

Another benefit that is maybe seldom considered is that the DG1000 is
surprisingly quick and pleasant to rig and derig. I've done it with
just myself and one other person (but two on the root end is
definitely helpful). We've been taking ours on far more "away"
weekends than we used to do with the Grobs or Janus. People would
mysteriously disappear if you were rigging one of those! (I haven't
tried with an ASK21 so can't comment on rigging one)

A good trailer also makes a huge difference, both to rigging and to
towing. Our Grob literally doubled the fuel consumption of my car,
while the DG1000 seems to add about 25% - 30%.

http://hoult.org/bruce/Subaru_with_TA.jpg

vs

http://twitpic.com/11uvwc

An ASK-21 also rigs easily enough to keep it in a trailer. Your
purchase arguments in favor of the DG1000 make sense.

Another factor is whether the club/FBO operates on weekends only
or 7 days per week if the weather is OK for flying. I can't see how
an ASK 21 or DG1000 can be economical if flown only on weekends
and/or is trailered for several months of the year. Still, finding
instructors and ride pilots who can reliably be available 7 days per
week isn't easy. Especially if you want them to work for free ;-)

On Nov 10, 4:36*pm, Bruce Hoult wrote:
On Nov 10, 11:41*am, "noel.wade" wrote:

I think you have misunderstood my last comment and the comments of
others here. *No one is saying that you have to buy a DG-1000 or a Duo-
Discus or an Arcus in order to conduct training. *Your example of an
ASK-21 is a sex-machine compared to the Schweizer gliders! *Compahttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eizer2-33C-GWC...
tohttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/SCHLEICHER_ASK_21_....

The point is that even someone who knows nothing about airplanes can
tell which one is more modern and capable.

Absolutely! Even a thirty year old ASK21 or Grob looks (and flies)
fabulous compared to an ASK13 (or 7), Blanik, or 2-33. *I think every
club that can possibly swing it financially (including loans) should
upgrade as soon as possible. We switched from Blanik to 17 year old
Grobs in 1995 and I think it was a great move.

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

Another benefit that is maybe seldom considered is that the DG1000 is
surprisingly quick and pleasant to rig and derig. I've done it with
just myself and one other person (but two on the root end is
definitely helpful). We've been taking ours on far more "away"
weekends than we used to do with the Grobs or Janus. People would
mysteriously disappear if you were rigging one of those! (I haven't
tried with an ASK21 so can't comment on rigging one)

A good trailer also makes a huge difference, both to rigging and to
towing. Our Grob literally doubled the fuel consumption of my car,
while the DG1000 seems to add about 25% - 30%.

http://hoult.org/bruce/Subaru_with_TA.jpg

vs

http://twitpic.com/11uvwc

There are 3 DG-1000's at our glider field, from what I've seen they
can be solo rigged with the proper equipment.

Brad

In article Bruce Hoult writes:

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

And the DG is also expensive. I am not certain about the service
life of any of these, but if they are 3000 hours to scrap, then the
current $102,500 price (74300 Euro posted by unclhank on 10/21/10)
$34.17 per hour just for the capital of the glider, not counting
maintenance, insurance, taxes, storage.

If you can run them longer, the cost goes down, but the hourly cost
of operation is still high.

Show the potential student the ask-12 or the dg-1000, and show him
the cost of operation, along with an old glider that doesn't have the
high hourly operating costs, and a lot will figure that saving a bunch
of money is good - it can mean more flying time in the less impresive
glider.

( Written by one who did a lot of my primary training in the least
expensive Cessna 150 I could find. I got more time in the air for
the same money, too. )

Alan

Hi Bill

Our two Bergfalkes had more in common with a packing crate (including
the holes covered with duck tape...)

Having done a refurb on both they are now quite respectable.

Interestingly - I braded them as "Vintage" on our website (hell - it was
about all we could differentiate on) and it worked. We attracted folk
who like old cars, and have a steady trickle of folk coming for an
intro. Even had a couple of international visitors over the years.

Still - we used our Blanik L13 for the more advanced training until
recently.

Maybe something composite and shiny is in the future of the club.

Bruce

On 2010/11/10 11:27 PM, bildan wrote:
On Nov 10, 1:29 pm, wrote:
On 2010/11/09 11:36 PM, Mike Ash wrote:

Some folk are strange and actually WANT to fly the vintage trainers.

No problem with that. I like old wooden gliders too. I just have a
problem with coercing others to fly them if they want something
better. (A 2-33 isn't 'vintage', it's just old.)

Snip---------

The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about the completeness of
skills it would provide if it were the only trainer used.

Snip---------

As others have pointed out, the K-21 will spin just fine with the CG
aft and weight kits are available just for that purpose. I find even
with the CG well forward, the ASK-21 clearly exhibits all the pre-
stall/stall behaviors a student needs to learn. Just asking them to
compare how the K-21 handles at 36Kts vs 42Kts convinces them it flies
a lot better at 42. It barks, but doesn't bite.

One youngster said in delight, "Hey, it gets wobbley when it's slow
just like a bicycle". Yup!

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

Hi Alan

The argument about cost of ownership is true, but you have the real cost
the wrong way around.

An all the bessl and whistles Duodiscus with a sustainer engine and top
of the line ground handling gear will cost you around $160k, the DG1000
is similar.
You can bring the costs down to ~$110K by speccing for club use.

So - a considerable investment.
But put the real numbers into a spreadsheet and it makes sense.
The new composite has an airframe life of 6000 hours initial + up to
15000 on extensions. So work on a time to trash of 6000 hours.
then consider the operating costs -
The maintenance effort on a 30-40 year old glider is considerable.
Recover costs lots in time and effort to do - and the glider is not
flying while that happens. Optimistically this is a three week job.
The tubes and timber rust, rot, bend and generally need attention -
particularly in the wet.
The older ones have skids that wear out and need replacement every few
years.
The instruments are often as old as the glider, and need refurbishment
(winter is great and cheap - others are less so)

Metal gliders get fatigue, and depending on where you operate, may need
very rare skills to maintain.

The composite fleet needs very little maintenance in comparison. I fly
at a couple of clubs.
One that has three Grob Twin Astirs with tens of thousands of launches
and hours between them. And , indeed after thirty years of intensive use
they are getting a little tired. Still look and fly a lot better than
what they replaced, and the actual cost of operation is lower. This club
has 20+ students at any one time and is thriving. T'other bunch have a
couple of Bergfalkes and a L13. It continues to stagger along - current
situation is L13 grounded (we took it out of service before the AD
because of loose rivets on the wings needing repair) and one Bergie out
of service for a new skid.

Both clubs have three aircraft - but the vintage operators battle to
consistently have two gliders airworthy and on the runway.

So - I am all for keeping the vintage stuff flying, but it is
uneconomical to depend on them for running a club. The cost of
maintenance, cost of downtime and cost of members who lose interest when
they see them is too high for them to be the sole training option in a
club operation. A "blended" approach like Lasham where there is some K13
and some glass makes a lot of sense. But the K13 is about the only wood
and fabric trainer I would recommend - and they are getting old.

Bruce
On 2010/11/11 8:59 AM, Alan wrote:
In Bruce writes:

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

And the DG is also expensive. I am not certain about the service
life of any of these, but if they are 3000 hours to scrap, then the
current $102,500 price (74300 Euro posted by unclhank on 10/21/10)
$34.17 per hour just for the capital of the glider, not counting
maintenance, insurance, taxes, storage.

If you can run them longer, the cost goes down, but the hourly cost
of operation is still high.

Show the potential student the ask-12 or the dg-1000, and show him
the cost of operation, along with an old glider that doesn't have the
high hourly operating costs, and a lot will figure that saving a bunch
of money is good - it can mean more flying time in the less impresive
glider.

( Written by one who did a lot of my primary training in the least
expensive Cessna 150 I could find. I got more time in the air for
the same money, too. )

Alan

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

On Nov 10, 10:59*pm, (Alan) wrote:
In article Bruce Hoult writes:

Where I'd quibble is whether people should be buying brand new ASK21's
TODAY. We looked at them several years ago but they're hellishly
expensive for what they are. It turned out that if you got a fixed
gear, fixed 18m span DG1000 with none of the optional extras then the
price was only a few thousand more than an ASK21 and can do everything
an ASK21 can do, but with 10 points more L/D.

* And the DG is also expensive. *I am not certain about the service
life of any of these, but if they are 3000 hours to scrap, then the
current $102,500 price (74300 Euro posted by unclhank on 10/21/10)
$34.17 per hour just for the capital of the glider, not counting
maintenance, insurance, taxes, storage.

* If you can run them longer, the cost goes down, but the hourly cost
of operation is still high.

* Show the potential student the ask-12 or the dg-1000, and show him
the cost of operation, along with an old glider that doesn't have the
high hourly operating costs, and a lot will figure that saving a bunch
of money is good - it can mean more flying time in the less impresive
glider.

* ( Written by one who did a lot of my primary training in the least
expensive Cessna 150 I could find. *I got more time in the air for
the same money, too. )

* * * * Alan

Why would you cap a DG-1000 at a 3,000 hour life? There are already
published 3000, 6000, 9000 (and every 1000 hours) inspections for the
DG-1000. There are many high time ASK-21 around well beyond 3,000
hours. Many well used and patched up but still bright and shiny and
modern looking.

OTOH the price quoted did was too low. No trailer, instruments, other
options, etc. and I'm not sure a linear depreciation is the right
model.

Darryl

On Nov 11, 7:59*pm, (Alan) wrote:
In article Bruce Hoult
And the DG is also expensive. *I am not certain about the service
life of any of these, but if they are 3000 hours to scrap, then the
current $102,500 price (74300 Euro posted by unclhank on 10/21/10)
$34.17 per hour just for the capital of the glider, not counting
maintenance, insurance, taxes, storage.

That's about 10k EUR more than when we were looking, but that was
2006. If the relativity has remained the same then I'd guess the
DG1000s Club would be about $80k EUR now.


* If you can run them longer, the cost goes down, but the hourly cost
of operation is still high.

We put about 250 hours on each of our DG1000's in a year. At that rate
3000 hours would be 12 years.

As it happens, before the DG1000's we had two 1978ish Grob Twin Astirs
for about 12 years, buying them in 1995 and selling in 2007-2008. We
paid around 30k EUR for them (17 years old), put about the same number
of hours per year on them, and then sold them for around 25k EUR.

The clubs we sold them to apparently don't think they are ready to
throw away.

Our DG rep told us 12,000 hours expected service life for the DG1000s.
That doesn't seem unreasonable.

That brings the per hour cost down to about $9 per hour.


* Show the potential student the ask-12 or the dg-1000, and show him
the cost of operation, along with an old glider that doesn't have the
high hourly operating costs, and a lot will figure that saving a bunch
of money is good - it can mean more flying time in the less impresive
glider.

Older gliders cost less per hour for capital, but tend to cost more
per hour fomr maintenance.

I'll also note that when I was flying Blaniks I thought 30 minutes was
a pretty good flight unless it was really booming, which it seldom is
here. In the DG1000 I can stay up as long as I want on a lot more days
throughout the year. That saves a huge amount on tows.

On Nov 10, 1:29*pm, BruceGreeff wrote:
On 2010/11/09 11:36 PM, Mike Ash wrote:





In ,
* Martin *wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:04:56 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Well, I'm one of those who got hooked by an ASK-21. I fly one of the
prettier glass toys and its gratifyingly shiny, but it is 41 years old
and has Libelle written on it. So, where does that put me on your scale?

Seems pretty sane to me. I welcome glider pilots in any equipment that
makes them happy. I just think that people who claim that looks don't
matter ought to put their money where their mouth is....

Some folk are strange and actually WANT to fly the vintage trainers.

Now - the opportunity to take the Bergie for a late afternoon lazy amble
over the river as the sun sets is not to be missed. Classic vintage wood
and fabric - gentle lift and peaceful slow flight has many attractions.
But it does not compare to pushing it in a 1:40+ glass single, or even a
composite two seater.
Personally my back is broken after less than an hour the back seat of in
most of the oldies. They are just plain horrible for instruction. My
personal maximum has been 11 flights and around 4 hours in the air in a
G103. Quite a long day if you include all the fetching and pushing
gliders, but no problem. Conversely - 8 launches on one day in a
Bergfalke II-55 cured me of wanting to instruct in vintage gliders... My
back took days to recover.

So depends who you are - I was actually attracted to the club I
initially learned at by the vintage trainers.

Having moved on - I still value some of the lessons they facilitated.
There is something to be said for learning to fly something that fights
back when you abuse it. The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about
the completeness of skills it would provide if it were the only trainer
used.

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I trained in 2-33's years ago, left gliding, and retrained upon my
return in Blanik L-13's, graduating to an L-33 and Jantar standard.
Now my club also owns a K-21.
My perspective, however, is from doing a stint as maintenance
director.
Regardless of it's flying qualities, the Blanik was designed in 1956
when repair labor was cheap, and
now that repair labor and parts have become very much more expensive,
they are increasingly more pricey to fix properly.
From what I've seen, this trend is going to make any procedure to
recertify them very difficult to make economical.
Moreover, their minium 30 year age is going to make metal fatigue an
increasingly difficult problem to deal with even if they are re-
certified.
The high up front cost of K-21's is a signficant hurdle for all, but
the 18,000 hour life and limited number of metal parts.
is a major ongoing advantage if that hurdle can be crossed.
So even if the current crisis passes, it will only provide breathing
room to find the answer we really need:
a low cost fiberglass trainer with the right handling characteristics
from a company with reliable parts supply.
That will be a very tough bill to fill unless we get a prolonged
period of a 95 cent Euro, which doesn't seem likely.