Future Club Training Gliders

Just to throw a spanner in the works, is everyone suggesting the AS-K21 as
a primary trainer aware that it is as good as impossible to spin whilst the
CofG is within approved limits? A-S make a spin kit, but this means that if
you want to use the K21 as a primary trainer you need to faff around with
installing weights on the tail before every flight where you intend to
spin the glider, then faff around removing them again afterwards.

The solution my club (Lasham in the UK) has is to have diversity in the
training fleet, although we have the luxury of 600 members, 100 private
gliders and 50 students at any one time paying fees to support all
this.

Our fleet:

9(I think) x AS-K13: Wood, Steel Tube + Fabric. Used for ab-initio
training because they are easy and cheap to repair, plus they spin (and
recover) well. K-7 would probably do just as well for this job.

2 x AS-K21: Used for transitioning students onto glass at a later stage of
training. Also good for aerobatic training, which I think is a point which
has been missed so far in this discussion. Will not spin readily (see
above).

2 x DG-1000: Used for XC and aerobatics training, plus private hire to
club members wishing to go on dual XC flights.

1 x Duo Discus: Used for XC training / Private hire

Anyway, I think the point I am trying to make is that maybe there is not
one particular glider which is ideal for everything?

On Sep 15, 12:57*pm, bildan wrote:
On Sep 15, 8:59*am, Westbender wrote:

You guys throw around these ideas that we should just do away with
2-33 and train with new DG's and ASK21's. Have you ever considered how
many smaller clubs there are that cannot afford to do such a thing? If
you're willing to donate the money to our club for a new ASK21, we'd
be happy to accomodate your idea.

Yes, we have thought about it - a lot.



Great! Email me offline and I'll give you the address to send the
check...

Michael Jaworski wrote:
if you want to use the K21 as a primary trainer you need to faff around with
installing weights on the tail before every flight where you intend to
spin the glider, then faff around removing them again afterwards.

Actually, I love this. It forces the student to contemplate on the
desired CofG, then weigh the pilots, calculate the needed amount of lead
and finally go up and trust in his calculation. (Which, of course, the
instructor has discreetly double-checked.)

Mounting and unmounting the lead is a matter of seconds and a complete
non-issue. Actually, I think aerobatics is the only application in which
the ASK21 beats the DG1000 because the latter is way too slippery.

Good points by all.
There is nothing that speaks or even whispers "future" (see the
subject line) about a 2-33, so I think it's only mentioned due to
economy. As Bill suggests, it's an antiquated plan and does not take
into consideration young pilot mentality as Noel explained. We need to
listen to more "junior" pilots, and not just assume they're
inexperienced etc.
Contrasting, but certainly not a primary trainer... The Arcus
screams "FUTURE".
My club trains using aero tow (1x) and winch (2x) launching in a
Puchatek, then solo in the Puchatek. Solo in Junior. Dual in G103,
solo in it. Then possibly solo in Jantar Standard or dual in Twin
Astir. Other ships to move up to are LS-7, LS-6, and Duo XT. All kept
in hangars, with tail tow equipment and instruments like you'd expect.
Not a one without a radio, audio vario or FLARM (there's a FLARM in
the Callair too). Everything but the Junior has a flight computer /
GPS data logger.
Like owning a house, aircraft ownership requires more than routine
maintenance. If you don't make upgrades periodically, your home or
fleet may look OK to you but will look outdated to others.
I have e-mailed Scheibe Aircraft (still producing the Motorfalke) to
see if there is any truth to the rumor that they will reintroduce the
SF-34. I know of only one in the USA, at Moriarty, NM. Believe it used
to be in Greensboro, NC or was that another one? But it will likely
cost as much as an AS-K21.
In Australia, the bulk of glider pilots are referred to as "OFITTH",
meaning "Old Farts In Terry Towel Hats". We all need to stop thinking
like an OFITTH.
Jim

I honestly think everyone is jumping to conclusions far too early....the AD
on Blanik's will reach a satisfactory conclusion all soon enough .there are
just too many of these world wide in continuous use and for all practical
purposes the AD's on these gliders have been few and far between..they are
still among the best club training gliders available by far..and they are
affordable...for the abuse these gliders have been given throughout their
lives, the "club's" lack of attention, stored outside in the elements and
basically given "office" annual inspections by many clubs and users they
have been rewarding ten's of thousands of hours and pilot
certificates....the alternatives.2-33's and 2-22's though old and a bit
clumsy have also done an admirable job or creating pilot certificates and
will continue to do so.not with a lot of glamour, but still working....K7's
and K-13's have done a good job but old and hard to find, at least at
affordable prices in the USA and the wood takes special care and
storage....and can also and has been a subject of AD's and special service
bulletins..K21's and Grobs have had and will have their share of AD's, many
very expensive to repair, more so than what the AD is likely going to be on
the L-13's...DG1000's and Duo's.not likely going to fit into club budgets
for 2011 HpH will hopefully have the new Twin Shark available to offer...it
too is however going to be out of the budget for most clubs, or, even if
they have one, not likely to fit assembled in the most typical club hangar
either......and if these glass and carbon fiber gliders are left to the
elements and tied outside like an L-13...then you'll find the real cost of
ownership.

Clubs to exist will need lower cost trainers....like Blaniks....those that
can be affordable to rent, lease, own and replace...few clubs will have
$100,000.00 budgets for new glass ships...and if they can't find affordable
gliders these clubs will simply fail to exist....
tim


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Michael Jaworski wrote:
if you want to use the K21 as a primary trainer you need to faff around
with
installing weights on the tail before every flight where you intend to
spin the glider, then faff around removing them again afterwards.

Actually, I love this. It forces the student to contemplate on the desired
CofG, then weigh the pilots, calculate the needed amount of lead and
finally go up and trust in his calculation. (Which, of course, the
instructor has discreetly double-checked.)

Mounting and unmounting the lead is a matter of seconds and a complete
non-issue. Actually, I think aerobatics is the only application in which
the ASK21 beats the DG1000 because the latter is way too slippery.

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 5453 (20100915) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com






__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5453 (20100915) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

On Sep 15, 11:13*am, Kevin Christner
wrote:
I have spent enough time instructing to see two types of students,
Schweizer trained and everyone else. *Place these two types in an
ASK-21. *Schweizer trained students often lack refined control
coordination and almost always have little ability to control pitch
and speed properly. *The other students seem to do much better. *The
Schweizer simply does not require the refined control of more modern
gliders to be flown in a way that seems coordinated. *Being trained in
a Schweizer typically means you will need to be totally retrained to
fly anything else, and the bad habits first learned will often creep
back.

Find me one world team member that thinks primary training in a
Schweizer is a good idea. *I doubt you'll have any glowing advocates.

KJC

You found one. I train in 2-33's every weekend I'm not racing. I completely disagree about skills as they relate to what glider is used. That is a function of good instructing much more than the platform.
Would I like it to be more comfortable in the back? You betcha!
All this said, our 2-33 fleet still provides economical, weather
tolerant, safe, durable service.
We added another to our fleet last year. We also bought a '21 for more
advanced training.
Keeping costs down may be why we have grown every year including the
downturn and have almost 30 juniors.
Not fancy , but it works.
All that said, building a 2-33 today would not be an economical thing
to do.
FWIW
UH

On Sep 15, 12:26*pm, Westbender wrote:
On Sep 15, 12:57*pm, bildan wrote:

On Sep 15, 8:59*am, Westbender wrote:

You guys throw around these ideas that we should just do away with
2-33 and train with new DG's and ASK21's. Have you ever considered how
many smaller clubs there are that cannot afford to do such a thing? If
you're willing to donate the money to our club for a new ASK21, we'd
be happy to accomodate your idea.

Yes, we have thought about it - a lot.

Great! Email me offline and I'll give you the address to send the
check...

An SSA Clubs & Chapters Committee 'best practice' is for clubs to
pursue a 501c(3) determination, making charitable donations possible.
At least 20 SSA chapters, including some of the largest, have such a
determination.

Forward planning saves a lot. See this Strategic Planning pdf
http://www.soaringchapters.org/conve...r_Clubs_V5.pdf

and this presentation on bringing your club into the 21st Century and
delivering on the promise of soaring. poor video, good audio and
content
http://www.soaringchapters.org/semin..._century21.wmv

Frank Whiteley

On Sep 15, 1:18*pm, JS wrote:
Good points by all.
* There is nothing that speaks or even whispers "future" (see the
subject line) about a 2-33, so I think it's only mentioned due to
economy. As Bill suggests, it's an antiquated plan and does not take
into consideration young pilot mentality as Noel explained. We need to
listen to more "junior" pilots, and not just assume they're
inexperienced etc.
* Contrasting, but certainly not a primary trainer... The Arcus
screams "FUTURE".
* My club trains using aero tow (1x) and winch (2x) launching in a
Puchatek, then solo in the Puchatek. Solo in Junior. Dual in G103,
solo in it. Then possibly solo in Jantar Standard or dual in Twin
Astir. Other ships to move up to are LS-7, LS-6, and Duo XT. All kept
in hangars, with tail tow equipment and instruments like you'd expect.
Not a one without a radio, audio vario or FLARM (there's a FLARM in
the Callair too). Everything but the Junior has a flight computer /
GPS data logger.
* Like owning a house, aircraft ownership requires more than routine
maintenance. If you don't make upgrades periodically, your home or
fleet may look OK to you but will look outdated to others.
* I have e-mailed Scheibe Aircraft (still producing the Motorfalke) to
see if there is any truth to the rumor that they will reintroduce the
SF-34. I know of only one in the USA, at Moriarty, NM. Believe it used
to be in Greensboro, NC or was that another one? But it will likely
cost as much as an AS-K21.
* In Australia, the bulk of glider pilots are referred to as "OFITTH",
meaning "Old Farts In Terry Towel Hats". We all need to stop thinking
like an OFITTH.
Jim

How do you like the Puchatek? OBTW, that's the Krosno KR-03a AKA
Peregrine I mentioned previously.

Frank

On Sep 15, 12:58*pm, wrote:
On Sep 15, 11:13*am, Kevin Christner
wrote:



I have spent enough time instructing to see two types of students,
Schweizer trained and everyone else. *Place these two types in an
ASK-21. *Schweizer trained students often lack refined control
coordination and almost always have little ability to control pitch
and speed properly. *The other students seem to do much better. *The
Schweizer simply does not require the refined control of more modern
gliders to be flown in a way that seems coordinated. *Being trained in
a Schweizer typically means you will need to be totally retrained to
fly anything else, and the bad habits first learned will often creep
back.

Find me one world team member that thinks primary training in a
Schweizer is a good idea. *I doubt you'll have any glowing advocates.

KJC

You found one. I train in 2-33's every weekend I'm not racing. I completely disagree about skills as they relate to what glider is used. That is a function of good instructing much more than the platform.

Would I like it to be more comfortable in the back? You betcha!
All this said, our 2-33 fleet still provides economical, weather
tolerant, safe, durable service.
We added another to our fleet last year. We also bought a '21 for more
advanced training.
Keeping costs down may be why we have grown every year including the
downturn and have almost 30 juniors.
Not fancy , but it works.
All that said, building a 2-33 today would not be an economical thing
to do.
FWIW
UH

I should rephrase my premise from "a good idea" to "the best option"
which was the intent behind the statement. Costs aside, I don't think
you'd choose the 2-33 over the K-21 for any purpose, but I could be
missing something.

In regards to equipment vs. instruction I stated previously
"Ultimately this is not an argument about 2-33's vs. K-21s, but rather
an argument about the pitiful state of glider training in the US."
Perhaps I've placed too much blame on the glider fleet and not enough
on the instructor base. I would have hoped this was not the case.

Surfer! wrote:

Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the
record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer.


"JS" wrote in message
...
The one redeeming quality of the 2-33 "Dragmaster" is that it laughs
at anything roughly resembling a landing.

However I suspect there could be a substantial amount of retraining
required to fly other more slippery ships...


And hence my main problem with the 2-33. The 2-33 will tolerate
sloppiness and abuse that no other glider will let you get away with.
I prefer to instruct in a glider that handles more like the ship that
the student will transition into. It may take a bit longer, but that's
OK. Retraining takes a long time and the learning "law of primacy"
dictates that when the stuff hits the fan, pilots will revert to what
they learned first.

What else is wrong with the 2-33? An incomplete list would include
- not enough leg room in either seat. I hate turning with
the stick *under* my knee.
- lethargic roll rate.
- Poor visibility from the rear seat - teaching someone to
soar in a gaggle is scary.
- ineffective trim - unless the front seater is heavy, you're
still applying significant forward stick pressure on tow even
with full forward trim.
- ineffective spoilers (but it does slip GREAT!).
- generally poor ergonomics.
- doesn't spin well.

What's good about the 2-33:
- it's cheap
- anybody can repair it
- it's built like a tank. If a student is going to crash, I want
him to be in a 2-33.
- doesn't spin well (yeah, I know).

Sex does sell..... the sport, I mean. :-) Sure many of us would have
started soaring a manhole cover, if that were possible. But for others,
who have an inkling and come to the field to see what it's like, the
2-33 is not a good sales tool.

That said, some people simply prefer the 2-33 and I'm OK with that. For
2 seaters, my club has 3 L23s, 1 Puchacz, and 1 2-33. If a student wants
to fly the 2-33, I'll be in the back seat.

Tony V. "6N"