SZD-56-2 Diana

Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:37:02 +0000, Robert Ehrlich
wrote:

if we didn't have this sponsoring in the past, France would certainly
not be among the 3 countries (with Germany and USA) where the number
of glider pilots exceeds (barely in France) 10000.

Actually that isn't very much. I believe there are approx 60M people
in France, and you say you have 10K glider pilots. There are in the
order of 5½M people in Denmark and we have close to 2K glider pilots.


I completely agree, this is not very much. The ratio pilots/people is often
higher in small countries, Finland is another good example. Maybe this
is due to the fact that this nevertherless put the number of pilots near
to the minimum workable number, i.e. if it were lower, gliding would have
vanished in that country and so the country would not show in the statistics.
Anyway my point was only that without public sponsoring, this number would
certainly be lower, if even gliding would still be practised here. According
to a book about gliding history in France, the number was 23000 in 1990, but
8500 among them were short time "licences" (in the sense of registration to
the national organisation (FFVV), not pilots certificates, even an intro ride
has such a registration).

Robert Ehrlich wrote:
Asbjorn Hojmark wrote:

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:37:02 +0000, Robert Ehrlich
wrote:

if we didn't have this sponsoring in the past, France would certainly
not be among the 3 countries (with Germany and USA) where the number
of glider pilots exceeds (barely in France) 10000.

Actually that isn't very much. I believe there are approx 60M people
in France, and you say you have 10K glider pilots. There are in the
order of 5?M people in Denmark and we have close to 2K glider pilots.


I completely agree, this is not very much. The ratio pilots/people is often
higher in small countries, Finland is another good example. Maybe this
is due to the fact that this nevertherless put the number of pilots near
to the minimum workable number, i.e. if it were lower, gliding would have
vanished in that country and so the country would not show in the statistics.
Anyway my point was only that without public sponsoring, this number would
certainly be lower, if even gliding would still be practised here. According
to a book about gliding history in France, the number was 23000 in 1990, but
8500 among them were short time "licences" (in the sense of registration to
the national organisation (FFVV), not pilots certificates, even an intro ride
has such a registration).

Robert,
what was the number in 1980, 1970, etc? I have the impression these numbers
have incredibly diminished. When i was at school there even existed programs
to help youngs practising power flying, i had several pals doing that.
Gliding costed next to nothing, when i began at Montpellier, half of the club
was peasants and factory workers from the surroundings. Now things have
changed so much ...


--

Michel TALON

Andreas Maurer wrote:
...
Thx for the link - my French is good enough that I understand the
text.
Yet I have not seen a source what airfoil was actually used on the
Pegase...


In the database at http://www.aae.uiuc.edu/m-selig/ads/aircraft.html
Pegase and Marianne are mentionned with airfoil "COAP 1" at wing root
and "COAP 2" at wing tip.

Michel Talon wrote:
...
However, it seems to me
that the LS4 is a glider which is as easy and benign as the ASK23
but has the advantage of not being a flying brick.


During the last season which was my first one as an instructor,
I sent my first student to solo flight. After his first solo
flight in the same ASK21 in which he did his last dual flight
with me, I had no problem to send him solo for the next flights
in an ASK23, so freeing the ASK21 for other dual flights. I would
probably not have sent him solo in any other glider I know, certainly
not in a LS4. I agree that the LS4 is easy and benign, but anyway
it is sufficienty different from the ASK21 that a student need
to gain experience in more solo flights before this transition.
And this is the current practice in all clubs I know : students
build hours by flying solo the two seater in which they learned
before flying a single seater, except the case above. As a
flying brick, the ASK23 is not worse than the ASK21 with the reduced
wing loading due to the empty back seat. Anyway penetration is not
very important for these first solo flights, as the student remains
in the cone of 10:1 glide slope, in close proximity to the field and
preferably upwind.

I agree, the price of this glider is a shame, or rather was, as it
is no more in production, just fot this reason.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 14:58:12 +0000, Robert Ehrlich
wrote:

During the last season which was my first one as an instructor,
I sent my first student to solo flight. After his first solo
flight in the same ASK21 in which he did his last dual flight
with me, I had no problem to send him solo for the next flights
in an ASK23, so freeing the ASK21 for other dual flights.

You did exactly what the Wasserkuppe flying school has been doing
successfully for many years - they even let the student pilot do his
first solo on the ASK-23.
We also did a similar thing in my once when our ASK-21 was damaged -
first solo flight in the Ka-8 after primary training on Twin 2.

As a
flying brick, the ASK23 is not worse than the ASK21 with the reduced
wing loading due to the empty back seat. Anyway penetration is not
very important for these first solo flights, as the student remains
in the cone of 10:1 glide slope, in close proximity to the field and
preferably upwind.

The ASK-23 was a replacement for the Ka-8, therefore it didn't need an
LD superior to its basic trainer, the ASK-21. Unfortunately this is
what broke the 23's neck. My club also intended to buy an ASK-23 -
instead we ended up with a DG-300 for similar price and kept our Ka-8.

Bye
Andreas