DG-300 or LS-3?

Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

On Apr 23, 12:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

My opinion - spend your time/money on getting more contest
experience. The glider won't make any difference, unless for some
reason you really don't like the DG.

Andy

On Apr 23, 12:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

Actual cross-country performance of the two ships won't be much
different - pilot skills will easily outweigh any difference in
aerodynamic performance. I used to have an ASW-20 and flew regularly
with a friend who had a DG-303 and the performance differences
weren't large enough to be noticeable.

I would base your decision on other factors, such as auto-hookups,
whether you want a flapped ship, instruments, trailer and maintenance.

In choosing my latest ship, I gave a higher weight to automatic
hookups and a nice trailer than pure performance. Choose according to
your own preferences.

Mike

*Choose according to
your own preferences.

Some day you will want to sell it.. Which will sell more easily? That's important. Good trailer can make a big difference too. You can't beat a factory trailer with good fittings.
A good refinish is very, very expensive.
If damaged and repaired ,was it done by someone that knows repairs?
GA

On Apr 23, 3:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

If you are talking about Andy's LS-3 than I can tell you his glider
climbs really well. I used to fly a very good climber SZD-55-1 and I
climbed with Andy in the same thermal a few times. I was surprised how
well he climbed. It is also an excellent runner. I would choose the
LS-3 if performance was what I were after. Plus paint finish is ever
lasting.

On Apr 23, 3:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

If you are talking about Andy's LS-3 then I can tell you his glider
climbs really well. I used to fly a very good climber SZD-55-1 and I
climbed with Andy in the same thermal a few times. I was surprised
how
well he climbed. It is also an excellent runner. I would choose the
LS-3 if performance was what I were after. Plus paint finish is ever
lasting.

On Apr 23, 3:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

If you opt for the LS-3, you'll want to add the cost of a Wing Rigger
to the price. Those wings are really heavy.

On 4/23/2010 2:36 PM, AK wrote:
On Apr 23, 3:54 pm, wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel


Changing gliders is expensive. You lose money on the one you sell, then
you spend a fortune upgrading the one you just bought.

Keep the one you have, and spend the money on tows.

On Apr 23, 12:54*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out the

Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. *You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. *You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.

Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). *The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.

2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. *The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. *Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.

According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. *Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.

What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? *If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?

Thanks for the assistance,

--Noel

Noel,

John Cochrane makes a good point in his paper "a little faster please"
I don't have it in front of me, but basically he say's the top pilots
will always finish in the top spots even if they flew 20 year old
sailplanes. So save yourself some money and implement the concepts
he's put forth.

Ron sure does well in that LS-3, but, he also did really well in his
LS-1. With the legs the LS-3 has over the LS-1 it is becoming obvious
to all of us that fly with him that indeed it is a big asset. I think
you might want to fly with him and see how the DG-300 compares to the
LS-3.

My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!

Brad

On Apr 23, 5:04*pm, Brad wrote:

My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!

Yeah, but even your 13M ship has a flap handle... I want one of
those!! I feel so inadequate without one... ;-)

--Noel
P.S. I slacked off at work today and correlated data from Idaflieg and
various Johnson Reports. At 80 knots the DG-300 achieves a glide-
ratio of about 27:1. By comparison, the LS-3 can get 31:1. When
Moffat and Johnson and others wrote a lot of their reports back in the
1970's and 1980's, the idea of high wing-loadings for faster
competition flying was not yet in-vogue... so they didn't cover it
much. But in strong conditions (i.e. Ephrata or other competition
sites in the western USA), the benefits of a heavier flapped ship like
the LS-3 are pretty significant (on paper at least).