1-26 vs 1-36

How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

On Jun 25, 2:06 pm, Fred wrote:
How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

The 1-26 is a nice handling little glider with the glide ratio of a
brick.
The 1-36 is a miserable glider as far as handling, but with the glide
ratio of a well polished brick.

The 1-26 is a very nice handling glider and is a joy to fly!!!!!!!

It has its critics because it is a over 50 year old design, and has a low
L/D and goes into the wind poorly.

It is also the best bird to ever land out, and will land in a very small
area, with very good control.

The 1-26 is also supported by a Very Active group, the 1-26 Association @
www.126association.org with dues of $15 per year.

The 1-26 Association is over 50 years old, has kept records and still keeps
records of accomplishments in the 1-26 and sponsors its own Championships
each year.

A number of pilots that have been on the United States National teams have
been 1-26 pilots and competitors.

Look at the web site, get a 1-26 and at least commit to doing your Silver
Badge in the little bird.

Kevin R. Anderson
SGS 1-26B 192




wrote in message
...
On Jun 25, 2:06 pm, Fred wrote:
How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

The 1-26 is a nice handling little glider with the glide ratio of a
brick.
The 1-36 is a miserable glider as far as handling, but with the glide
ratio of a well polished brick.

On Jun 25, 4:20*pm, wrote:
On Jun 25, 2:06 pm, Fred wrote:

How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

The 1-26 is a nice handling little glider with the glide ratio of a
brick.
The 1-36 is a miserable glider as far as handling, but with the glide
ratio of a well polished brick.

From personal experience:

The 1-36 is more pitch-sensitive (especially on takeoff and during the
landing flare - people used to the big stick movements of a 2-33 will
be more prone to PIOs. People used to small stick movements and
sensitive aircraft will be A-OK). The 1-36 has worse handling at min-
sink speeds (and below). Basically, aileron control tends to degrade
quite a bit at low speeds (but pitch control is decent). This can
make handling in turbulent thermals a chore unless you keep the speed
up (which in turn requires a slightly tighter bank, which makes for a
slightly higher G-loading, which makes for a slightly lower-than-
optimal climb rate).

The 1-36 tail-wheel has a lot of weight on it, making ground-handling
sometimes a chore for an otherwise small aircraft. You CANNOT push it
backwards around the ramp - the tailwheel suspension works great going
forwards; but will also cause the tail to jamb at the smallest bumps
and cracks, and the loads from pushing backwards over uneven ground
(even small cracks in asphalt, or expansion joints in concrete) will
quickly tear up any simple plastic or urethane (roller-blade)
tailwheel you put on it.

NOW, having said that I know that Schweizers are all known to have
inidividual personalities. Our club's 1-36 supposedly has less
aileron control than some others. And despite the less-than-ideal
handling, I will say that our 1-36 does climb quite well. It is also
very communicative in regards to lift (you feel it in the seat of your
pants quite well, AND you hear the oil-canning of the metal wings
*chuckle*). Its not a very quiet glider to fly, but its simple to
operate, robust, and the cockpit is spacious with a relatively
comfortable seat (though its very "upright" seating).

The glide-ratio of the 1-36 is not bad as long as you fly slow and
don't have much wind. These gliders will float pretty well on light
days. If you want to speed up, both Schweizers will fall like a brick
- but I think the 1-36 will penetrate a headwind slightly better than
the 1-26 (while still falling like a brick).

Take care,

--Noel

On Jun 25, 6:06*pm, Fred wrote:
How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

1-26 is easy, safe glider for new pilots as long as proper briefing
about
the differences between the glider they trained dual in and the 1-26
are covered.
These include.
Increased pitch sensitivity vs 2-33(the most likely trainer from which
someone will transition
to 1-26. Rest forearm on thigh and fly with wrist action.
Reduced clearance under the nose. A demonstration on the ground of
tailwheel contact, then skid contact
shows this.
View out of the cockpit has wing in a new place so scan in pattern is
a little different.
Pilots must demonstrate proper recovery from turn stalls and incipient
spins.
We put our students in the 1-26 after about 6-10 solo flights in the
2-33.
It is a fun ship and a good glider to learn a lot in.
UH

On Jun 25, 7:20*pm, wrote:
On Jun 25, 2:06 pm, Fred wrote:

How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

The 1-26 is a nice handling little glider with the glide ratio of a
brick.
The 1-36 is a miserable glider as far as handling, but with the glide
ratio of a well polished brick.

I "grew up" on Schweizers in the following sequence: 2-22, 2-33,
1-26, 1-36 (with a couple of 2-32 and 1-34 sorties thrown in). I
would say my first 200 hours were in these birds, with most of it in
the last two. In fact, I did my first long XC flight (150 miles or
so) in the 1-36 on thermals, so I got to spend some real quality time
with it Others have already posted, but here's what I would say are
the key differences in terms of what you asked:

I would suggest that there isn't a huge difference if you're
transitioning from a 2-33; they're both way more pitch sensitive and
significantly more responsive. However, the 1-26 is probably
"easier" in that it has fewer bad habits.

Regarding the 1-36, it is:

* A little more prone to falling off into an incipient spin when
thermalling. In fact, it was the first plane in which I ever
inadvertantly entered a fully-developed spin. Recovery took
aggressive (proper) control inputs.
* A bit trickier to land. It is a higher perforance glider, and it
will float a long ways if you try to dive it down onto the ground.
* I found the spring trim somewhat annoying, as it seemed to never be
"just right" and was too easy to release by accident (could've just
been the specific one I flew, I suppose). OTOH, 1-26 trim is
essentially non-existant, so you take your pick.
* There are two different 1-36 variants; one is a real tail dragger
and one is a nose-sitter. The nose sitter is easier to handle on the
ground and is probably a better "beginner" single place since it is a
little easier to cope with during takeoff and landing rolls.
* Much more comfortable. The factory seat cushions are really nice,
and it is reasonably comfy for 3-4 hour flights if you have everything
adjusted correctly.
* Noisy. It is a real oil-canner, which can get annoying on bumpy
days.

The big plus for both airplanes (with a slight nod to the 1-26) is
that they will put up with a lot of crap as far as being landed in
tight spots and rough fields. When I think of a couple of early
landouts I got away with vs. what would have happened if I had tried
to stuff my Grob Astir (itself a very benign ship) into the same
spaces... yipes.

Erik Mann
LS8-18 (P3)

Hundreds of hours in each.

If you are a confident pilot, prefer the 1-36. Longer legs and most of its
negatives are quickly and easily addressed. The pitch sensitivity some
allude to is the result of a dead spot in the trim system. When the trim is
engaged, you don't get a control movement until you've moved the stick about
1/4 inch. This tends to cause over control and PIO. Simple solution is to
pull the trim trigger and hold throughout take off and landing. Dead spot
disappears. Warnings from 1-36 pilots who don't know this should suggest
their level of competence and the value of their advice.

Both gliders are honest at the stall and will spin readily. The 1-26 is
easier to fly, but requires a well-refined Fiat complex to truly love. 1-36
also has exceptional dive brakes.


"Fred" wrote in message
...
How do these aircraft compare as far as ease of learning to fly it?
Any unusual traits that a new pilot should be wary of?

Fred

At 12:35 29 June 2008, user wrote:

Both gliders are honest at the stall and will spin readily. The 1-26 is
easier to fly, but requires a well-refined Fiat complex to truly love.
1-36
also has exceptional dive brakes.

I know this wasn't part of the original question, but it might
be significant to someone considering buying one of these
gliders. With the 1-26, you have a great supporting
organization, and you can compete in it, with tasks that
are called with the 26's performance in mind. There are
generally some local contests within reach, plus the Big
Deal every year with the 1-26 Championships.

There really isn't much of a place for the 36 to race.
Sports class, I suppose, but it's going to be tough.
With the 1-26, it's head-to-head racing.

Jim Beckman (234, 664, 336, etc.)