A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Future Club Training Gliders



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 15th 10, 03:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tony[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,965
Default Future Club Training Gliders

The 2-33 is suffering the same metal fatigue problems in it's wings as
the L-13.



Is this statement based on actual issues with 2-33 wings or just the
fact that "it is metal, it will fatigue eventually"?

I see no mention in any of the Schweizer Service Bulletins about
issues with 2-22 or 2-33 wing structure and have never heard of any
problems either.

I notice that 3 or 4 of the USA World Team members trained in
Schweizers.



  #22  
Old September 15th 10, 03:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Westbender
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 154
Default Future Club Training Gliders

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.
  #23  
Old September 15th 10, 04:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tony[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,965
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 15, 9:59*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.


exactly. i'm a member of two clubs and i dont think either one could
afford a new ASK, Duo, or DG if they sold all of their assets.

Well I suppose we could start charging $500 or $1000 to join and jack
up the monthly dues and flight fees. And watch most of our membership
disappear...

  #24  
Old September 15th 10, 04:08 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
mattm[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 167
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 15, 10:34*am, Tony wrote:
The 2-33 is suffering the same metal fatigue problems in it's wings as
the L-13.


Is this statement based on actual issues with 2-33 wings or just the
fact that "it is metal, it will fatigue eventually"?

I see no mention in any of the Schweizer Service Bulletins about
issues with 2-22 or 2-33 wing structure and have never heard of any
problems either.

I notice that 3 or 4 of the USA World Team members trained in
Schweizers.


Heck, I trained in Schweizers as well (not too likely to be a team
member though). Post solo I had a chance to fly a K-21, which went
fine since I'd been trained to a high standard. Even with flying
"low performance" planes from the start I stuck with flying;
I did learn to soar well in those things.

I'd love to instruct in a K-21 these days, but cost really is an
issue.
I hardly ever see K-21s on Wings and Wheels; there are a couple
available in Europe for 50-60K Euros. New ones are advertised for
64K Euros, and I would think the delivery price with needed
instruments would wind up higher (I've heard $90K for new).
Typical 2-33s, L-13s, and K-7s go for $10-15K or so.

We've hashed over this argument before. A number of clubs
have managed to afford the more expensive ships for primary
training; I say more power to them. Many of us can only
afford cheaper lower performance planes. We can still train
good pilots in them.

-- Matt
  #25  
Old September 15th 10, 04:13 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Kevin Christner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 211
Default Future Club Training Gliders

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

On Sep 15, 7:34*am, Tony wrote:
The 2-33 is suffering the same metal fatigue problems in it's wings as
the L-13.


Is this statement based on actual issues with 2-33 wings or just the
fact that "it is metal, it will fatigue eventually"?

I see no mention in any of the Schweizer Service Bulletins about
issues with 2-22 or 2-33 wing structure and have never heard of any
problems either.

I notice that 3 or 4 of the USA World Team members trained in
Schweizers.


  #26  
Old September 15th 10, 04:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tony[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,965
Default Future Club Training Gliders

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.



unless it was the only way they could afford the training.
  #27  
Old September 15th 10, 05:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
bildan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 646
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 15, 8:34*am, Tony wrote:
The 2-33 is suffering the same metal fatigue problems in it's wings as
the L-13.


Is this statement based on actual issues with 2-33 wings or just the
fact that "it is metal, it will fatigue eventually"?

I see no mention in any of the Schweizer Service Bulletins about
issues with 2-22 or 2-33 wing structure and have never heard of any
problems either.

I notice that 3 or 4 of the USA World Team members trained in
Schweizers.


A large fraction of 2-33's already have patches on their wings due to
metal fatigue cracks. I've found cracks on several the AI missed.
Look at the skins on top of the wing ahead of the spar. If there are
skin cracks, there's a good chance of other cracks where they can't be
seen. There will be an AD - probably sooner than later.

As to why there are no SB's - ask Schweizer.
  #28  
Old September 15th 10, 05:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 15, 6:54*am, John Smith wrote:
Am 15.09.10 01:13, schrieb John Cochrane:

I just talked to John Murray about other stuff, and he mentioned that
ASK 21 are actually remarkably easy to get right now. Our club
(chicago glider club) just bought a new ASK21, and it's a joy both to
fly and teach in.


I don't understand why someone would still buy an ASK21 today when you
can get a DG1000 or a Duo which offer *much* more performance for little
more money. And yes, they are perfectly suited for primary training.


I know they can and credit to places that are doing this, but I think
there is still a place for a slightly more "agricultural" primary
trainer. Especially if there is a training fleet to keep busy with
primary instruction. You can learn to fly power in a Bonanza but a
C172 with fixed gear and simpler systems is less likely to get a pilot
in trouble. I know you can get club versions of the DG-1000, with
fixed gear etc, but by the time I had a DG-1000 I'd want the retract
version and use it more XC.

It is unfortunate the some operations may end up in a very tough place
with the L13 issue and it comes at a time when the economy is bad.
Trying to contain costs is a good goal, but I worry that a lot of
clubs/operations in the USA are operating "on the wrong side of the
curve". i.e. focus on driving down to a minial cost - not working on
attracting people who are likely to stay around and fly XC, buy their
own gliders, etc. - that is helped by having a more modern training
fleet and focus on XC capable ships and XC instruction/mentoring to
get people going.

I look at what Morgan is doing at Avenal by having his Duo there and
that seems to be driving a lot more interest/activity in XC soaring by
pilots there. Or at Williams where you have sixteen year old line-boys
working their hours off and getting started flying XC in ASW-24s.
$100k divided by 20 people is $5k each. Scale for the right amount,
but even in tough financial times I'd still hope that type of funding
makes it possible to raise a pool to purchase a glass trainer. I know
it is not going to be possible everywhere.

BTW I have nothing against older gliders, many of them are just
*beautiful* and I'm glad to see them being flown and looked after.

Darryl
  #29  
Old September 15th 10, 05:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 14, 10:30*pm, Grider Pirate wrote:
[....]
Frankly I don't think it would have mattered to me
WHAT the club had to fly. I just wanted to be in the air.


Same here.

Now, all things being equal, I do prefer to fly a better glider. The
problem is, things are rarely equal. In my (admittedly limited)
experience, a club with a glass fleet will:
- be expensive to join, or
- be expensive to stay in, or,
- limit flying time (many members, few gliders), or
- all of the above.

Given a choice between getting a glass ship for an hour or 1-26 for
half a day, I'll take 1-26.

B.
  #30  
Old September 15th 10, 05:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Kevin Christner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 211
Default Future Club Training Gliders

On Sep 15, 8:37*am, Tony wrote:
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.


unless it was the only way they could afford the training.


As an advocate of wood and glue your defense of Schweizers puzzles me,
so I'll figure its because your unaware of the far better wooden
alternatives. The Ka7/Berfalke III/IV and the like come up for sale
on a regular basis in the $7-$10k range and offer far better training
and handling characteristics. You can almost begin to teach energy
management in them - they at least have enough energy for one high
speed pass followed by an immediate 180 and landing - don't ask me how
I know. The rear seats have adjustable rudder pedals and *gasp* an
instrument panel.

Perhaps the best thing I can say is that you can teach a student to
land two point or better yet tail first. The inability of such a
large percentage of US pilots to do proper low energy landings is
probably the biggest contributor to the amount of ground loop damage
in outlandings. I remember standing next to one very well regarded
European pilot watching a number of landings at the end of a contest
day. He said to the gathered group "Does anyone in American know how
to land a glider properly? We would not let any of you go solo!"

Try a wooden alternative, you just might like it.

I know of one club who sold their Ka7 last year to "upgrade" to an
L-13. Quite unfortunate.

KJC
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Club Class Gliders Sam Giltner[_1_] Soaring 4 December 3rd 08 04:28 AM
Basic Training Gliders Derek Copeland Soaring 35 December 26th 05 03:19 PM
Basic Training Gliders Justin Craig Soaring 0 December 6th 05 11:07 PM
Basic Training Gliders Justin Craig Soaring 0 December 6th 05 11:07 PM
Soaring club close to NYC, with high-performance gliders City Dweller Soaring 9 September 29th 05 11:55 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.