First Glider

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass. He hasn't flown in about 10 years.
I am also looking at a brand new 15 meter SZD51-1 Junior.
I know they are not quite in the same class but I
am a little nervous about the high performance of the
LS4. I plan to spend the next two weeks in a Lark to
transition to a glass ship(remember I don't have my
licence yet but am very keen and careful). My approaches
are good and PDM has been refined over the last 15
year. I do not want to get discouraged by a ship over
my level of ability. I still plan to spend lots of
time dual to refine my skills. Any advise is greatly
appreciated.

Jeff

Jeff Runciman wrote:

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass.

Don't worry about performance. Last week I flown a Discus2 and I have
to tell that I can't imagine better glider for beginners. I think it
will be difficult to sell you junior and you could outgrow in a year so
go for the ls4 if you can afford it.
Regards,

/Janos

"Janos Bauer" wrote in message
...
Jeff Runciman wrote:

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass.

Don't worry about performance. Last week I flown a Discus2 and I have
to tell that I can't imagine better glider for beginners. I think it
will be difficult to sell you junior and you could outgrow in a year so
go for the ls4 if you can afford it.
Regards,

/Janos
There seems to be a steady stream of clubs and others looking for Juniors in
the US. There are eight on the registry and no one wants to sell. One
owner told me he'd had a call each month this year when I called a few
months ago. Due to the Euro/Dollar rate, they are a little bit expensive
for new production w/trailer as there are other suitable options available
on the used market.

Frank

Janos Bauer wrote:
Jeff Runciman wrote:

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass.

Don't worry about performance. Last week I flown a Discus2 and I have
to tell that I can't imagine better glider for beginners. I think it
will be difficult to sell you junior and you could outgrow in a year so
go for the ls4 if you can afford it.

And Jeff, keep in mind some of the performance is just from the
retract wheel. Really I wouldn't buy into a fixed gear glider unless
it was a Sparrowhawk. In the end, if the retract idea is scary,
just leave the gear down! Tie-wrap it that way if you like!

Believe me, you'll outgrow fixed gear quickly...
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Mark James Boyd wrote:

And Jeff, keep in mind some of the performance is just from the
retract wheel. Really I wouldn't buy into a fixed gear glider unless
it was a Sparrowhawk. In the end, if the retract idea is scary,
just leave the gear down! Tie-wrap it that way if you like!

Believe me, you'll outgrow fixed gear quickly...

THis might not be obvious, but a glider designed with fixed gear doesn't
suffer the same performance penalty a retractable gear glider does when
the gear is down. THe typical fixed gear does not extend as far from the
fuselage as on a retractable gear glider, and it is faired in properly,
so the drag is negligible at thermalling and moderate speeds and small
at higher speeds.

Because a nonretracting gear is typically on lower performance gliders,
I think people come to believe it is a big performance liability. These
gliders would still be lower performance with the gear tucked away. For
example, note the small handicap difference between these two Russias
(US handicap):

AviaStroitel Russia AC-4A 1.193 (fixed gear)
AviaStroitel Russia AC-4C 1.185 (retract gear)

Or the SAME handicap for the two versions of the Phoebus:

Bolkow Phoebus A, B 1.025 (A is fixed; B is retract)

What the retractable gear can give a designer is flexibility in other
aspects. The glider can sit higher off the ground for better wing and
fuselage clearance in a off-airport landing, and more "crush space" is
available for absorbing very heavy landing loads.

Of course, the designer might choose a gear high enough that wing tip
stalling on the ground roll is a problem, or not use the crush space
effectively (cheaper). You will definitely pay more for the retractable
gear because they are more costly to design and build, and some of us
will pay more for fixing the glider when they forget to lower the gear
or it makes it's own decision about retracting!


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Eric Greenwell wrote:
Mark James Boyd wrote:

And Jeff, keep in mind some of the performance is just from the
retract wheel. Really I wouldn't buy into a fixed gear glider unless
it was a Sparrowhawk. In the end, if the retract idea is scary,
just leave the gear down! Tie-wrap it that way if you like!

Believe me, you'll outgrow fixed gear quickly...

THis might not be obvious, but a glider designed with fixed gear doesn't
suffer the same performance penalty a retractable gear glider does when
the gear is down. THe typical fixed gear does not extend as far from the
fuselage as on a retractable gear glider, and it is faired in properly,
so the drag is negligible at thermalling and moderate speeds and small
at higher speeds.

This is all quite true. A Russia with gear down will fly worse than
a fixed gear Russia (at the same weight).

I was really just making the point that if retract gear familiarity
is the issue, it's certainly possible to fly for a while and get
familiar with other aspects of the glider before mucking with
learning the retract gear procedures...

Because a nonretracting gear is typically on lower performance gliders,
I think people come to believe it is a big performance liability. These
gliders would still be lower performance with the gear tucked away. For
example, note the small handicap difference between these two Russias
(US handicap):

AviaStroitel Russia AC-4A 1.193 (fixed gear)
AviaStroitel Russia AC-4C 1.185 (retract gear)

I disagree completely. Sure, the handicap difference looks small.
This is bunk. There is a big difference in performance between these
two gliders in even moderate (4 knot) conditions. And in wave or
strong ridge lift? The polar at 80 knots is about 15% better for the
retract. I'd be willing to bet that two evenly ranked pilots,
one in each, would prove that the AC-4c is better. Swap them
out every other day, and you'd see the AC-4c win a competition.

I think the AC-4c is mishandicapped. It won Sport class at
Avenal this year, and Chad Moore took third in a 2000 competition
despite missing a day!

You can make up for not having flaps to some degree by using
ballast, but a big draggy tire (or TWO!) has no fix except gettin'
it out of the wind...again, the Sparrowhawk may be an exception because
adding the mechanism and space for retract might involve other
needed changes that subsequently reduce performance...
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Jeff Runciman wrote in message ...
Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass. He hasn't flown in about 10 years.
I am also looking at a brand new 15 meter SZD51-1 Junior.
I know they are not quite in the same class but I
am a little nervous about the high performance of the
LS4....

Once again, "high performance" does not equate to "hard to fly" in a
sailplane. Characteristics that make a glider "hard to fly" are poor
roll rate, small spoilers, inadequate rudder, touchy spin
characteristics or tip stalling tendencies, poor cockpit layout,
unharmonized controls, poor aileron control on takeoff, etc. This can
come with good glide angle or bad glide angle. More glide angle by
itself does not make a sailplane harder to fly - it only makes it
more fun! The LS4 is a very good easy to fly glider -- only the LS8,
Discus2, ASW28 are better in that class, and they also perform better.
The LS4 is a lot easier to fly than older generation gliders with
worse performance.


John Cochrane (BB)

I've flown both. The LS-4s I have flown are easier and more pleasant to
fly than the Junior I flew. I'll risk saying that the LS-4 is so easy to
fly that it is almost boring. Very stable in all 3 axes. Darn near flies
coordinated on it's own and requires very little input in thermals.

The one Junior that I have flown is a fine ship except for a sticky
rudder.

My first glider was a 301 Libelle (my second glider was a 301 Libelle as
well). On releasing from tow, I remember thinking "What have I gotten
myself into".

Every club should have an LS-4! Best tool ever for recruiting and member
retention.

In article ,
Jeff Runciman wrote:

Hi guys,

Thank you so much for your insights and advise. There
is a local pilot that has an LS4, a little bit of crazing
of the fiberglass. He hasn't flown in about 10 years.
I am also looking at a brand new 15 meter SZD51-1 Junior.


--
Take out the airplane for reply

Wallace Berry wrote:
I've flown both. The LS-4s I have flown are easier and more pleasant to
fly than the Junior I flew. I'll risk saying that the LS-4 is so easy to
fly that it is almost boring. Very stable in all 3 axes. Darn near flies
coordinated on it's own and requires very little input in thermals.

The one Junior that I have flown is a fine ship except for a sticky
rudder.

As an aside, the PW-5 is a bit under-ruddered. Not much roll rate
flipping into a thermal.
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd