Dart17R, SHK-1, & K6E How they compare?
Frank Ivey
get my private rating in the next couple of months. At the I stop
flying, I had my Silver Altitude and Duration- same flight in a K6CR. This
time I plan to buy my own ship and want opinions on the Dart17R, SHK1-1,
and K6E. How do they compare in handling qualities, etc.? I something
about their relative
performance and handling through SSA's Sailplane Directory, Jane's World
Aircraft, and Moffat's "Winning on the Wind". Any other sources I should
consult?
Any opinions, advice, or experience with/about these will be appreciated.
Frank
fi...@crl.com
Sylvain Louboutin
well, I have had the opportunity recently to fly a Slingsby DART 17R;
I am also used to fly the Ka6CR, as well as the ASK-18 (roughly the
wings of the Ka6E but 16m instead of 15m, and a fuselage of a Ka8
alghough slightly better strealined; basically the performance of the
Ka6E but a lower speed);
bear in mind that my impression of the DART comes from only *one*
flight; so take it with a grain of salt; the DART has unfortunatly an
appalling reputation concerning its spinning/stalling characteristics;
I don't really believe it deserves it; it has indeed *sharp* stalling
characteristics (I tried it out), i.e., it behaves as described in the
book, i.e., when it stalls it indeed stalls, but also recovers
nicely; however it may come as a surprise to a beginner accustomed to
more forgiving ships. It is a *big* glider; 30 percent more heavy
than the Ka6E; you need to apply more strengths on the control to fly
it; but its response is quite positive; it is a very confortable
ship, I believe it would nicely suit large garbarit pilots; it is
very stable, i.e., it flies as if mounted on rails; (I took off
during a rather turbulent day behind a SuperCub which was flying a tad
fast but the plane was very stable nevertheless); it is a heavy
plane, but very easy to rig; my flight was ridge soaring only, I
dunno how it behaves in thermals, but there was a Ka6CR with me on the
ridge, a much lighter ship but which did not manage to outsoar me;
one thing though, it is not a glass ship, and it shows when you push
the speed up... on paper the DART flies better than the Ka6E.
I tried it out because I was considering buying one (by the way there
is one for sale at the Ulster Gliding Club, and in very good
condition); I did not buy it though, for several reasons, one of them
being a recent review of my own financial situation :-( besides two major
snags I see is that it is a glider ones must pilot, while the Ka6
gliders are more like machines ones *flies* if you see what I mean (but
this is a very subjective opinion and once again I only flew it once);
the other consideration was that I do not plan to settle down here in
Ireland, and it seems the DART is not a machine very easy to resale,
well at least not as easily as Ka6s...
hope it helps,
--
%%Sylvain R.Y. Louboutin, phone:(+353-1)7021539, e-mail:slou...@dsg.cs.tcd.ie
%%Distributed System Group, O'Reilly Institute, room F.35, fax:(+353-1)6772204
%%Department of Computer Science, Trinity College, Dublin 2, -Ireland- ASK-18
%% http://www.dsg.cs.tcd.ie:/dsg_people/sloubtin/sloubtin.html
Andy Wright
not flown the Dart 17R but I can offer one or two comments on it.
On pure performance grounds the SHK1 is definitely the best. It climbs well in
weak conditions and the glide performance is similar to machines such as the
Standard Cirrus or Standard Libelle. On the downside, the wings are heavy (about
220lbs each), and the airbrakes are poor, so speed control on approach is very
important. Later versions however have a tail chute which can be very handy
for landing in small fields (repack it before every flight to increase reliability). I have flown around 50 hours in the SHK over here in England, and
in my opinion it is a very good machine. The handling is very nice, you can only
feel a slight feedback between rudder and stick due to the V-tail. The aircraft
will spin readily if provoked and full recovery technique is needed to stop it
spinning. In addition the rudder loads are quite high in the spin.
I have flown about 5 hours in a K6E belonging to a friend of mine, including
a couple of short cross countries. For the weak conditions we experience here in
England it is definitely better in the climb than the Dart 17R, but not quite
as good as the SHK. The glide performance is slightly worse than the Dart (about
32:1 compared with a quoted 35:1 for the Dart). The SHK has a believable 38:1.
On the downside the under carriage is not retractable, so there is some loss of
performance here. The wings are nice and light compared with the SHK. Again the
handling is first class, though the elevator is very light due to the all
moving stabiliser with spring trimmer. Approach control is excellent due to
the powerful airbrakes.
The Dart has always had a reputation for poor climb performance in weak
conditions in this country. In addition the undercarriage is not particularly
strong. Watch out as some versions have a metal spar in the wing, which is
difficult to repair if it gets damaged. As I haven't flown it I can't make any
comment on the handling. Again the approach control is excellent.
To conclude I would go for the SHK on pure performance grounds, though I would
recommend that you ALWAYS "fly before you buy". Hope this helps. If you have any
further questions either post them or send an e-mail to:
Andy Wright
SHAUN C KELLER
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.soaring
Subject: Re: Dart17R, SHK-1, & K6E How they compare?
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 1994 16:39:15 GMT
Message-ID: <CKpKx...@world.std.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
I've owned a Dart 17R, but can't comment on the K6 or SHK. In short,
the Dart is an excellent sailplane.
My wife and I purchased the Dart while still going through our solo
training before passing the US glider rating, so we didn't have lots
of experience in gliders (neither of us has any other pilot ratings).
Prior to flying the Dart we flew the Schweizer 2-33 and 1-26 with
flight instruction from people trained in the US, England, and South
Africa. Subsequently, we've flown Grob 103 Acro (aerobatic training
at Estrella)), ASK-21, Janus B, Grob 102, Blanik L23, and Schweizer
1-34. My wife and I flew the Dart in thermal, ridge, and wave (at
Sugarbush, Vermont) so we experienced both easy and difficult wind
conditions. The Dart was always a nice plane to fly and stands up
well in performance against planes of comparable age. The Dart is a
nice plane to fly if you can't afford the higher performance modern
planes.
I have two interesting stories about the Dart. On my wife's first
Dart flight the tow plane ran out of fuel on tow! As the tow plane
dropped below the Dart's nose my wife pulled the release, thinking that
she was out of position. After making a fine landing she found out
what the real problem was! On my second day flying the Dart the tow
plane pulling me (a different plane and pilot) had a battery explosion
and waved me off rather low and far for a normal pattern, but not so
far as to force a land out. Is that strange luck?!
Relative to points that have been made about the Dart by other
responders: the stall and spin respond to normal recovery (our
training prepared us and we practiced with the Dart), there was an
early in-field modification to strenthen the undercarriage (see that it
has been done), there is a US AD about the metal of the later version
wood and metal spar that requires a very tight tolerance on
inspection, but you should discuss this with your airframe examiner to
get their opinion on the potential long term impact.
You might want to consider the ease and cost of repair for these three
sailplanes. Slingsby is long gone and finding parts could be a
problem. Recovering and wood repair can be very expensive.
We sold the Dart 17R to members of our soaring club who seem to enjoy
the plane as much or more than we did!
-Shaun
--- GOMail v1.2 [DEMO] 02-28-94
* Origin: The Play Room BBS (907)338-7049 (907:709/0)