Buying LS3a or ASW20a? ~$25k cross country glider. Which one and why?

[Michael N.]

I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.

I'd like to get a flapped 15 meter, and have been doing a lot of searching and reading on the groups and have kind of narrowed my decision down to an ASW20 or LS3a

I have about 200 hours in gliders all glass, but never anything with flaps, however I also owned and have several hundred hours in a Mooney M20C so have good experience in complex aircraft that require good in flight planning for various aspects of flight.

I was also considering the following, and will list some of my reasons for weeding them out of my choice list.

Ventus B: Great performance, but my understanding from reading (no actual experience) is that they are not forgiving or maybe a better way of putting it, is they require full time attention which can be fatiguing on long flights.

DG 200 or 202, good aircraft but you have to pay annual fees just to buy parts?

Mini Nimbus: also good aircraft, just not up to the same performance level as an ASW20

That kind of leaves the ASW20 or LS3 in this price range and category. Unless I am missing something.

So which would you have and why?
I am leaning towards an ASW20 purchase, but am finding some very well equipped LS3a's in the same price range as a moderately equipped ASW20.

Assuming similar clamshell style trailers and self rigging gear, which is the better buy or which would you have and why?

Also, anyone knowing of an ASW20 or LS3 for sale not already on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.

Thanks, I know this topic has been brought up before, but I am in the final stages of preparing for a purchase before the 2019 season gets into full swing and would like to get some final advice before pulling the trigger on this purchase.

[Tim Taylor]

As always buy the glider with the best trailer. I would not rule out the Ventus. I have flown the ASW20 and the Ventus. I found them both to be similar. I would not buy either unless they have winglets. The Ventus b had automatic hookups, where the 20a may have manual hookups, especially on the elevator.

The LS3 has heavy wings, and significantly lower performance than either the Ventus or 20, especially at higher speeds.

In the 2nd generation gliders I would likely pick:
1. Ventus with winglets
2. Discus
3. ASW20 with winglets
4. LS4
5. LS3a

[ronald...@gmail.com]

The LS3 (all models) will have the requirement for the annual subscription fee for factory support. In spite of the heavy wings, I really like my LS3.

RC

[Steve Leonard]

For the record, you guys all like to bash on them about their "annual fee". It is 245 Euro. Yeah, the other manufacturers aren't doing this, but I sure as heck wouldn't rule out a plane I am looking at spending upwards of 25K on because there is an extra $275 per year in expense of ownership. Heck, you might even find parts are cheaper for supporting an older LS under contract than an older Schleicher. Maybe not. But I wouldn't rule them out just because of that little bit.

YMMV,
Steve Leonard
LS6 serial 6037
N511M
Most recent sailplane to have been flown by a US Pilot (not me!) to a World Championship.

[ronald...@gmail.com]

No bashing here. I wouldn't rule them out either.

RC

[Michael N.]

Ok but what is the performance comparison or flying comparison between the LS3a and ASW20a?

Also, not wanting to bring up an old discussion, but how much harder to fly is the Ventus B? Is it harder or just more tiresome?

Also, it was mentioned to buy with winglets. I'm not sure this group of gliders, with winglets is available in the $25k price range. If you know of one, that is decently equipped with good finish, I'd like to hear about it.

I do need to target an aircraft that has a good serviceable finish, and decent electronics for X-country. Is that doable for $25k?

Thanks for any suggestions or information.

[Charlie Quebec]

There are two payment levels for DG service, 245E and 175E. The cheaper price gets only electronic copies of manuals you print yourself.
LS3A does not have the heavy wings of the LS3 due to splitting the flaps and ailerons.

[ronald...@gmail.com]

There is a good article about LS3's by Greg Arnold here:

http://soaringcafe.com/2011/01/used-sailplane-review-ls3/

RC

[Per Carlin]

Most of us LS and older DG owners have not signed the service contract. How often you you need spare parts? They can often be found from an crasched glider. There has not been any new mandatory TN for my LS1 in about 20-years, wht pay 175€/year for a paper that will never show up?

I would not spend to much time on comparing performace on gliders that are 30 years old, they perform more or less equal.
Buy a nice looking glider with instruments and trailer that suits you budget, then do what gliders are designed to do = > Go flyging :)

[Paul Hodgetts]

Don't rule out a Ventus B .... I've owned a half share in one for four
years,
it's a delight to rigg (lift-top trailer) cf wings are light(ish) and the
thin
section is less affected by rain and bugs. The trialing edge airbrakes can

give you a 4.5 to 1 glide(!) which can be very useful.
Yes, there are things to be aware of (don't close the brakes near the
ground!) but possibly no more than with other older flapped gliders. At my

weight, 85Kg, the stall seems innocuous.
Not particularly tiring to fly.
And I almost forgot - with the 16.6m tips it soars and goes really, really

well!
Paul Hodgetts

>

[uncl...@ix.netcom.com]

Don't rule out other options.
Any '20 or LS-3, or Ventus in the price range you are looking at will be a clapped out ship.
For similar money it would be possible to find a ship in much better condition such as an ASW-19, Std Cirrus, Pegesus, DG100 or such. Some of these ships show up having been refinished a few years ago and having a good amount of life before major expense will be needed.
UH

[benso...@gmail.com]

Agree, you should also consider the S-H Ventus.

The LS-3 is a dream to fly; controls are very harmonic and it is comfortable. It lacks accommodating panel space and it does not "run" as well or land as short as the ASW-2O. That being said, the 20 is more pitch sensitive and will not tolerate poor approach piloting. The 20's thinner airfoil requires more attention and stall respect.

The LS support is iffy and concerning (no offense Cumulus Soaring). Here in the US, you'll have more experience and support with a Schleicher product. The Mayes family @ Williams Soaring, CA are the Schleicher US reps and are very experienced.

Which one? IMO, deciding factors should be damage history, finish condition, instrumentation, and trailer condition.

Having many XC hours in both, my preference is the ASW-20 and especially the 20C. The 20C is worth the extra money.

> On Sunday, March 31, 2019 at 11:04:06 PM UTC-4, Michael N. wrote:

[SoaringXCellence]

Unless you're also planning on competing, or trying for records, you should widen your selection. The performance difference is very small between most of the second generation glass ships. Looking at the Johnson reports shows 1-2 points difference, but all of them measured better than 37:1 which is plenty for great XC soaring.

I have flown an H301 Libelle, Pegasus, ASW-20, and currently own a Mini Nimbus C.

The flapped ships are fun and the Peg is very easy to fly. I love the Mini for the landing flaps (which some people don't). Lots of panel space and easy to rig (nothing is as easy as the Libelle. Automatic hook-ups and a very comfortable cockpit (about the same as the Ventus).

Mike B.

[Michael N.]

On Sunday, March 31, 2019 at 9:04:06 PM UTC-6, Michael N. wrote:
> I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.

Thanks, I guess at this point I am looking for "best bang for the buck" in the current marketplace. Including finish and instruments and trailer.

I really cannot go much higher than $25k so I am looking for a complete package (good finish, trialer, instrumentation package) for cross country.
I do want a flapped ship, as again I have lots of hours in complex aircraft, and I want the ability to get into short fields on landing out if I have too.

I am reconsidering now the Ventus B, also the DG202, as well as the previously mentioned LS3 or LS3a, and ASW20 (a,b, or c)

In my price range I do see an ASW20a and a Ventus B (maybe) without winglets. So I am also trying to see if winglets are still available for the 20 or Ventus.

Thanks for the feedback, please keep it coming.
Mike

[Dan Marotta]

...And 511M is one sweet flying machine.  I know this as a former owner
who added about 650 hours to her clock.

--
Dan, 5J

[Dan Marotta]

Don't get too hung up on instruments.  You can legally fly with just the
basic instruments noted in the Type Certificate Data Sheet. True, it's
easier with moving maps and soaring computers, but there's quite a sense
of satisfaction in accomplishing a task with just the basics.  I
completed my Gold Badge with just a prayer wheel and sectional chart,
and all my Diamonds with only the addition of an early, basic GPS
(Trimble Flightmate Pro) which only gave bearing and distance to
airports, no glide information.  You can add a great soaring computer
for about $100 using an obsolete cell phone with a daylight readable
display and XCSoar (free download).

Have fun!

--
Dan, 5J

[JS]

Mosquito should be another candidate.
You may find that for $25k you'll end up with something other than those two choices. But if you insist, the LS could be the best of the two for that price.
If you want "ready to fly", perhaps look at the overall condition of the glider and trailer before performance. That would include paperwork.
Jim

[Michael N.]

As a secondary question, how well do winglets, or 16.6 extensions help the flying qualities of the Ventus B?

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

First questions nobody asked.......
Where are you flying?
How serious?

I can only comment on 20's........
20a, fantastic flaps......early flying season, come in very high on final, do full landing flaps and full dive brakes.......drops like a homesick brick.......
But, elevator is not auto connect.......know of a ship trashed because of this.
A 20A or C, limited to 9pounds..........fine if eastern thermals. Screwed if fast conditions.
Sucks to western thermals or ridge......trust me, I have been beat in eastern ridge in a nationals......I had local knowledge so made time on gap climbs, watched heavier gliders run by on long ridge runs. Yes, ran against "DG in a LS6" and,others.
Flying ridges or western thermals, maybe a 20B.
All the 20's can be helped with winglets.
I have my preference, but I am biased partly because I was "beta boy" on lots of testing for 20 and 24 winglets.

In your price range.....I will say a standard AS ship......partly because if you learned on a SGS, control harmony is similar.
I can't state for other glass single seaters.......

As stated before, in your price range, a flapped ship is likely borderline a rat.
Bad?.......ask Daniel on his performance on a "rat ship" I know of last year.
Crazed surface THAT IS SMOOTH can do well.
Most of a result is the "nut behind the stick".

Just my opinion.
Best I ever did was first page on the SSA ranking list.
I won't say I am a "mover or shaker"....,,

[arche...@gmail.com]

With 200 hours I would stay away from the Ventus w/o winglets unless your instructor says you have plenty of extra bandwidth available while flying and your thermalling skills are already very sound. It's not a glider that you want to learn how to fly XC with.
OTOH, if you are flying in the western US and know for sure you are in it for the long term and only want to buy and fly one glider in the next 10 years and your enthusiasm is high, the Ventus might be a good choice. But it will take you longer to get better at all of the XC skills than if you bought an LS-4 and flew it for 200 hours XC first. As was said, some of the unappreciated but very valuable things about the Ventus are auto hookups, pretty light wings, and it's easy to put water in it. Just pour water into the wing from a hose with meter attached. And it really, really goes. It's the perfect glider for me because I've flown a lot and I can't afford the next generation.
Buy a 4 or 3 or Mosquito or Pegasus or the like, fly it for 200-300 hrs. XC, then buy a Ventus. The numbers are only slightly different but the performance is dramatic and well worth it in my opinion, particularly with water.
An Oudie2 or similar is a very powerful easy to add computer sufficient for navigation. The radio is also important, should be clear and have a functional PTT.
And you should probably consider adding FLARM if it doesn't already have it.
And don't buy anything without a sound Komet or Cobra trailer unless you have hangar access.
Pretty tough to have all that and a good finish for <$25K but I wish you success. 10 years ago it was impossible!

[Michael N.]

Yep, agreed I am a nut :-)
How serious? I don't know yet, to be honest. I'd like to compete in club class when I have some time built up.
I can't afford to buy or sell gliders over and over, so my intent is "best bang for the buck" and flapped for the short field landing capabilities. I'm not afraid of the workload of flaps, as I noted I have some hours in Mooney's and other complex high performance aircraft that require concentration and planning especially on approach to land.

I will be flying mountain, as I am part time in Utah. I learned out of Minden, flying wave and mountain.
I had heard that the ASW20 (a-c) were good for mountains due to the semi-flexible wing design?

Thanks for any further feedback...
Mike

[Michael N.]

On Monday, April 1, 2019 at 1:26:03 PM UTC-6, arche...@gmail.com wrote:
> With 200 hours I would stay away from the Ventus w/o winglets unless your instructor says you have plenty of extra bandwidth available while flying and your thermalling skills are already very sound.

Can you comment further on the differences in handling of the Ventus B with and without winglets?

Thanks!

[JS]

Please take all our suggestions as constructive. Doing this in two steps as others suggest may prevent a big surprise.
Mooneys aren't generally flown in steep turns at close to stall.
You will be flying a Ventus A/B or an ASW20 in those conditions, and in rough air!
If you let a Ventus A/B or ASW20 without winglets stall in a thermal it will get your attention in a hurry. It really would be best to do that after getting more experience.
When looking at performance figures only, you'll wonder why people pay so much for newer generation gliders. Much of their performance is due to user-friendliness.
Winglets, it seems especially the higher aspect ratio ones, make low speed flying more stable. A friend dinged one of his Maughmer winglets and flew the 20 without them while it was being fixed. With many hours in that glider he didn't like it.
Jim

[arche...@gmail.com]

Unfortunately I can't, never flown one with them. There have been comments in other threads iirc. JS's post above is a good one, safety is the primary concern with all of this. Another tack... your instructor, and competent conservative pilots that you hold in high regard that know your flying, that you have flown with, will know. Ask them what they think of your idea and if they get quiet and take a long pause, listen :). This works for many, many questions in soaring... "I'm thinking of doing _X_, whaddya think"? If eyes dart towards the ground you probably have your answer. Like the day I was considering a Diamant...
And are you sure you would lose any significant amount of $ buying and selling glider #1? Gliders are getting cheaper over time i believe so if you buy one with a good finish, are not stuck with a "hot potato" as it were, then it's mostly just inconvenience. And you might have a much better idea what you DO want, say you have a chance to fly a Ventus for example, and then be in a position to jump and buy the glider you know you want when it comes up for sale.

[Michael N.]

On Monday, April 1, 2019 at 1:58:01 PM UTC-6, JS wrote:
> Please take all our suggestions as constructive. Doing this in two steps as others suggest may prevent a big surprise.
> Mooneys aren't generally flown in steep turns at close to stall.
> You will be flying a Ventus A/B or an ASW20 in those conditions, and in rough air!
> If you let a Ventus A/B or ASW20 without winglets stall in a thermal it will get your attention in a hurry. It really would be best to do that after getting more experience.
> When looking at performance figures only, you'll wonder why people pay so much for newer generation gliders. Much of their performance is due to user-friendliness.
> Winglets, it seems especially the higher aspect ratio ones, make low speed flying more stable. A friend dinged one of his Maughmer winglets and flew the 20 without them while it was being fixed. With many hours in that glider he didn't like it.
> Jim

I definitely value the opinions being shared here.
Everyone here is likely a better, more experienced glider guider than I am. I really do appreciate the wisdom and suggestions.
So I am going to take a step back and add to my considerations, standard class gliders.
I do have the concern of buying something and then re-selling to upgrade later. I'm going into retirement shortly, and will have a nice income, but still a limited income for larger purchases. I'll never be in the position of being able to afford anything over $50k, and even that unlikely.

I was going to try and get the Pegasus or Pik 20 (I forget which) the the soaring museum had listed at a very good price around 13k but I missed that opportunity.

So maybe I should look at an ASW19 or similar. Seem like an LS4 is out of my price range.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

I think standard class is a great way to start. I started in 15 meter ship that was not easy to fly and I soon realized I would get much more flying with a easier and safer bird to fly. Got rid of the 15 meter bird and got a great deal on a standard class bird. First year I had I flew 275 hours, much of it XC. With my prior bird, I was dealing with a number of factors, one being it had a few defects in airframe and trailer, and my flight time was not very high that season. If you buy too much glider you will fly less, and not as safe. I wouldn't worry a ton about performance at this stage, you want to get into the air. Find the easiest to fly glider, with best trailer in your price range. There were other posters mentioning where you fly. If you want to fly all year a low wing loading helps you climb in winter thermals, and most std class can carry water for great weather. There was a Peg listed on W&W for 13K. If I was looking to buy a first glider I would check that out. You can get a few hundred hours or much more in it, and probably make money selling it when you want to buy your Nimbus 4/5/? In the mean time you are gaining knowledge experience and more contacts that can help you sell this and move up. Good luck

[Roy B.]

Michael:
You will find no shortage of opinions on this forum. But - Considering your budget and age you might consider buying a better glider with a partner. There are lots of nice machines on the market in the $35-$50K range, and there is a lot to be said for sharing the expenses and the fun with a partner. You can support and retrieve each other. All of my first non-club gliders were bought with partners and all of the experiences were good. Today I own one machine myself and another one (abroad) with a partner. Just a thought.
Good luck,
Roy

[Steve Leonard]

On Monday, April 1, 2019 at 4:52:01 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

There was a Peg listed on W&W for 13K.

Sorry, folks. That glider has sold. And, would you believe. Not to me?!?

Steve Leonard

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Decent comment.

I can only speak for AS.......20, 24, 28, 29 for single place glass, ASK-21 for dual......not counting many SGS ships (26, 33, 34, 35, 36), but the AS's have a similar control harmony to SGS FWIW.......
Yes, AS ships with winglets (and other brands) are easier to fly than without.

A partner is likely a better way to bump up a bit.
My previous comments still apply......

[Michael N.]

Yeah, I missed that 13k Pegasus by a couple of days. That would have been great.

[Michael N.]

So I just re-read this thread from the top.
A lot of good information here. I appreciate it.
I'm going to take a deep breath and re-review what is available.
I'm going to focus on a good glider with good finish and trailer that has the potential of being re-sold in a few years.
Anyway, there is a lot to think about here.
If you know of a glider not currently on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.
At this time a partnership is not in the cards due to traveling.

[Ron Gleason]

Not sure if you are a member of the Utah SOaring Association, there is a Mike N on the membership list, but you should be a member as you mention you are part time in UT. Four different airports, G103 and Twin Astirs to fly and access to a Pilatus when you are checked out.

The club is the best bang for your buck to stay current and gain experience as you are performing your search.

[Stu]

On Sunday, March 31, 2019 at 9:04:06 PM UTC-6, Michael N. wrote:
> I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.
>

> I'd like to get a flapped 15 meter, and have been doing a lot of searching and reading on the groups and have kind of narrowed my decision down to an ASW20 or LS3a
>
> I have about 200 hours in gliders all glass, but never anything with flaps, however I also owned and have several hundred hours in a Mooney M20C so have good experience in complex aircraft that require good in flight planning for various aspects of flight.
>
> I was also considering the following, and will list some of my reasons for weeding them out of my choice list.
>
> Ventus B: Great performance, but my understanding from reading (no actual experience) is that they are not forgiving or maybe a better way of putting it, is they require full time attention which can be fatiguing on long flights.
>
> DG 200 or 202, good aircraft but you have to pay annual fees just to buy parts?
>
> Mini Nimbus: also good aircraft, just not up to the same performance level as an ASW20
>
> That kind of leaves the ASW20 or LS3 in this price range and category. Unless I am missing something.
>
> So which would you have and why?
> I am leaning towards an ASW20 purchase, but am finding some very well equipped LS3a's in the same price range as a moderately equipped ASW20.
>
> Assuming similar clamshell style trailers and self rigging gear, which is the better buy or which would you have and why?
>
> Also, anyone knowing of an ASW20 or LS3 for sale not already on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.
>
> Thanks, I know this topic has been brought up before, but I am in the final stages of preparing for a purchase before the 2019 season gets into full swing and would like to get some final advice before pulling the trigger on this purchase.

I owned an ASW-20 for 25 years; now fly an ASW-27. Never had winglets on the 20 and did not have any problem keeping up with a Ventus unless they were fully loaded with water. The only issue with the 20 is the manual hookups. Since I am older and more forgetful, I would not go back to manual hookups. The 20 is much better performance than the LS3. If you are going to do competitive flying with a full load of water, then I would go with the Ventus; however, I think to get one with a good finish you will be looking at 35K.

For recreational flying and considering the cost, I would go with the ASW-20, assuming you follow checklists and do a very thorough pre-flight control check. By the way, I flew an entire day in strong mountain conditions with out the blot in the tail of my 20!

Stu 2Z

[johnsin...@yahoo.com]

Tom Stowers (Minden) has an LS-3a that was completely stripped, countoured and re-finished in Urethane in 2015. Decent trailer and instruments and price dropped to 28K. I would expect that ship to hold that selling price for some time to come. The 3 is the most comfortable ship I have ever flown and pleasant to fly with a light stick and good harmonics.
Hope this helps,
JJ

[Charlie Quebec]

Ive flown The Mini Nimbus, Mosquito and DG 202. For gliders of that era using the FX67-k170 airfoil there is only a small spread of Performance, with the Pik 20 slightly worse due to poor airfoil accuracy, one locally is 19% thick rather than the 17 % it should be. The LS3 seems to be the best handling of the bunch, and the 20 with its thinner airfoil has the best performance.
I bought a 202. I would put the Mosquito second behind the DG, though for larger pilots the cockpit is a little small. Johnson said the DG was the most comfortable glider he had flown at the time.
The Mosquito was very nice to fly and had a big cockpit. The DG showed a slightly higher performance in Johnson’s tests, of about 1.5 L/D points. When I recently ran templates of my 202, the airfoil was still very accurate. I have found no great issue flying with flaps, compared to retrimming a standard class glider, there really isn’t much difference.
Both the DG and Mini have versions with carbon wings, which are lighter and make rigging easier.
All of these gliders are nice to fly and viceless handling. It really comes down to what suits you personally best, my advice would be to try and test fly as many of them as possible before making a decision.
The LS3, ASW20 AND DG200/202 have optional span extensions to about 17m which gives a worthwhile improvement in performance. Only the Mosquito has full automatic control hookups, I have fitted Wedekind sleeves that make hookups much easier, and is not a great cost or difficult to fit.
Recently Ingo Renner took my DG for a test flight and remarked that it is a very nice glider with no “buts”
In order of performance.
ASW20 =LS3
Dg 202
Mosquito = Mini Nimbus
Pik20
All capable of 1000km flight in the right hands and condition.

[Matt Herron (Sr)]

On Sunday, March 31, 2019 at 8:04:06 PM UTC-7, Michael N. wrote:
> I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.
>
> I'd like to get a flapped 15 meter, and have been doing a lot of searching and reading on the groups and have kind of narrowed my decision down to an ASW20 or LS3a
>
> I have about 200 hours in gliders all glass, but never anything with flaps, however I also owned and have several hundred hours in a Mooney M20C so have good experience in complex aircraft that require good in flight planning for various aspects of flight.
>
> I was also considering the following, and will list some of my reasons for weeding them out of my choice list.
>
> Ventus B: Great performance, but my understanding from reading (no actual experience) is that they are not forgiving or maybe a better way of putting it, is they require full time attention which can be fatiguing on long flights.
>
> DG 200 or 202, good aircraft but you have to pay annual fees just to buy parts?
>
> Mini Nimbus: also good aircraft, just not up to the same performance level as an ASW20
>
> That kind of leaves the ASW20 or LS3 in this price range and category. Unless I am missing something.
>
> So which would you have and why?
> I am leaning towards an ASW20 purchase, but am finding some very well equipped LS3a's in the same price range as a moderately equipped ASW20.
>
> Assuming similar clamshell style trailers and self rigging gear, which is the better buy or which would you have and why?
>
> Also, anyone knowing of an ASW20 or LS3 for sale not already on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.
>
> Thanks, I know this topic has been brought up before, but I am in the final stages of preparing for a purchase before the 2019 season gets into full swing and would like to get some final advice before pulling the trigger on this purchase.

Hi Michael: I've owned an LS-4, a Ventus C, and my current LS-6. For me there would be no choice. The LS gliders are a joy to fly. They have no bad habits; they hold tight circles easily; and on long flights they are much less fatiguing. On my third Ventus flight in turbulence I went into a high speed stall without any warning, found myself looking directly at the ground and thought I was going to die. It took me three years to fully trust the glider. The Ventus C and especially the B require constant attention to the flight controls. They do not fly themselves. Flying the Ventus will eventually make you a very good pilot, but you may not entirely enjoy the experience.

I have never flown an ASK 20, but I hear good things about them. I would avoid the 20A because it has a bad habit of spinning at low speeds. We lost a club member in such an accident. This was corrected in the 20B, and people who have them think it's a very fine glider. I'm not sure I would obsess about winglets. In the class of ships you're looking at other concerns are probably more important. Good luck in your quest!
Matt

[krasw]

ASW 20 was ahead of it's time and in reality belongs to same generation as Ventus/LS6 (except that final bit of wing loading). Handling is pleasant, more so than Ventus, and it is easiest glider to land on a short field. You get spare parts and technical assistance from factory without annual fees. It will drop wing if stalled in thermal, just like every single glider this old (especially with aft CG). Push stick forward and you are flying again. All Wortmann FX170-profiled gliders are older generation performance-wise. If it rains or you get bugs on leading edge, you fall out of sky like an anvil. No doubt most of them can be pleasant to fly and perform ok, but they are not on the same level as '20.

[Steve Leonard]

On Wednesday, April 3, 2019 at 1:53:19 AM UTC-5, krasw wrote:
> ASW 20 was ahead of it's time and in reality belongs to same generation as Ventus/LS6 (except that final bit of wing loading). ... All Wortmann FX170-profiled gliders are older generation performance-wise. If it rains or you get bugs on leading edge, you fall out of sky like an anvil.

But, the 20 uses the older (and maybe better?) 62K153/131 family. Maybe that is why it was ahead of its time? Because it used an older airfoil section. Like its big brothers, the ASW 12 and ASW 17.

Steve Leonard

[Michael N.]

On Tuesday, April 2, 2019 at 9:59:15 AM UTC-6, Ron Gleason wrote:

> Not sure if you are a member of the Utah SOaring Association, there is a Mike N on the membership list, but you should be a member as you mention you are part time in UT. Four different airports, G103 and Twin Astirs to fly and access to a Pilatus when you are checked out.
>
> The club is the best bang for your buck to stay current and gain experience as you are performing your search.

I am joining the Utah Soaring Association. Hoping to be in Utah most all of the summer and doing a lot of flying with the group. Also, need some refresher training and a BFR. Thanks!

[Michael N.]

I am looking at this as a candidate. Thanks

[Michael N.]

Thanks for all the replies! This is great information.
I'm still searching.
From what I am seeing here it seems that in general most of these gliders in the late '70s early '80s era are roughly the same. Without trying to start a debate, maybe a bit of an edge going to the 20 or Ventus, with the caveats mentioned in the discussion.

I am not as concerned about manual VS automatic hookups. Obviously I would prefer automatic hookups. Who wouldn't? However the reality is in my price range I have to look at gliders that fall into both categories. I'm a software engineer and am very process deliberate, and to me having manual hookups means always being diligent in the process of putting the glider together. Manual hookups do not make the glider less safe, you just have to diligently follow the assembly process, checklist, and positive control check every time. If you get distracted, double check everything, restart the assembly checklist from the beginning and re-check every fitting, every time. Then do a positive control check, again.

Having read this thread over from top to bottom a few times, as well as some private discussions, I've narrowed my search down to roughly 4-5 candidates, unless something new comes on the market in the next couple of weeks.

My main criteria now is finish and quality of the aircraft, trailer, and instrumentation. I'll just have to start doing some traveling and looking at aircraft. Right now my candidate list are a DG 200, a DG202, 2 LS3's, an ASW20, and maybe a Ventus, but I am still thinking about the Ventus due to conflicting opinions I am getting on that aircraft. Some say it's great, others not so much.

I was thinking about starting a thread on GPS displays and Flarm. i.e. If I get a glider without a GPS display such as an Oudie, or no Flarm, what are my options for updating at a reasonable cost?
I will want a transponder, at least Mode C, as I plan on getting back to Minden for some wave flying. (I went to 23.5k feet in the wave at Minden once, and have had several flights in the wave over 17k feet.)

Thanks again for all input, I do appreciate it.
Mike

[Mike the Strike]

The first iteration of the ASW-20 (there never was an "a" model as such) had a very aggressive flap setting, known by many of us as the "Jesus flap". That's what you said the first time you deployed it - lots and lots of drag, big change in attitude and no extra lift. I believe that most early spin accidents with the ASW-20 resulted from the combination of rearward CG plus early deployment of full landing flap in the pattern followed by a stall/spin on turning.
Schleicher recommended that the Jesus flap only be deployed when your final was properly set up. In the six years I owned my ASW-20, I only deployed maximum flap a couple of times - once when landing out in a very short space. Models from the ASW-20b on removed this last flap setting since it was never really needed.

I have followed several experienced cross-country pilots flying Ventus B gliders and it's noticeable that control movements are larger and more often than in other contemporary models. One pilot I know appeared to use the rudder for supplemental thrust as it was always flapping! I think it's safe to say it needs a bit more attention to fly than others.

I concur with comments about auto-hookups for controls and a decent trailer - once you've had either you never go back!

Mike

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

"Jesus flap".....never heard that before.....but......having flown an early -20(a), yes, every spring after getting used to things, I would come down final VERY high....then, full brakes and full flaps....Frikkin felt like standing on the rudder pedals but limited speed increase...impressive!
The 20C was close, but not quite as good.

Winglets help on the low speed end depending on what design....some are more high speed others are low/mid range speeds.
For most thermal spots, I would lean to a 20C since some auto hookups.
Strong thermals and ridge, I would lean to a 20B due to wingloading.

[George Haeh]

The 20 B & C have automatic elevator hookup - caveat that the extremely hamhanded could possibly misalign.

There's been some attrition of the "a" model and a few pilots because of failed elevator hookups.

[cliff...@gmail.com]

Dont rule out the Ventus, although getting one for 25k it will surely be run out. It made a huge difference in handling when I added a tail tank and got the cg back to 85-90%. Winglets make low speed handling better too.

CH 3500 hrs in Ventus B now in a ASW27

[Martin Gregorie]

On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 14:17:04 -0700, George Haeh wrote:

> There's been some attrition of the "a" model and a few pilots because of
> failed elevator hookups.
>

I never minded the elevator hook-up because at least it was out in the
open and easy to see while you connected it. OTOH I really disliked
fumbling in the dark inside that tiny hatch with six connections to make.
At least mine had Weedekind sleeves fitted: doing the job without them
and trying to fit the safety clips one-handed doesn't bear thinking about.

BTW, some numbers for the OP: after soloing I flew the club's SZD Juniors
for a year before converting to a Pegasus 101 (at Williams) with 83
hours, mostly winch launches, so 223 flights). For the next three years I
flew the club's Peg 90 and Discuses, greatly preferring the Peg (better
all-round vis and comfort). Then I bought an early ASW-20 - at that time
I had 272 hours and 411 launches. I reckon it took me another 35 hours
before being fully comfortable with it, i.e. being in the right flap
setting at all times.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[sgs...@gmail.com]

I have flown both and I feel the control harmony of the -3a was just fabulous. I miss it. The two guys I know who sold an LS to "upgrade" to a Schempp-Hirth product were disgusted with their new acquisitions and ditched them promptly. Done many inspections on German ships from 3 other mfg. and IMHO none I have seen yet are superior in construction and design to the LS.

[ulrich.w...@gmail.com]

I have about 3,000 hours on various ASWs incl. ASW 20, 20B,(both without winglets) and now ASW 27. I found the ASW 20 to be a wonderful machine, but, as others have said, the full landing flap has to be used carefully. My brother was more of an S-H man having owned a Standard Cirrus, Mini-Nimbus and then a Ventus B. He did very well with them in competitions. Finally, he bought a share in an ASW 20C. After his first flight his only comment was " now I know why you guys did so well in the ASW 20s". He found the handling to be quite a bit better than that of the Ventus B. I also found that the ASW 20B and Ventus B were equals in almost all conditions but the ASW had the handling edge.

[kirk.stant]

On Monday, April 1, 2019 at 6:01:10 PM UTC-5, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> I can only speak for AS.......20, 24, 28, 29 for single place glass, ASK-21 for dual......not counting many SGS ships (26, 33, 34, 35, 36), but the AS's have a similar control harmony to SGS FWIW.......

I'm curious what makes you say that - the LAST ships I would describe has having control harmony similar to ANY glass ship is anything made by Schweizer!

SGS: 1-23, 1-26, 1-34, 2-22, 2-32, 2-33.

AS: 19, 20, 21

IMHO, SGS gliders range from OK if heavy (2-32, 1-23, 1-34) to twitchy in pitch but nice otherwise (1-26) to borderline unpleasant (2-22, 2-33).

But then I'm spoiled by 1000 hrs in an LS6...

Cheers,

66

[Bob Gibbons]

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 20:57:24 -0700 (PDT), "Matt Herron (Sr)"
<ma...@takestockphotos.com> wrote:

... text deleted

>
>Hi Michael: I've owned an LS-4, a Ventus C, and my current LS-6. For me there would be no choice.
>The LS gliders are a joy to fly. They have no bad habits; they hold tight circles easily; and on long
>flights they are much less fatiguing. On my third Ventus flight in turbulence I went into a high speed
>stall without any warning, found myself looking directly at the ground and thought I was going to die.
>It took me three years to fully trust the glider. The Ventus C and especially the B require constant
>attention to the flight controls. They do not fly themselves. Flying the Ventus will eventually make
>you a very good pilot, but you may not entirely enjoy the experience.
>

>text deleted
>Matt

Just a quick note in defense of the Ventus. After 20 years and approx
1800 hours flying a Ventus C in both flatland and mountain conditions
(mostly in 17.6m configuation), I have never experienced any
uncommanded flight motion. That said, the ship will not fly "hands
off" for very long. Note, I have not flown a Ventus B, so cannot
comment on differences between the B and C, other than that the C is
much easier to tape the wing-fuselage intersection (it has a fillet on
the fuselage).

Bob

[Tango Eight]

I used to be a pretty avid amateur photographer. Some old timer observed once that in that field amateurs worry about equipment, pros worry about money, true masters worry about light. And so it is with soaring (substitute "rules" for "money", "weather" for "light").

There's no getting around the need for equipment, and the purchasing decisions are significant, but I'd suggest being careful with the advice of anyone who seems to have a brand name tatooed on their psyche and even more careful with *anything* you read on r.a.s. :-).

Your equipment needs to fit your mission. The mission of a 200 hr glider pilot interested in XC is to go out and fly XC and become a better, more experienced pilot without breaking shit. Do you ski? Skiers get this: there is no point to buying more ski or taking on more terrain than your current skills can cope with. You improve by stretching the envelope incrementally. You do not improve spending your time and money in doctor's offices. Your objective as a skier is to become a better skier, not own brand xxxxxx equipment.

Make friends with the guys who have been doing the kind of flying you want to do and are obviously enjoying it. They'll have good insight.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

[johnsin...@yahoo.com]

Michael,
There’s an elephant in the room that nobody’s talking about. Your price range means older ships, older ships have old gelcoat. Properly refinishing a 15 meter ship is going to cost a minimum of 20K! If you buy a ship with so-so finish, your going to sell it a few years down the road with less than so-so finish! My number one priority would be buying a ship with recent refinish in Urethane. Number 2 priority would be good instruments, number 3 priority would be trailer, then comes auto hookup’s, disc brakes, nose tow hook, etc. I am a prior owner the LS-3a that Stowers is brokering at Minden. Feel free to contact me for any questions about that bird.
JJ

[Papa3]

As the Chief Refinishing Officer (CRO) of my club, let me wholeheartedly agree with JJ. The bottom line is that refinishing an older (club class glider) doesn't make economic sense unless you are doing it yourself because have the time and skills, doing it because of the love of the glider, or doing it because you are a sado masochist.

Here's the math for an ASW-20:

- Moderately crazed ASW-20 in otherwise fair shape. $25K
- Full refinish at retail north of $25K (being generous here)
- Total cost $50K (forget about all the other stuff - instruments, trailer, etc.)

Now, go look at the classifieds. Several nice to very nice ASW-20s for mid $30K. Each of those owners at some point in the near past dropped significant money into those ships that they will never get back.

In your price range, the LS3 that JJ mentions as well as a Pegasus that showed up and maybe one or two others would be the best bets. As others have mentioned, a partnership would let you get into an LS4, ASW-20, ASW-24 etc in much better shape which would let you spend more time flying and less time fettling.

p3

[KarlBoutin]

One remark I would like to make to Micheal N. that has not been made so far on this thread as to do with the 3000 hrs inspection that a certified A/C might require. In the cohort of gliders that you are considering (70s - 80s) you may find A/C getting close to this milestone. This may have to be considered in your purchase decision.

In my case, getting the inspection and maintenance for a life extension to 6000 hrs was a "piece of cake". That was due in part because of the great maintenance job that the two previous owners did on our ASW-20 (wink,wink, THX Uli), and also for the great engineering and support from AS. The few pieces that we had to change (rudder cable, forward and aft carry-through pins, rudder bottom hinge) were easy to obtain, relatively inexpensive and a charm to install. A member at my club, who also had to get the 6000 hrs life extension for his non-AS german glider would have a completely different and more expensive story to tell.

My point, for Micheal N., is not to do any "my glider vs your glider" bashing, but to point out that this may be an important variable to add in your purchase equation. As a first owner, you should be aware of this.

As for the "Jesus Flaps"... they are a lot of fun but you have to used with care. Only deploy when you know you are making the field. I have read, I believe in the POH, that the ASW-20 with full spoilers and the "JF" gets an incredible 4:1 glide ratio. From the cockpit, this almost look like going straight down :-0

[Dan Daly]

To get an idea of what a refinish entails, take a look at Richard's work on his Ventus B... http://craggyaero.com/ventus.htm

140.5 hrs not counting build-up (gear, TOST hook, belts, instruments, registration marks/contest ID, rudder, etc), weighing. All in a wonderful workshop with all the right gear and skills to do it. That's just for the fuselage, now add in the wings.

[Papa3]

Conventional wisdom is 400 hours +/- for a complete standard class glider. In our experience (decent shop, decent skills, decent equipment) we have taken about 10-15% more time, but we've been starting with basket cases, so strip down to glass.

[Nick Kennedy]

After reading JJ's post I went through the wings and wheels For Sale Ads.
There are at least two refinished with urethane LS3a's in very good condition in there for the mid 20's. With Clamshell trailers and updated instruments and new water bags. Jeez that's a lot of glider for the mid 20's IMHO.

I've owned both the ASW20 and a LS3a and while some say the ASW 20 will beat a LS3a, that might be true, might not, it's very very close.
The LS3 and LS3a are wonderful ships, big cockpit, big panel, easier to fly than a -20, launch and land like a piece of cake and do get 40/1 And that landing gear lever, Dick Johnson wrote it was the best system he ever saw, and he was right, soooo easy and fast.
About 25k- that's a great price! what's not to like about that ??

[Michael N.]

Thanks guys, I am looking at finish, or last time refinished as my number 1 factor in deciding which of these era gliders to buy.

In fact this brings up a question important to my current top 5 candidate list:
One of the candidates is a DG 200, the current owner who I feel is trying to be accurate and honest in his representation of the glider during our phone calls.
States the glider has the original finish in good condition, with no crazing in the gel coat, but some cracking in the area of the dive brakes.
He is indicating that DG gliders of the era were very well finished, and do not have a history of needing to be refinished often.
Again, he seems to be very honest and forthright to me, but I do not have glider purchase history experience to back up my impression.

Can anyone comment on the DG 200 - 202 finish quality over time?
I am aware the finish quality over time is highly affected by whether the glider was stored, or left out in the elements. I am asking more in general, or typical wear.

Thanks again for all the great information. When I started this thread I would never have thought I'd get this much information. I appreciate it, and I am listening and taking this discussion heavily into my decision process.

[uncl...@ix.netcom.com]

DG's of that era were finished with Scwabellack(sp?). It generally held up better than the Vorgelat used on AS and SH ships of that time. A crack or 2 around the spoiler box is not uncommon.
UH

[Michael N.]

Yep, looking at those too. In fact, I have to say that there are a several choices out on wings and wheels, that are great performing gliders, and not all but many with good re-finishes, avionics, and trailers. I think I may be doing this at the right time :-)

I did have one question maybe I could get some enlightenment on regarding the LS3 vs LS3a, I have read a lot about these lately in my searching. The one question I had is that Dick Johnson reported a somewhat less L/D rating of the LS3a of around 38 vs around 41 in the original LS3.
I'm sure I am going to get a few comment like "at your level you shouldn't care" and maybe that's right, but I'd like to know if the LS3a is in fact worse in glide performance, or maybe when it was being tested, conditions were not favorable? Or any other insight on this?

Thanks again for this fantastic discussion, which I do appreciate. I am trying to get a list of top 5 gliders I want to actually see in the next few weeks and this has been very helpful.

Mike

[Matt McBee]

I co-own a 1982 DG-101G. The original finish is in amazingly good shape overall except for a few dings here and there from assembly and handling. I'd say that what you are hearing about the virtues of Schwabbellack are true. I can't see our ship needing a refinish anytime in the foreseeable future.

The 200 may be worth a careful look.

Matt

[Charlie Quebec]

The original gel on my 1980 202 is still I’m excellent condition, was a bit yellowed, but I was able to get rid of that by light sanding.
The schwaballac gel coat of that era was very good indeed. Ive seen vorgelat gelled gliders needing a refinish after 10 years.
As long as schwaballac is not cracked, which is rare, it can be safely painted over without total removal, Vogelat must be completely removed.

[christoph...@googlemail.com]

The original LS3 have the reputation of a slightly better performance than the LS3a. The LS3 polar measured by idaflieg is about equal to an ASW20. There were several sets of wing molds being used, perhaps one of them was less accurate. This info comes from the LS-book which has been publishes a few years ago.

LS3 are quite heavy, in the 290-300kg region. But that's not a big problem if it comes with a good trailer. 3a have about 20-30kg less weight. This difference in weight comes from split flaperons without lead ballast and a different construction of the wing spar. The spar caps on the 3a are directly under the wings outer laminate which allowed lighter spar caps being used. In the LS3, the spar caps are under the foam sandwich laminate. That requires more material in the caps to be used for the same strength, but prevents any warpage to show in the wing surface.

The LS3 fuselage is structurally very similar to an LS1-f whereas the LS4 more ore less took over the fuselage from the LS3a with the new empennage. For that reason an original LS3 (non -a) cannot be modified with an integral tail wheel.

[Papa3]

We currently have an LS3 (winner of last year's US Sports Class Nationals btw) in the shop for a wing refinish. We are working on smoothing the inevitable spar flat spot and also looking at the leading edge. We put the CNC cut templates on a couple of weeks back, and the wings are overall remarkably good for a 40 year old glider. There's some work to do, but the basic glass is really close to spec.

Assuming that whoever did the refinish on the LS3 you may be looking at (if it's JJ, it's gonna be good), then you can figure that you'll get a glider that's 98% of the outright performance of the ASW-20 for 25% less $$. That's a pretty good tradeoff.

[chip.b...@gmail.com]

Lotta chatter about the LS-3. For the record, the LS-3 and LS-3a are two different animals. As someone noted, the original LS-3 tested equal to the ASW 20 in performance, FWIW. Most LS-3s now suffer from flat spots over the spar that hurt high-speed performance, though not climb. I owned one for 13 years and it's lovely to fly. I did profile out the flat spot and it ran with the '20s and Venti of the day just fine. Most won't, however, which is where the comments arise. The wings are, indeed, heavy (and awkward because they're trailing-edge heavy) but I solo rigged mine most of the time using the factory Komet trailer. Pay attention because trailers of that vintage may well need work.

The LS-3a split the flaperon into two pieces and is lighter. Early LS-3a models seemed to go well with later ones not quite so good. The explanation was thought to be thicker-than-spec airfoil cause by slight wing mold warping as production continued. I'm told it flies as well as the original LS-3. Some of them came with wingtip extensions.

As many have noted, the finish is very important, as is the trailer. You can upgrade instruments over time, especially with all the used stuff coming out of cockpits these days. Upgrading a complete finish and/or trailer is a lot more expensive/effort.

I'd pay attention to UH's advice about looking for a good Standard Class ship as an alternative. I've owned my ASW 24 for 27 years and still love it. It's a little more work to land short than my LS-3 which, in turn, was more work than our ASW 20. But they all come down. They're all fun to fly and go well. I've frequently flown against 15M flapped gliders at the regional level straight up. And now with the slight handicapping available in the Standard Class, the older gliders are very competitive.

Chip Bearden

[dtarm...@gmail.com]

Maybe it's because im shopping a similar price range but it seems there's not much worth persuing among the aircraft you've listed in the U.S. Segelflug.de is what the europeans use for posting gliders for sale. You'll get a better value even with the transportation and exchange rate. Most of the gliders over here at that price point are pretty well neglected. On the other hand if you can live with a slightly lower performance glider, you can find Cirrus, Ls1, and Libelles at a lower price point in much better shape. For 20-30k you have to sacrifice at least one of the following: finish, customer support/parts, performance...forget about instrumentation it's not there.
Look on the bright side, glider manufacturers are buiding more motor gliders than pure these days and soaring in the States is in steep decline, soon we'll have a market flush with once expensive self launchers!

[kmet...@gmail.com]

Having been in a similar situation over the winter with a price range up to $45K, I actually chose a cheaper alternative, Jantar Std 2.

Reasons being no gelcoat, very sturdy, awesome spoilers (outlanding fields here in the northeast aren't huge) and having some time in one.

I also like the reclined position.

I'm around 100h mark so it'll be a while until the ship will be holding me back from making awesome.

I did consider Ls-3, Pegase, DG-200, HP-14/18, Ventus C 17.6. At the time there were no ASW-20's that seemed like a good deal.

Seems to be some decent deals for westeners on wingsandwheels. DG-20(2/0), (Open) Cirrus and Kestrel would be on top of my list to look at if I were looking out west right now. Save some money now for tows and get a 3rd gen glass ship in 5-10 years for way cheaper than what they go for now.

[son_of_flubber]

On Thursday, April 4, 2019 at 11:46:26 AM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:

> Here's the math for an ASW-20:
>
> - Moderately crazed ASW-20 in otherwise fair shape. $25K
> - Full refinish at retail north of $25K (being generous here)
> - Total cost $50K (forget about all the other stuff - instruments, trailer, etc.)
>
> Now, go look at the classifieds. Several nice to very nice ASW-20s for mid $30K.

So a fair price for a "Moderately crazed ASW-20 in otherwise fair shape" would be $8K. Invest $25-30K in repair and you'd get a good glider for $33-38K. Buyer deserves some compensation for the hassle, risk and delay of refurbishment.

People who're setting unreasonably high prices for their poor condition gliders are hurting themselves, and hurting the sport by making it harder for young people to get into the sport.

I suggest that people who want to get into the sport start offering a reasonable price for trashed gliders $5-8K. Sellers (or the executors of their estates) will eventually come to their senses.

[Delta8]

> wrote:-

> I have about 3,000 hours on various ASWs incl. ASW 20, 20B,(both
> without winglets) and now ASW 27. I found the ASW 20 to be a wonderful
> machine, but, as others have said, the full landing flap has to be used
> carefully. My brother was more of an S-H man having owned a Standard
> Cirrus, Mini-Nimbus and then a Ventus B. He did very well with them in
> competitions. Finally, he bought a share in an ASW 20C. After his first
> flight his only comment was " now I know why you guys did so well in the
> ASW 20s". He found the handling to be quite a bit better than that of
> the Ventus B. I also found that the ASW 20B and Ventus B were equals in
> almost all conditions but the ASW had the handling edge.

> -

Lurker for a while as well as a new 20a driver . I was dying to try the
flaps I heard about so much . I did a test pattern at 2,000 ft to
familiarize myself with the descent angle . And Damn for me it's like
being back in a 1-26 with the spoilers out save for better visibility
over the nose . I tossed in a slip as well but it didn't seem to make
much difference . I pulled spoilers in and flared a bit higher as I had
3/4 of a 2000' runway and stopped in 600' after touchdown without brakes
I can honestly say knowing the option is there for an off field
landing helps reduce stress. But as others noted make sure you have the
field made and only use them when on final .




--
Delta8

[Andreas Maurer]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 07:20:42 -0700 (PDT), Steve Leonard
<zun...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, April 3, 2019 at 1:53:19 AM UTC-5, krasw wrote:
>> ASW 20 was ahead of it's time and in reality belongs to same generation as Ventus/LS6 (except that final bit of wing loading). ... All Wortmann FX170-profiled gliders are older generation performance-wise. If it rains or you get bugs on leading edge, you fall out of sky like an anvil.
>
>But, the 20 uses the older (and maybe better?) 62K153/131 family. Maybe that is why it was ahead of its time? Because it used an older airfoil section. Like its big brothers, the ASW 12 and ASW 17.


Interesiting side note:

Luc Boermans recently told me that ALL his airfoils are based upon the
FX 62K-131 of the ASW-20.

The FX67 was a one-trick pony that was impossible to cure of its
extremely bad performance when wet or dirty.


Thus said: The ASW-20 and LS-3 are similar in performance as long as
they are clean and dry.

Once an LS-3 gets dirty or wet, the performance loss is drastic - the
20 hardly suffers. One clear point pro ASW-20.

Cheers
Andreas

[Andreas Maurer]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 09:16:48 -0700 (PDT), Mike the Strike
<Strin...@msn.com> wrote:

>The first iteration of the ASW-20 (there never was an "a" model as such) had a very aggressive flap setting, known by many of us as the "Jesus flap". That's what you said the first time you deployed it - lots and lots of drag, big change in attitude and no extra lift. I believe that most early spin accidents with the ASW-20 resulted from the combination of rearward CG plus early deployment of full landing flap in the pattern followed by a stall/spin on turning.

Err... probably not.
The 20 is extremely tame in landing flap setting (4 and 5) due to its
extreme wing twist (both ailerons actually go up).

The only flap setting where it enters a spin is 4, the thermalling
setting.



Cheers
Andreas

[paulst...@msn.com]

On Sunday, March 31, 2019 at 10:04:06 PM UTC-5, Michael N. wrote:
> I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.
>
> I'd like to get a flapped 15 meter, and have been doing a lot of searching and reading on the groups and have kind of narrowed my decision down to an ASW20 or LS3a
>
> I have about 200 hours in gliders all glass, but never anything with flaps, however I also owned and have several hundred hours in a Mooney M20C so have good experience in complex aircraft that require good in flight planning for various aspects of flight.
>
> I was also considering the following, and will list some of my reasons for weeding them out of my choice list.
>
> Ventus B: Great performance, but my understanding from reading (no actual experience) is that they are not forgiving or maybe a better way of putting it, is they require full time attention which can be fatiguing on long flights.
>
> DG 200 or 202, good aircraft but you have to pay annual fees just to buy parts?
>
> Mini Nimbus: also good aircraft, just not up to the same performance level as an ASW20
>
> That kind of leaves the ASW20 or LS3 in this price range and category. Unless I am missing something.
>
> So which would you have and why?
> I am leaning towards an ASW20 purchase, but am finding some very well equipped LS3a's in the same price range as a moderately equipped ASW20.
>
> Assuming similar clamshell style trailers and self rigging gear, which is the better buy or which would you have and why?
>
> Also, anyone knowing of an ASW20 or LS3 for sale not already on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.
>
> Thanks, I know this topic has been brought up before, but I am in the final stages of preparing for a purchase before the 2019 season gets into full swing and would like to get some final advice before pulling the trigger on this purchase.

Michael,

I happen to own the LS3a (9P) that Dick Johnson did his flight test review on. I had a little over 200 hours of glider time and 0 hours of power aircraft time when I purchased it. After flying this ship for 250+ hours, I don't think the Johnson report was accurate regarding the L/D, however, I don't have the technical data to support my claim. It is my first flapped glider. It took me about 50 hours to get used to the flaps. I never felt like I was "behind" the glider. It has been a joy to fly and I have had a handful of 300km and a few 500km flights in it. It has been the perfect vehicle to teach me how to read the weather conditions on course, which may be much more important at this phase of your development than wringing out the polar of a high performance ship.

In my opinion, find a ship with a good gel coat and a good trailer and spend the next 3 or 4 seasons learning how to soar. Don't get bogged down with relatively small performance advantages, just get a ship and fly as much as possible. Go thru the flapped glider learning curve with a $25K ship and then move on to higher performance.

Paul

[Stephen Struthers]

At 01:47 05 April 2019, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

This thread makes me want to go find a LS


A member of my club has just emaiied the members offering this


https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipN86jI42v_rioaQaAH4lsU7jozxg4EX
2pwmz0-V51u0lVMJioqaz6DmBZvTtLK_IA?
key=Z2RRN29MYkljQTV6TmtvbndNMzI0YjVqTmJmQndB

£30 000 UK pounds Its a lovely machine

[Stephen Struthers]

At 07:07 05 April 2019, Stephen Struthers wrote:
>At 01:47 05 April 2019, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
>
This thread makes me want to go find a LS

Sorry link on previous post didn't work !!

A member of my club has just emaiied the members offering this

£30 000 UK pounds Its a lovely machine

https://photos.app.goo.gl/j44feKhifZVMb38Q8

[Jonathon May]

AT £30,000 IS IS A VERY CHEAP GLIDER.

[Jonathon May]

This is a LS 6a

[Michael N.]

So I have never imported a glider from overseas, although I understand it is relatively commonly done.
Any insight on how difficult this process is and in general the cost involved?
Obviously I understand I have to get the current conversion rate. But what about shipping fees, customs clearance, FAA registration and inspection requirements, etc. I don't want to go too far off topic here, but some general insight would be helpful.
I had thought about the import option and was thinking at my price range it would not be worth the trouble. However maybe some general insight in the process would be useful.
Wow, again so much great information here. Thanks all

[Michael N.]

P.S. while nice looking, it is at roughly $38.5k U.S. dollars.
Out of my price range at this time.
Thanks

[krasw]

On Friday, April 5, 2019 at 5:41:00 AM UTC+3, Andreas Maurer wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 07:20:42 -0700 (PDT), Steve Leonard
> <zun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, April 3, 2019 at 1:53:19 AM UTC-5, krasw wrote:
> >> ASW 20 was ahead of it's time and in reality belongs to same generation as Ventus/LS6 (except that final bit of wing loading). ... All Wortmann FX170-profiled gliders are older generation performance-wise. If it rains or you get bugs on leading edge, you fall out of sky like an anvil.
> >
> >But, the 20 uses the older (and maybe better?) 62K153/131 family. Maybe that is why it was ahead of its time? Because it used an older airfoil section. Like its big brothers, the ASW 12 and ASW 17.
>
>
> Interesiting side note:
>
> Luc Boermans recently told me that ALL his airfoils are based upon the
> FX 62K-131 of the ASW-20.
>

And I read somewhere that when Lemke designed LS6 profile the upper surface was more or less taken straight from FX62. Of course the lower surface of modern profiles is more refined, in 70' you could not even dream about stretching laminar flow to almost full chord length.

[uncl...@ix.netcom.com]

Here is the reality from somebody who has been doing this for more than 2 decades.
It is almost impossible to buy a glider at a price the seller will accept, refinish it commercially, and sell it at a favorable price. If it was that easy, everybody would be doing it, including the refinish people.
My experience is that a refinish adds somewhere around half the commercial cost to the salable value of the glider.
A recent example.
Club member buys a Cirrus 75 with older Komet trailer for $12000.
Over 2 years he refinished it in my shop. It required almost exactly 400 hours, mostly his labor. Materials(polyester finish) cost about $1000.
He now has a very nice glider that may get $22K or so on the market.

Someone wanting to enter the market that does not have the resources to pay for a "nice"(defined as not expecting to need a refinish anytime soon) glider, is going to have to settle for an older glider needing clean up and care and fly it for a few years while saving up the dough for a nicer glider.

UH

[Tango Eight]

The other part of the reality is the refinished 20 in question has an unusual history and was sold very cheap (distress sale cheap) at one point. The seller can sell at an attractive price and do very well. Good for him. This isn't a "market", it's a one off.

Would be buyers have little cause for whining at this time. Great selection of very flyable, decent performance stuff out there at very reasonable prices. If you want nice, one way or another you pony up.

T8

[Jonathon May]

At 15:01 05 April 2019, Tango Eight wrote:
>On Friday, April 5, 2019 at 10:31:48 AM UTC-4,
uncl...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 4, 2019 at 8:07:42 PM UTC-4,
son_of_flubber wrote:
>> > On Thursday, April 4, 2019 at 11:46:26 AM UTC-4, Papa3
wrote:

>> >=20
>> > > Here's the math for an ASW-20:=20
>> > >=20

>> > > - Moderately crazed ASW-20 in otherwise fair shape.
$25K
>> > > - Full refinish at retail north of $25K (being generous
here)
>> > > - Total cost $50K (forget about all the other stuff -
instruments,

>t=
>railer, etc.)
>> > >=20

>> > > Now, go look at the classifieds. Several nice to very nice
ASW-20s

>f=
>or mid $30K. =20
>> >=20

>> > So a fair price for a "Moderately crazed ASW-20 in
otherwise fair

>shape=

>" would be $8K. Invest $25-30K in repair and you'd get a good
glider for

>=

>$33-38K. Buyer deserves some compensation for the hassle,
risk and delay

>o=
>f refurbishment.
>> >=20

>> > People who're setting unreasonably high prices for their
poor

>condition=

> gliders are hurting themselves, and hurting the sport by
making it harder

>=

>for young people to get into the sport.

>> >=20

>> > I suggest that people who want to get into the sport start
offering a

>r=

>easonable price for trashed gliders $5-8K. Sellers (or the
executors of

>the=

>ir estates) will eventually come to their senses.

>>=20

>> Here is the reality from somebody who has been doing this
for more than

>2=

> decades.
>> It is almost impossible to buy a glider at a price the seller will

>accept=

>, refinish it commercially, and sell it at a favorable price. If it
was

>tha=

>t easy, everybody would be doing it, including the refinish
people.
>> My experience is that a refinish adds somewhere around half
the

>commercia=

>l cost to the salable value of the glider.
>> A recent example.
>> Club member buys a Cirrus 75 with older Komet trailer for
$12000.
>> Over 2 years he refinished it in my shop. It required almost
exactly 400

>=

>hours, mostly his labor. Materials(polyester finish) cost about
$1000.
>> He now has a very nice glider that may get $22K or so on the
market.

>>=20

>> Someone wanting to enter the market that does not have the
resources to

>p=

>ay for a "nice"(defined as not expecting to need a refinish
anytime soon)

>g=

>lider, is going to have to settle for an older glider needing clean
up and

>=

>care and fly it for a few years while saving up the dough for a
nicer

>glide=
>r.
>>=20

>> UH
>
>The other part of the reality is the refinished 20 in question has
an

>unusu=

>al history and was sold very cheap (distress sale cheap) at one
point.

>The=

> seller can sell at an attractive price and do very well. Good for
him.

>T=
>his isn't a "market", it's a one off. =20

>
>Would be buyers have little cause for whining at this time.
Great

>selectio=

>n of very flyable, decent performance stuff out there at very
reasonable

>pr=
>ices. If you want nice, one way or another you pony up. =20
>
>T8
>

You do pay a premium for Flaps,it may be better to go for a std
15M ship LS4 would be good or a asw19.

[BobW]

On 4/5/2019 10:37 AM, Jonathon May wrote:
<Snip...>

>
> You do pay a premium for Flaps,it may be better to go for a std 15M ship
> LS4 would be good or a asw19.

The 'premium' bit is true 'in general' but - going deeper into the weeds, here
- arguably not universally so in the 1st-generation-glass world. Even amongst
those glass ships with the FX67K-150/170 'one-trick-pony' airfoil, those
relying *exclusively* on their flaps as large-deflection landing-drag devices,
tend to be 'somewhat discounted' in the pricing market from - so it seems to
me - flapped *and* spoilered ships (e.g. LS-3X, DG-20X, AS W-20 and (even)
Mini-Nimbus/Mosquito.

Think PIK-20A/B (no gelcoat!), Zuni and - while not glass - SGS 1-35 and Nugget.

With the bulk of my time in an early-model Zuni, I never felt 'significantly
handicapped' by the ship's (in?)ability to 'competitively go XC' against newer
15-meter ships - wet (internally *or* externally [dry chuckle]) or dry.

That airfoil is also a pussycat, IMO.

YMMV

Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[chip.b...@gmail.com]

> Once an LS-3 gets dirty or wet, the performance loss is drastic - the
> 20 hardly suffers. One clear point pro ASW-20.
>
> Cheers
> Andreas

Regarding rain, we discovered the LS-3--like the PIK 20B that was notorious for falling out of the sky when wet--responded well to using a little more flap than usual. All of the gliders that used that airfoil at the time (LS-3/3a, PIK, Mosquito, Mini Nimbus, others) had the same issue and, I suspect, would respond to the same technique.

Another solution that some of us employed was, after the contour/profile sanding, leaving the wing at about 400 grit finish instead of polishing it up. The water drops didn't bead up so the performance effect wasn't as great. I know one pilot who flew his LS-3 at 220 grit but he joked about having to sand the bugs off. :)

Speaking of bugs, we don't often have to deal with insects building up on the wing to the same extent as in Europe. So performance in the rain is the concern. I agree the ASW 20 is affected to a much lesser degree.

Chip Bearden

[gregg...@gmail.com]

Just get a 1-26.

[Matt Herron (Sr)]

A few words about finish. Don't discount buying an older glider with gel coat in fairly good but far from perfect condition. Until I had my LS-6 refinished in poly a few years ago, I would spend a couple of afternoons at the beginning of every season touching up the wings with patches of fresh gel coat from my friendly TAP plastics distributor. Crazed areas yield fairly easily to sanding followed by brushing on fresh gel coat followed by wet and dry sanding down to 1000 or 1200 grit.

If you're accustomed to hand work, it's not a hard job. I doubt that I ever spent more than ten hours at it, probably less. The patches came out beautifully fair and smooth, although they were visible (adding the correct amount of yellow tint is tricky), and I never noticed any loss of performance with the glider.

However, if you're not accustomed to hand work I wouldn't recommend this -- or at least practice on a spare piece of fiberglass until you get it right!

[martin...@aon.at]

ia m from europe and followed this "buying a 15m flapped glider" discussion. i want to congratulate you guys to the civilised, friendly and informed exchange of ideas on that topic. in some other forums for gliding people are much more rude.
i personally fly a standard class glider and don´t think the difference in performance is that great if you don´t fly with MC settings above 2,5m/sec.
to get a nice trailer, which has been mentioned here, and that the ship will not need too much refurbishing soon is more im portant in my opinion. plus, wether you feel comfortable in the cockpit. i guess back pain after 3 hours equals -10 performance points.

[Andreas Maurer]

On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:20:07 -0700 (PDT), chip.b...@gmail.com wrote:

>Speaking of bugs, we don't often have to deal with insects building up on the wing to the same extent as in Europe. So performance in the rain is the concern. I agree the ASW 20 is affected to a much lesser degree.

Well Chip,

I fear that bugs are a thing of the past at least in Germany where I
fly.

During the last five years it gradually got worse (or better?) until
last year I hardly ever had any noticeable amount of bugs on the wings
anymore.

Corresponding to that the number of birds has decreased dramatically,
too.

[Andreas Maurer]

Martin,
I can only second every single word.

In my experience the IGC index reflects pretty well the real-life
perfomance of a glider, the difference between, say, an old Cirrus and
an ASW-20 being less than 15 percent, even with the latter carrying
water ballast.


Cheers
Andreas

[chip.b...@gmail.com]

> I fear that bugs are a thing of the past at least in Germany where I
> fly.
>
> During the last five years it gradually got worse (or better?) until
> last year I hardly ever had any noticeable amount of bugs on the wings
> anymore.
>
> Corresponding to that the number of birds has decreased dramatically,
> too.

Andreas,

Does that mean that bug wipers--which we never see here--are becoming an historical artifact?

Chip Bearden

[Andreas Maurer]

On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 10:43:02 -0700 (PDT), chip.b...@gmail.com wrote:

>Does that mean that bug wipers--which we never see here--are becoming an historical artifact?

Hi Chip,

I think so - I decided not to install any and didn't feel any
disadvantages last year.

[Nick Kennedy]

On Page 8 of Wings and Wheels for sale ads is the JJ refinished LS3a asking 28k.
That looks like the one I'd focus on. Recently repainted by a pro, all the extras and looks like its ready to rock. Maybe you could get it for 26.5 cash in hand.
This has been a long thread and I'm impressed that it did not go into the gutter, as so many of these do.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Just a comment on rain. I have about 1700 hours, mostly XC in the western mountains, I have flown through serious rain storm once, and gotten rained on a handful of times. As for bugs, never more than a few.

[drli...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 1, 2019 at 12:04:06 PM UTC+9, Michael N. wrote:
> I'm looking for a glider for cross country in the $25k range.
>
> I'd like to get a flapped 15 meter, and have been doing a lot of searching and reading on the groups and have kind of narrowed my decision down to an ASW20 or LS3a
>
> I have about 200 hours in gliders all glass, but never anything with flaps, however I also owned and have several hundred hours in a Mooney M20C so have good experience in complex aircraft that require good in flight planning for various aspects of flight.
>
> I was also considering the following, and will list some of my reasons for weeding them out of my choice list.
>
> Ventus B: Great performance, but my understanding from reading (no actual experience) is that they are not forgiving or maybe a better way of putting it, is they require full time attention which can be fatiguing on long flights.
>
> DG 200 or 202, good aircraft but you have to pay annual fees just to buy parts?
>
> Mini Nimbus: also good aircraft, just not up to the same performance level as an ASW20
>
> That kind of leaves the ASW20 or LS3 in this price range and category. Unless I am missing something.
>
> So which would you have and why?
> I am leaning towards an ASW20 purchase, but am finding some very well equipped LS3a's in the same price range as a moderately equipped ASW20.
>
> Assuming similar clamshell style trailers and self rigging gear, which is the better buy or which would you have and why?
>
> Also, anyone knowing of an ASW20 or LS3 for sale not already on Wings and Wheels, I'd like to hear about it.
>
> Thanks, I know this topic has been brought up before, but I am in the final stages of preparing for a purchase before the 2019 season gets into full swing and would like to get some final advice before pulling the trigger on this purchase.

I have owned an LS-3, LS-3a and LS-4. Loved them all.

As mentioned above, LS-3 and 3a are different creatures.

Advantages of LS-3 over 3a:
1. Auto-hookups. Cant get it wrong. 3a need to be contected, but with a little practice is very straight forward.
2. Slightly better performance than 3a. Definitely less than an ASW-20; Dave Martin always pulled away from me.

Disadvantages of LS-3 over 3a
1. Fin is shorter. I found it would skid a little when thermally. 3a grooved extremely well.
2. Heavy wings. Not ridiculous, but noticeable.

Same
1. Both 3 and 3a come down on rails in landing configuration.
2. Cockpit is large and comfortable.
3. Both come down like 2-33s in the rain.

I would recommend the LS-3a all things considered, if you can stretch the budget, get an LS-4.

Cheers

David

[Michael N.]

Well I am trying to see two or three now.
This has been a great resource for me.
I went flying yesterday after not having flown in over 10 years. Got some dual at Tampa Bay Soaring Society. I had not even opened my log books for that time.
Anyway, I was rusty.
Flew a Blanik for the first time. Take off and landing were fine, no real crosswinds. However my thermaling was horrible. We had 2 to 5 knot lift around the field with ceilings around 4.5k feet. I was having a lot of trouble centering the thermals. With some help from my CFI, we had a 1.5 hour flight, which we only terminated because the day was getting late.

Anyway, with regards to my purchase, I am going to take a few weeks and get some more seat time in to see how I do. I am setting up to go see some gliders. Two candidates, the DG202 and the LS3a mentioned are both at Minden, so I can go look at those at the same time.

Thanks again for all the good dialog.
Mike

[Charlie Quebec]

Good luck, either of those will be great to fly, even as a 202 owner the LS would be my choice given equal pricing, had there been one at that price when I got mine, I would have bought it .Here the LS would sell for around 5-10k more. It’s worth finding out if the 202 has carbon wings or glass.

[Michael N.]

Thanks for the comments.
Why the LS over the 202?
I understand they both have essentially the same airfoil, and I have read Dick Johnson's report on the 200 about 5 times. He says it's comfortable, flies well, has a 40 to 1 L/D and responds well to the various flap settings.

So assuming finish and equipment is roughly the same on two used gliders, why the premium on the LS3(a) over the DG 200 (202)?

Thanks
Mike

[arche...@gmail.com]

Probably because the LS has better handling. Some pilots value this higher than others, where that ranks is specific to each pilot. I've flown a 4 and a 200-17 and would much prefer the 3.
You've narrowed it down to gliders with such similar performance that it's time to put performance to the side. 2 points better or worse at best glide speed is sort of meaningless once you're actually out on XC, it is a very small difference. Perhaps the 3 goes better at faster speeds, I don't know, and that might be the only consideration between these two. But far greater factors now are the condition of the finish, and aesthetics that are particular to you, like seating position and comfort, location of controls and the panel, ease of rigging/trailering, etc.
First, a glider that has been refinished not in gel-coat is a huge asset. If it has been done by a reputable shop (the profile has been maintained and the "paint" will stay on), you never for all intents and purposes have to worry about the finish. At the price you are buying in at, the finish is worth more than the actual glider. A glider under about $35k is only worth the condition of it's finish, particularly the wings. It will not make economic sense to refinish the entire glider, ever! And resale value will hold.
Second, go sit in the gliders you are considering. Hopefully they will rig them for you and you can get a sense of what it will take to put your glider together every time you want to go fly. Sit in them rigged, bring your chute if you have one, and move the controls and reach the instruments. By then you might have a strong feeling for the one you want.
Lots of good info here for you, there has been so much interest here likely because we all like to consider what choice we would make now that we know what we know about what we have flown and owned. It's fun.
On that note, there is a DG-300 on W&W now near the other two you are looking at, might want to consider that one as well :) It's a buyers market!

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Basically agree.

Nut behind the stick is worth more than a couple performance points. Time makes you a better nut.
Do you fit over potentially long hours.
A refinish (even if you do it......) is expensive.

As to -20's, strong thermal conditions or strong ridge, a -20B has a higher wing loading. Part of why I asked earlier where you intend to fly. Sucks flying a -20 limited to 9lbs and watching others blow by you....been there, done that.....sigh.