Houston JS1c crash ONLY (not in any way about a Puchaczs, or anything else!)

[Sean Fidler]

For the love of god, please discuss no other subjects here but the JS1 and this very sad accident.

Do we even know that this accident involved a spin yet? Any factual information? Did anyone see it spinning? It easily could have been a medical or a structural failure or rigging issue, etc? Has anything new been learned about this accident other than that the glider crashed and a pilot was fatally injured.

It is sickening to me when an accident happens. But I think its important to do what it takes to understand the cause and increase my knowledge. The previous thread had almost no value in terms of the JS1 or this accident and is clearly drifting off into the abyss.

I was very close to ordering a JS1c this summer. I would like to race 18/Open more than 18/15 as 15 is likely going to be handicapped soon. I have put a purchase decision off for a bit, but still have serious interest in the JS1c for the future as it is clearly very strong in both 18m and Open class around the world.

Personally, I think the JS1c is as safe as any other modern glider. That is to say that they are all high performance aircraft with massive wings, tiny control surfaces and a tendency to fly with aft CG most of the time, etc, etc (;-)).

I would love to hear other meaningful and relevant opinions about the JS1c as well as any updates relating to the cause of this terrible accident.

So basically, unless you have flown a JS1, own a JS1 or plan on buying a JS1 there is probably not alot you can add (or subtract) from this thread. Sorry...but true.

Sincerely,

Sean

Sean

[Alexander Georgas]

I cannot comment on the circumstances of the accident, but regarding the
JS1-C, having flown it in 18m configuration for half a season now, I can
report that it is one of the easiest and certainly the most
pleasure-inducing glider I have ever flown. Even in the most difficult
of conditions, it seems to give the confidence that it is there to help
the pilot rather than confuse him.

I have not tried to spin it yet, but have tried to stall it and it will
require quite a bit of positive effort to do so and will give ample warning.

Simply said, I would not change it for anything else.

Regards,

Alexander - SB

[Tony]

I was lucky enough to get 3 flights in an 18 meter JS-1 last year, and also was nothing but impressed with its flight characteristics.

[Sean Fidler]

I have received a number (5+) very heartfelt emails from JS1 owners and pilots in the US and overseas discussing their experiences and thoughts with the JS1c in both 18m and 21m (dry and wet, etc). Thanks to all of you for taking the time to write some really honest, highly descriptive emails about your experiences. It sounds like it is a hell of a good sailplane.

I would be happy to have private discussions with anyone else interested in hearing what I have learned.

Sean

[clewi...@gmail.com]

Perhaps you'll consider posting a compendium of those emails here for others to benefit, de-identified of course. Share the knowledge! :)

Casey

[anderson....@gmail.com]

On Friday, July 18, 2014 5:39:46 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> I would be happy to have private discussions with anyone else interested in hearing what I have learned.

Sean - Anyone suggest you buy a Puchacz?

:-P

[Sean Fidler]

Hey! Lol!

[son_of_flubber]

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:55:57 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> For the love of god, please discuss no other subjects here but the JS1 and this very sad accident.

um.

[Ramy]

Why would people choose to not share a positive feedback about a glider? Why would they chose to send private emails? Sorry, I don't get it.

Ramy

[beens...@gmail.com]

I'm interested in ordering a JS1-Cj too Sean. Please share the responses you received.

[John Galloway]

At 14:19 19 July 2014, beens...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:55:57 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler
wrote:
>> For the love of god, please discuss no other subjects here
but the JS1

>an=
>d this very sad accident. =20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> Do we even know that this accident involved a spin yet?
Any factual

>info=

>rmation? Did anyone see it spinning? It easily could have
been a medical

>=

>or a structural failure or rigging issue, etc? Has anything new
been

>learn=

>ed about this accident other than that the glider crashed and a
pilot was

>f=
>atally injured. =20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> It is sickening to me when an accident happens. But I think
its

>importan=

>t to do what it takes to understand the cause and increase my
knowledge.

>T=

>he previous thread had almost no value in terms of the JS1 or
this

>accident=

> and is clearly drifting off into the abyss.

>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> I was very close to ordering a JS1c this summer. I would
like to race

>18=

>/Open more than 18/15 as 15 is likely going to be
handicapped soon. I

>have=

> put a purchase decision off for a bit, but still have serious
interest in

>=

>the JS1c for the future as it is clearly very strong in both 18m
and Open

>c=
>lass around the world. =20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> Personally, I think the JS1c is as safe as any other modern
glider.

>That=

> is to say that they are all high performance aircraft with
massive wings,

>=

>tiny control surfaces and a tendency to fly with aft CG most of
the time,

>e=
>tc, etc (;-)). =20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> I would love to hear other meaningful and relevant opinions
about the

>JS1=

>c as well as any updates relating to the cause of this terrible

accident. =
>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> So basically, unless you have flown a JS1, own a JS1 or
plan on buying a

>=

>JS1 there is probably not alot you can add (or subtract) from
this thread.

>=
> Sorry...but true.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Sincerely,
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Sean
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20

>> Sean
>
>I'm interested in ordering a JS1-Cj too Sean. Please share the
responses

>yo=
>u received.

I don't want my private email posted on a public forum and I
have asked Sean not to do so. However I have copied and
slightly edited below the relevant parts of my email to him.
My impressions are those of an experienced older pilot but not
a top competitor.

The first thing to dispel about JS1s is the story about them
being "built in a shed". I spent 2 full long days at the factory
in January and while they were still using a hangar space for
final tinkering around, instrumentation work and final assembly
on new gliders, the major part of the manufacturing is done in
beautiful spacious new premises designed specifically for the
purpose. Their workshops, staff training regimes and general
impression of organisation is very positive.

I spoke to several of the engineers and workers and found they
were highly motivated and proud of their work and I have been
very happy with the build quality and engineering on my glider.
Having said that, the long established manufacturers have over
many years established their own individual solutions to the
little hidden engineering problems with linkages and controls
etc and there were several minor mods to such things in the
early gliders - but nothing significant except for the rudder S-
tube design. That was a complete aberration IMHO but the
modified design follows all the good design features of the
other major manufacturers.

After collection from the factory I flew my glider (S/N 59) at
Bloemfontein for a few weeks in January so, apart from the
first flight at the factory which was 21m and dry, all my early
flights were with the glider ballasted to 560-600kg in 18m or
around 660 kg in 21m mode, and in relatively strong turbulent
conditions. I found the handling of the JS1 to be very pleasant
- very stable but responsive. The aerodynamic flaperon control
forces are heavier than my previous 18m Discus aileron forces
but the reward is much better roll response when you want it.
There is good rudder coordination except in 21m mode and dry
when thermalling at low speeds - around 46knots then you can
momentarily run out of rudder if you are too vigorous with the
roll rate. In ballasted 21m mode I don't find that - presumably
because the airspeed is higher.

The cockpit is wonderfully comfortable and the handling
generally so pleasant that I find it is like flying around lazily in
a comfortable armchair - unlike SH cockpits that all give me a
sore back.

The approach control is good but not spectacular like one of the
new Duo XLs. I tend not to use full landing flap as it floats a
long way and then tends to bounce on my home strip in
Scotland which is a bit bumpy. One thing I don't like is having
the wheelbrake on the airbrake handle as you sometimes have
to reduce airbrake on round out then touch down then let go to
go to negative flaps (as much to protect the flaps when the
wing touches down as for roll control) then back to the airbrake
handle to apply wheel brake. It gets a bit busy.

Winch launching is very easy with a very short run before take
off with the flaps at setting 4.

Aerotow is also very easy because the glider is so stable but I
find it to "floaty" in flap postion 4 and tend to use 3. Ballasted
then I ask for a minimum speed of 70 knots - especially in 21m
- and Uys emphasised that speed as the absolute minimum for
21m at 720kg (which I can't get up to).

Performance-wise it is obviously fully competitive in 18m
mode. I flew a 560k OR task in SA with the 21m tips shared
with an 18m JS1 and a Ventus 2cxt (all ballasted) and it was
clear that the 21m JS1 climbed and cruised better and I was
able to catch and pass them quite easily. Handling-wise when
ballasted I find the JS1 nicer in 21m but when dry I prefer it in
18m.

I have no qualms at all about flying my glider either from the
structural or flying characteristic point of view but I do make
sure that the aerotow speed is sufficient just in case.

John Galloway

[Sean Fidler]

Gents,

I am not going to post people's private emails to me on a public forum without their express permission. I would love to share all that I have learned but that's not how I wish to operate. It would be a violation of trust. If they wanted their messages to me on RAS, they would have posted here on RAS in the first place!

I would not be surprised if some people choose to make public comments here on RAS in the future, but I can also understand how some would make a conscious decision to avoid the joys and sorrows of participating in a RAS thread. ;-) That's just a simple fact. So, I am not surprised that too many of the emails I received did not include the statement, "go ahead and post this on RAS for me..."

If you are truly interested in a JS1 (have the potential of truly owning one or flying one), you are welcomed to send me a PM or email me so that we can discuss further.

Thanks,

Sean

[Ramy]

Nicely put Sean.

Ramy

[beens...@gmail.com]

Thanks John Galloway. I hope other JS1 owners will share their evaluations.

[Sean Fidler]

Yes, well said John G. Thanks for sharing. Very valuable to hear an owners perspective.

[Renny]

Here's the link to the NTSB preliminary report on the accident.....It really says very little.....

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20140717X31349&key=1

[nimbus]

For what it's worth, I have about 5 flights in the 18m JS-1. These flights were conducted in wave and thermals and from my little experience in the JS-1, I was thoroughly impressed with it's handling characteristics, especially at slow speeds. It was extremely easy to fly and even in rotor, handled exceptionally well at slow speeds at various bank angles. There weren't any sneaky things about it throughout all flight regimes.
Personally I think it's totally coincidental that several accidents occurred in the JS-1C within a relatively short time period. I sat through Uys Jonker's talk at the convention and if my memory serves me correctly, he mentioned that during flight testing, the JS-1C was fully loaded with water, then water depleted from one wing, and then the aircraft intentionally spun into the heavy wing with a successful recovery. Pretty impressive. It's a really strong glider.
I'm not making any comparisons to other similar sailplanes. Just my take on the JS-1.

Thanks,
Gordon Boettger

[Sean Fidler]

Thanks Gordon. That spin test is amazing! Is that a typical test for certification of sailplanes?

Bummer then NTSB prelim is so useless as usual.

[mattm...@gmail.com]

Yes, it's been done before. There's a great story about the Schweizer 1-35
flight test with one tank full and the other empty. Bernie Carras (who
was the corporate test pilot for a long time) had a hard time getting
the spin to break. It finally recovered fairly low, and he landed the
plane. He gave the plane a few extra kicks once he got out, just for
good measure!

Matt

[Sean Fidler]

That's crazy. Well, here is to those daring test pilots!

That said, I just learned first hand that a modern glider is capable of losing significant wing water in flight. I visited the 2014 Canadian Nationals this summer was shocked to learn that a brand new ASG-29 returned to the airport with a bit of a surprise. The cockpit was half full of water upon landing. The pilot/owner could not be sure what had happened or how. Was it the fuselage tank or the wing, etc? We suggested that he put the wings up on horses and refill it (before attempting to fly again). He did and sure enough one of the wings leaked, alot! The inboard tank seal (a 3x4 panel on the very inboard part of the wing thru which the ballast dump valve control rod runs) somehow failed during the flight.

So, the wing water tank had definitely been draining into the cockpit at some rate during flight. Additional water was likely draining out the gap between the wing and the fuselage as well (depends on the tapes ability to withstand the water I suppose). How much total water that was out of that wing we will never know. It certainly was possible that the leak was large enough for the glider to have lost all of the water in that one wing. Scary, scary stuff.

I sure hope that scenario never happens to me (or anyone else). That said, I feel better knowing the manufactures are testing that scenario for us. Are all manufactures testing for spin recovery with a full and empty wing? I never would have imagined that that condition could be recoverable. I am impressed that the JS1 (or anything else) could pass that test albeit with a test pilot who knows that one wing is indeed empty (and which wing that is)......

Does anyone know what failures are possible (or that have happened or are known) with other manufactures wing water systems?

This is a very interesting side topic actually. No this does not mean that Punchaz comments are back on the table again ;-)!

Thanks in advance.

[anderson....@gmail.com]

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 8:53:12 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what failures are possible (or that have happened or are known) with other manufactures wing water systems?
>

My very first contest flight in an LS-3 - at Ionia.

I was climbing in a thermal - as I recall it was right after going through the start gate. I heard they "glug, glug, glug" sound. Looking over my right shoulder I saw a waterfall cascading off the right wing spar. I had failed to burn the wing bag adequately and the pressure had pushed the bag off the fitting. It dumped 10 or more gallons into the cockpit. Realizing that the left wing was still full I pulled the dump. I flew the task in a bathtub that eventually drained through the 1/2" fuselage drain hole. There was never a handing problem, but my parachute was soaked.

[nimbus]

Sean,
I'm not sure whether it was a requirement for certification of the JS-1. I'll try and get an answer.
Gordon Boettger

[Mike C]

I doubt if my father ever kicked the prototype 1-35.

The problem was not with spinning the sailplane with water in one wing, that was ok, but when it was in a tail heavy flat spin with a lot of jettisonable lead at the tail that did not jettison as it should have, but finally did.

Mike

[JS]

Richard Starke, test pilot for the JS1C, is currently working in Mojave, CA and living in Tehachapi.
I only have 40 or 50 hours of JS1B and C, all at 18m so not familiar with circumstances that could lead up to whatever caused the tragic accident in Texas.
It's a fantastic glider to fly. JS1s are flown with a reasonably mid-range CG, so doubtfully pushed aft of the limit.
Jim

[John Galloway]

A couple of the junior guys at the factory told me that they
watched a very asymmetrically loaded spin test that was
required for NZ CAA certification and that their lady
representative was there when Uys flew that test. The story
they told me was that the spin was pretty wild and that she
later told Uys that she was sorry he had to go through that
experience.

The manual says that:

"It *may* be possible to recover the JS1 from a spin with a
significant asymmetric water ballast loading, provided correct
recovery procedures are followed:

1. Apply full rudder opposite to spin rotation
2. Simultaneously release the elevator back pressure by moving
the stick fully forward
3. Close the airbrakes (I guess that assumes landing
configuration. JPG.)
4. Move flaps to full negative position (Position 1)
5. Apply aileron into the turn
6. Centralize the controls when the rotation stops
7. Gently pull out of the resulting dive"

The emphasis on fully forward stick, fully negative flap and into
turn elevator being the differences from standard (including
normal JS1) recovery.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 20:53:12 -0700, Sean Fidler wrote:

> Does anyone know what failures are possible (or that have happened or
> are known) with other manufactures wing water systems?
>

I remember a clubmate telling me that he had a sticky dump valve on his
ASW-20 which resulted in only one wing emptying when it dumped water.
Said it happened twice and that he didn't notice any problem in the air
either time - just that the full wing thunked down soon after he touched
down at the end of the flight.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

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

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 11:53:12 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> That's crazy. Well, here is to those daring test pilots!
>
>
>
> That said, I just learned first hand that a modern glider is capable of losing significant wing water in flight. I visited the 2014 Canadian Nationals this summer was shocked to learn that a brand new ASG-29 returned to the airport with a bit of a surprise. The cockpit was half full of water upon landing. The pilot/owner could not be sure what had happened or how. Was it the fuselage tank or the wing, etc? We suggested that he put the wings up on horses and refill it (before attempting to fly again). He did and sure enough one of the wings leaked, alot! The inboard tank seal (a 3x4 panel on the very inboard part of the wing thru which the ballast dump valve control rod runs) somehow failed during the flight.
>
>
>
> So, the wing water tank had definitely been draining into the cockpit at some rate during flight. Additional water was likely draining out the gap between the wing and the fuselage as well (depends on the tapes ability to withstand the water I suppose). How much total water that was out of that wing we will never know. It certainly was possible that the leak was large enough for the glider to have lost all of the water in that one wing. Scary, scary stuff.
>
>
>
> I sure hope that scenario never happens to me (or anyone else). That said, I feel better knowing the manufactures are testing that scenario for us. Are all manufactures testing for spin recovery with a full and empty wing? I never would have imagined that that condition could be recoverable. I am impressed that the JS1 (or anything else) could pass that test albeit with a test pilot who knows that one wing is indeed empty (and which wing that is)......
>
>
>
> Does anyone know what failures are possible (or that have happened or are known) with other manufactures wing water systems?
>
>
>
> This is a very interesting side topic actually. No this does not mean that Punchaz comments are back on the table again ;-)!
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>

> Common stuff includes not putting in the little drain plugs in the root rib area of some gliders with integrated tanks. Valves and bladders can fail and leak.
One very useful thing to do is leave about 1 inch of the trailing edge not taped.
This lets small amounts of water drain without going into the fuselage and can provide a warning that attention needs to be paid to a problem.
UH

[Papa3]

FWIW, I think the case can be made that more glider types have had failures resulting in asymmetric loading than have not. For example, my LS8 inner tanks developed an un-intended crossfeed to the outer tanks via a failed vent tube. It showed up for me on takeoff at a ridge site. An under-trained wing runner didn't realize that "I have water" shouldn't translate to having to hold up a wing with 20lbs of force. As soon as he let go - instant groundloop. Luckily, no other gliders or people were staged near the runway.

In this case, there was a Technical Note shortly thereafter to seal up the vent tube permanently.

[Dave Nadler]

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 11:53:12 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:

> ...This is a very interesting side topic actually....

For heavens sake Sean! Stick to the topic!
*Houston JS1c crash ONLY (not in any way about a Puchaczs, or anything else!)*

[Sean Fidler]

LOL Dave ;-)!

[Sean Fidler]

All, thanks for the great info. As with most aviation emergency's (from a pilot training perspective), you almost have to expect asymmetric water and be constantly prepared for it.

PS: I left my plugs out in Perry this year on the first day. Fortunately we caught it very, very early in the filling process.

Sean

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:55:57 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> For the love of god, please discuss no other subjects here but the JS1 and this very sad accident.
>
>
>
> Do we even know that this accident involved a spin yet? Any factual information? Did anyone see it spinning? It easily could have been a medical or a structural failure or rigging issue, etc? Has anything new been learned about this accident other than that the glider crashed and a pilot was fatally injured.
>
>
>
> It is sickening to me when an accident happens. But I think its important to do what it takes to understand the cause and increase my knowledge. The previous thread had almost no value in terms of the JS1 or this accident and is clearly drifting off into the abyss.
>
>
>
> I was very close to ordering a JS1c this summer. I would like to race 18/Open more than 18/15 as 15 is likely going to be handicapped soon. I have put a purchase decision off for a bit, but still have serious interest in the JS1c for the future as it is clearly very strong in both 18m and Open class around the world.
>
>
>
> Personally, I think the JS1c is as safe as any other modern glider. That is to say that they are all high performance aircraft with massive wings, tiny control surfaces and a tendency to fly with aft CG most of the time, etc, etc (;-)).
>
>
>
> I would love to hear other meaningful and relevant opinions about the JS1c as well as any updates relating to the cause of this terrible accident.
>
>
>
> So basically, unless you have flown a JS1, own a JS1 or plan on buying a JS1 there is probably not alot you can add (or subtract) from this thread. Sorry...but true.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>

> Sean

[jim.pe...@gmail.com]

Hi Sean/everyone,

I'm currently giving serious consideration to ordering a JS1C. From people who have flown them I read nothing but good things about the handling characteristics. There have been some accidents but I have not been able to find anything about the root causes of them as yet. A few questions for yourself or anybody else who can answer:

1) Would you be kind enough to share some of the emails from owners as to their experiences with me?
2) Have the investigations into any of the accidents identified the root causes?
3) Have you gone ahead with your order?
4) Is the finish and engineering quality on a par with the top German manufacturers?
5) Is the inner wing section heavier than a Ventus 2cxt?
6) How easy is it to rig/de-rig?

Yours,
Jim

[Sean Fidler]

Jim,

I chose to by the 29. It was primarily an ease of use issue. I will buy a new glider soon. It's probably a wait and see how the Ventus 3 performs, availability, etc. Another huge question is 21/18 or 18/15. Another is jet? I would also suggest looking at the 18 meter HPH Shark.

Sean

[benso...@gmail.com]

> 4) Is the finish and engineering quality on a par with the top German manufacturers?+++++Yes, without question, it is exceptional.+++++

> 5) Is the inner wing section heavier than a Ventus 2cxt?+++++yes (for good reason, see paragraph 6); I do not know weight difference.+++++

> 6) How easy is it to rig/de-rig?++++same as 29 or V2 but the inner panel is a bit heavier. Heavier for two good reasons; (one) it is a very thin wing (which is good) and (two) it has to be stronger/heavier to support the additional span/load of 21 meters if you go JS1 C 18 and 21 meter tips.

[Craig Reinholt]

Sustainer (jet) or even self launch. If you interested in the new JS1SL (self launch), it will probably be available next spring. Many options to think about.

[BruceGreeff]

If you were wanting to look at alternatives to the JS1, then the LAK17b
is an alternative. Very nice glider, and reasonably competitive. The 304
is also an alternative, well made, sweet to fly but apparently quite
heavy and so not very competitive.

Youw have a number of manufacturers making the new kind of multi-span
gliders:
LAK17b in 15, 18 and 21 metre span.
Schempp-Hirth Ventus 2/3 in 15 and 18 metre span.
JS1 in 18 and 21 metre span.
304CZ Shark in 18 and 21 metre span.
DG800 series in 15 and 18 metre

Each makes different compromise choices - JS is aimed at winning races,
DG808 is aimed at autonomy and "touring XC", LAK is the swiss army knife.

Glaser Dirks seems to be selling lots of DG1000/1001 two seater for
advanced instruction. Their 800 model has always been targeted at the
gentleman glider pilot who is interested in a premium aircraft for
personal rather than competition mount.

So Schempp-Hirth stepped in and partnered with Lange. Last I heard the
Quintus was alive and well, and shipping beautiful precision
manufactured 23m open class gliders to discerning owners.
Schempp makes more money building lots of Arcus and Discus two seaters,
so I suspect the Quintus is a low production halo product.

JS focusses on the quality, competition success and sales volumes of the
a single class of gliders. They do this from a relatively low cost
location, attached to a University with substantial academic input. This
is a formula that has worked well for Schleicher, and Schempp-Hirth
before. Whether they can or want to expand to the rest of the market is
a moot point.

So - I think the manufacturers are all similarly sustainable.

So - the question is - what do you want to do with the glider.


Bruce
--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771

[John Galloway]

At 20:28 13 May 2015, jim.pe...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Monday, July 21, 2014 at 6:42:07 PM UTC+1, Sean Fidler wrote:
>> All, thanks for the great info. As with most aviation emergency's
(from

>=

>a pilot training perspective), you almost have to expect asymmetric water

>a=

>nd be constantly prepared for it.

>>=20

>> PS: I left my plugs out in Perry this year on the first day.

>Fortunatel=

>y we caught it very, very early in the filling process.

>>=20
>> Sean
>>=20

>> On Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:55:57 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
>> > For the love of god, please discuss no other subjects here but the
JS1

>=
>and this very sad accident. =20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > Do we even know that this accident involved a spin yet? Any factual

>in=

>formation? Did anyone see it spinning? It easily could have been a

>medica=

>l or a structural failure or rigging issue, etc? Has anything new been

>lea=

>rned about this accident other than that the glider crashed and a pilot

>was=
> fatally injured. =20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > It is sickening to me when an accident happens. But I think its

>import=

>ant to do what it takes to understand the cause and increase my
knowledge.

>=

> The previous thread had almost no value in terms of the JS1 or this

>accide=

>nt and is clearly drifting off into the abyss.

>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > I was very close to ordering a JS1c this summer. I would like to
race

>=

>18/Open more than 18/15 as 15 is likely going to be handicapped soon. I

>ha=

>ve put a purchase decision off for a bit, but still have serious interest

>i=

>n the JS1c for the future as it is clearly very strong in both 18m and

>Open=
> class around the world. =20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > Personally, I think the JS1c is as safe as any other modern glider.

>Th=

>at is to say that they are all high performance aircraft with massive

>wings=

>, tiny control surfaces and a tendency to fly with aft CG most of the

>time,=
> etc, etc (;-)). =20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > I would love to hear other meaningful and relevant opinions about the

>J=

>S1c as well as any updates relating to the cause of this terrible

>accident.=
> =20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > So basically, unless you have flown a JS1, own a JS1 or plan on
buying

>=

>a JS1 there is probably not alot you can add (or subtract) from this

>thread=
>.. Sorry...but true.
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> > Sincerely,
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> > Sean
>> >=20
>> >=20
>> >=20

>> > Sean
>Hi Sean/everyone,
>
>I'm currently giving serious consideration to ordering a JS1C. From

>people=

> who have flown them I read nothing but good things about the handling

>char=

>acteristics. There have been some accidents but I have not been able to

>fi=

>nd anything about the root causes of them as yet. A few questions for

>your=

>self or anybody else who can answer:
>
>1) Would you be kind enough to share some of the emails from owners as to

>t=

>heir experiences with me?
>2) Have the investigations into any of the accidents identified the root

>ca=

>uses?
>3) Have you gone ahead with your order?
>4) Is the finish and engineering quality on a par with the top German

>manuf=

>acturers?
>5) Is the inner wing section heavier than a Ventus 2cxt?
>6) How easy is it to rig/de-rig?
>
>Yours,
>Jim

I only have about 100 hours in a JS1c so far but the only negative things I
can
point to are the delay in getting the jet certified for use in Europe and
the fact
that rigging it takes extremely precises wing alignment because the main
pins
have no chamfering. The wings are 80 kg each but I use an IMI rigging aid
so
the weight is not an issue.

The build quality is fully as good as the German gliders. That includes
the
downsude of possuble minor issues on delivery as discussed a few weeks
ago here. My JS1 had a blocked tail tank dump valve. ( My Duo had a
disconnected TE tube inside the fin, my Discus 2cT had a tailplane
attachment knob inside the base of the fin). They are all handbuilt
machines.

The handling is extremely good, it feels both responsive and stable. The
low
speed handling is exceptionally benign and confidence inspiring. It can
be
forced to depart if you try and spins fully as do all its competitors but
it would
have to be seriously mishandled to spin accidentally. I am happy
thermalling
down to 45 knots IAS unballasted in smooth thermals. It is also extremely

comfortable for long flights unlike SH single seater cockpits which give me
a
sore back no matter what I try

The two spin fatalities are very hard to understand. I was present when
the
South African accident occurred ( launched in a similarly ballasted 21m JS1

by the same tug and pilot just before it) so I have given it a great deal
of
thought but I can't find anything in the handling of my glider to make me
think
that I am at any more risk in this glider than any other high performance
glider. A ballasted 21m JS1 is at a very high wingloading, higher than any

ballasted 18 glider, so that needs respect but it is a phenomenal thing to
fly.

John Galloway

[Alexander Georgas]

I would second John's comments. It is a wonderful well-built glider and
it is both satisfying and easy to fly.

One tip worth mentioning is that it is well worth traveling to the
factory for the glider delivery as any minor issues can be sorted at the
spot before shipping. This is also a brilliant opportunity to fly the
glider in the wonderful South African conditions.

All of this also applies to comparable gliders like the ASG-29, they are
all wonderful gliders and they are all hand-made.

What I particularly like about the JS-1c is the attention to certain
design details. The Jonker brothers are pilots first and foremost and I
feel that this shows in the philosophy of their product.

Hope this is useful,

Alexander

[Jim Pengelly]

Hi Sean - ease of use issue? Can you expand? Ventus 3 - yes - it would be interesting if SH are creating a direct competitor (18/21) with it. Does anyone know when details of it will be released?

[Sean Fidler]

Jim,

Ease of use (poor word choice perhaps) means: The glider I purchased was already in my possession in Michigan (care of a very good friend). I had been flying it off and on for a year or two before purchasing. I was very comfortable and fairly competitive in it (the 29 is arguably the best current 18m glider if World Championship results are considered). The glider was ready to go, here, etc. All I had to do is write the check. This particular glider is also perhaps among the lightest 29s around (considerably lighter than most other 29s). Finally, the 29 is a very easy glider to rig, fly and manage. Parts are readily available as is knowledge from the community. The "speeds and feeds" are well known. This broad community of US 29 owners was a huge reason I ultimately chose to buy the used 29. It is a truly wonderful sailplane to fly and clearly is widely accepted to have exceptional performance in all conditions and wing-loadings. The ASG-29 is "practically" an open class glider in 18m.

That said, I did strongly consider the JS-1 (I had paperwork in hand and was close to signing) and Lak17b FES. The reason that I did not do the JS-1 is, ironically, the 18/21 meter offering. 21m is also one of the greatest strengths of the JS-1. I love the idea of 21 meter performance (60:1) and the very high achievable wingloadings. I just could not decide how much I would actually use the 21 meter. There are almost no open gliders in Michigan and they are flown even less. The Open class is small in the US right now and only 2 contests each year are held for Open (Perry and Nationals). The simple fact is that 18m is plenty of performance. And, in the USA, the 15m class is still very strong, competitive and dense with top pilots.

As for the Lak17b, I still believe that it is a really outstanding option. The Lak team is highly innovative and forward thinking. They were the first adopter of FES. FES is (without question) the safest, simplist and most reliable sustainer system of the market. I remain very disappointed that the U.S. Handicap committee has failed to adjust the Lak17b handicap to account for the drag of the FES system and not just "LOWER" the handicap due to the increased weight of the batteries. This irritates me to no end. I find the situation to be lazy and irresponsible (and plain wrong). Now that Schliecher and Schemp Hiirth gliders are starting to deliver FES equipped gliders I can only hope more serious attention be given to this issue. It has been nearly 2 years since I brought this up (still nothing has changed I believe). Sorry for the rant, back to the Lak17b. The Lak17b also has 15m tips! So you can have a 15m, 18m, Open (21m) and FES glider all in one (and a 13.5 I believe!!!). That is amazing versatility and all bases could perhaps be covered with this one glider (and a nice hangar to store all these wing extensions!). As I owned a Lak17a (my first glider), I was already impressed with the rigging ease and quality (something I miss on occasion as I continue to learn the 29). The Lak17a was a dream to fly although the rudder was small (this has been addressed with the B model). I also suspect the performance of the 17b is highly underestimated (as the 17a was).

At the end of the day we have 7 very competitive 18 meter gliders on the market right now.

1) ASG-29 - the gold standard, 15/18 only, confident resale, community, proven, available within a year new

2) JS-1 EVO - innovative, focused on 18, proven performance in both 18 and Open but not noticeably better than the 29 in 18, Jet has been pretty much perfected, under a year delivery. also, the lack of a 15m option is difficult for many hard core contest pilots to "let go."

3) VENTUS 3 - it is very hard to ignore the potential and hype (claims of 55:1, etc), get in line!...it's going to be awhile (2-4 years potentially), not proven (hype at this point, to me it must win 2 world championships in a row before its proven to be the best), there will almost certainly be bugs to work out early in the production, SH gross "weight" concerns, fuselage size ?s (supposedly the V3 will offer only 2 size options vs 3, something between an A/B ("sport")and another between a B/C). I suspect the SH chose to go with 15/18 vs 18/21 for the V3 is because the window of predicted higher performance with a 21 meter wing was just to narrow. If the V3 delivers the performance that is being "whispered" (55:1, ultra flat polar via thinner airfoils, etc) it will essentially be a highly competitive open class glider with 18m wings. That would be great because carrying 21/18 tips in a normal trailer is a PITA.

4) ASG-31 - very, very good performance, Schleicher refined, highly reliable self launch capability (unique in the 18 meter class other than than the Antares, great all around glider, surprisingly competitive in both 18/Open.

5) LAK17b(FES) - highly underestimated, offers 15/18/21 and even 13.5, FES experienced (first to introduce the technology to a production glider), easy to rig. But the LAK17b has not had great competition results, the company itself may be more vulnerable (recent ownership change), few (20 perhaps?) have been built and even fewer are in North America although those who have seem extremely happy.

6) HPH 304s - extremely well built, great performance, reliable Jet sustainer, self launch option, good U.S. Dealer who is now campaigning the glider in competition I believe.

7) Antares 18/20 Electric Self Launch - company is so goofy now that it really should not be on this list....but....the glider itself is unreal IF you are prepared to maintain it properly. An amazing used Anteres is currently on Wings and Wheels for around 170k!

I honestly think all of these gliders would be good choices. I truly do. I think they all are competitive with a good pilot. It just comes down to some slight variances in personal preference and budget. Another big factor is company stability and dealer service. Hardcore racers will continue to lean towards the ASG-29 for awhile (a safe choice, here now, by far the most affordable on average, absolutely proven performance in all conditions) or the JS-1 (if 18/Open is key or Jet sustainer is key). The Ventus 3 is very exciting. I suspect a "tiny bit" overhyped ;-). We shall see. Regardless, it will be sold in force (many deposits, etc) and clearly we will have plenty of data on its actual competition performance within 2 years. Remember, the JS-1 was supposed to crush the 29 too. Apparently that task is slightly more difficult than it looks.

The ASG-31 is the "best overall 18m glider" in my opinion because it's a highly reliable self launch with 18/21 options. It's also quite expensive and generally considered touch too heavy in 18m when it's weak. That said, possessing the abilitity to fly almost anywhere you want, at almost anytime you want is truly extraordinary! If competition was less of a focus for me, this would be my choice.

The LAK17b and Shark 304s are also excellent as well although "understated" in their marketing situations (Lak especially in the USA). The FES option on the Lak and its "Swiss Army" tip choices on the price list are very compelling. Essentially 3 or even 4 gliders in one! The Shark is very refined, very high build quality and also has a proven self launch system like the ASG-31 but only with 18m. It seems to be selling very well too.

I bought the ASG-29 and will sit on the fence for a couple years and see how I develop as a pilot and how the market develops.

I hope that helps! It burned up 15 minutes waiting for the plane this morning!

[Jim Pengelly]

Sean - you're a legend. That's such an informative reply and has given me great food for thought. The stand out sounds like the Ventus 3 if the hype is to be believed. Jet sustainer version might be an incredible option. Possible long waiting list and teething trouble with early machines are the only downsides. Frustratingly what I'm hearing is 'might be best to hold off' rather than invest in a JS1 :( Damn it! :) I'm a recreational pilot but I do compete a bit and I'd like to do much more in future, so whilst I'm not looking explicitly for an out and out racer, if I do upgrade (from Discus bT) I do want something that will perform at the highest level so that if I do improve and get into racing seriously then I don't need to upgrade again, if that makes sense.

[Kevin Neave]

The FES option for Schleicher gliders is news!

There was no mention of it at Aero a few weeks ago

(Sorry for drifting off topic)

KN

At 14:27 14 May 2015, Sean Fidler wrote:
>As for the Lak17b, I still believe that it is a really outstanding
option.

>=
>Now
>that=

> Schliecher and Schemp Hiirth gliders are starting to deliver FES
equipped

>=

>gliders I can only hope more serious attention be given to this issue.
It

>=

>has been nearly 2 years since I brought this up (still nothing has
changed

>=

>I believe). Sorry for the rant, back to the Lak17b. The Lak17b also has

>1=

>5m tips! So you can have a 15m, 18m, Open (21m) and FES glider all in
one

>=

[Tony]

Jim, if you wait for the Ventus 3, by the time it shows up there WILL be something that it 'might be best to hold off' for. In the meantime you'll have lost 3 or 4 years of flying at a higher level.

[k...@richmond-cap.com]

>> 3) VENTUS 3 - it is very hard to ignore the potential and hype (claims of 55:1, etc), get in line!...it's going to be awhile (2-4 years potentially), not proven (hype at this point, to me it must win 2 world championships in a row before its proven to be the best), there will almost certainly be bugs to work out early in the production, SH gross "weight" concerns, fuselage size ?s (supposedly the V3 will offer only 2 size options vs 3, something between an A/B ("sport")and another between a B/C). I suspect the SH chose to go with 15/18 vs 18/21 for the V3 is because the window of predicted higher performance with a 21 meter wing was just to narrow. If the V3 delivers the performance that is being "whispered" (55:1, ultra flat polar via thinner airfoils, etc) it will essentially be a highly competitive open class glider with 18m wings. That would be great because carrying 21/18 tips in a normal trailer is a PITA.

I was unaware that SH offered 3 fuselage options. SH has produced several "C" versions of gliders, but these are 15/18m options that come in varieties like Ca and Cb. One would therefore be wise not to purchase a "C" model glider expecting a cockpit that can fit a 6'5" pilot without further due diligence. It also points out that one should be skeptical about advise offered in these forums by relative newcomers who don't have first hand experience with the subject.

[Sean Fidler]

What I have heard is the old "A" (suitable for very, very small frames) will be slightly larger and renamed something like "Sport" and the old B will also be changed larger. This sounds like a smart move to me as very few of the current pilots could possibly fit (let alone be comfortable) in the A. As far as the C fuselage (or D, E and F, etc), lighten up "Francis." It's all for fun and trying to help answer a guy's question. If you have something to offer or can do a better job, please go ahead and state it.

I have never flown a SH glider but I do have 2 owners of V2cxm's in my hangar in MI. I think I know a thing or two about the gliders, their quality and their performance. Excellent on all counts.

[Renny]

Kevin,
You are correct that the FES is not offered by Schleicher. The FES is currently offered on the following gliders:
- LAK-17b FES
- SH Ventus 2cxa
- SH Ventus 3
- SH Discus 2c
- HPH 304S
- Silent 2 Electro
- Albastar also has a 13.5m glider with FES, but I believe they are not in production.

Thx - Renny
(LAK-17b FES owner)

[Kevin Neave]

As a 5'10'' 75kg pilot I've sat in but not flown most of the Schempp Hirth
Fuselage variants.

Std Cirrus / Mini Nimbus are plenty big enough!

The original Discus A / Ventus A were very small. I nearly bought a Ventus
A 20 years (And 5kg lighter) ago. I would have been OK in the summer,
wouldn't have been able to wear my winter woolies!

The Discus B / Ventus B are fine in all seasons.
(I have a shade under 1000hrs in Discus B)

Moving on to the Discus 2a / Ventus 2a - I've sat in the D2a, it's snug but
would probably be OK even in winter, and probably be OK for pilots up to 6'
or so. The D2b / V2b are positively roomy.

The Cockpit of D2c / V2c are pretty much the same as the D2b / V2c, if
anything feel slightly better for tall pilots.

According to SH the V2cax has "2cm more width and will fit pilots up to
1.9m"

V3 is likely to have similar size fuselages to V2c & V2cax

V3 is likely to be a little while away yet, hasn't flown yet & there's
probably quite a waiting list.
18m JS1 claims 53:1, so 55:1 could be possible

Of course after the 18m V3 FES flies there will probably be the 18m D3
FES.

Regards & more apologies for the drift

KN

At 19:32 14 May 2015, Sean Fidler wrote:
>What I have heard is the old "A" (suitable for very, very small frames)

>wil=

>l be slightly larger and renamed something like "Sport" and the old B
will

>=

>also be changed larger. This sounds like a smart move to me as very few

>of=

> the current pilots could possibly fit (let alone be comfortable) in the

>A.=

> As far as the C fuselage (or D, E and F, etc), lighten up "Francis."

>It'=

>s all for fun and trying to help answer a guy's question. If you have

>some=

>thing to offer or can do a better job, please go ahead and state it.
>
>I have never flown a SH glider but I do have 2 owners of V2cxm's in my

>hang=

>ar in MI. I think I know a thing or two about the gliders, their quality

>a=

[OG]

I've read the posts with interest, and some valid and some invalid points have been made. Looking at performance, the 29 is is really good, and had the edge on both the V2 and the old JS, especially so in good weather, when running hard. The 29 handles really well, but the 18m JS handles better, and gives more input to the pilot on where the energy is, especially at mauw. The V2 climbs well, but cannot run with either the 18m JS or the 29. Rigging the 29 is easier, as the JS inner wing is heavy, but if you have a hangar or rigging aid this is a moot point. Very little to choose between the JS and the 29' although I believe the finish on the later JS's are slightly better than the 29, and the 29's wings warp after the 2nd season. Also, the new evo has the edge on the 29, judging by the runs we had at the Grand Prix in Worcester.
The best production open class glider currently is the EB 29, but there is really very, very little difference between the two (almost like the ASW 17 was just a fraction better than the Nimbus 2). But at three times the price of the 21m JS, and an animal on the ground, I really prefer the JS. I've been washing and polishing 26m wings for a long time, and the extra 5 meters makes a big difference :-) .
The difference comes in the handling. Although the EB handles very well for such a big glider, the 21m JS is really just the ultimate I have experienced in handling. Using the right technique, it out-thermals almost anything at max weight, and it's dynamic soaring is unsurpassed. If price was not an issue, I would still choose a JS over an EB.
The Quintus is just not there, especially taking into account the trouble between Tilo and Lange. For The same reason, buying an Antares is a risky option, plus if the black box goes wrong (and it does), its a very costly replacement. The 18m LAK runs well, but cant climb. The 21m LAK is really a frightning thing, and I turn my head every time it takes off. Those wings are just not made for the 21m tips.
The 21m JS at max weight is really well behaved on tow, and a lot more manageable than a ASW 22, Nimbus 4 or ASH 25, even an ASW 27. Fly any of these slow on aerotow at your peril. I suspect that the JS lulls pilots into a false sense of security because it is so well behaved. But things go wrong quickly if you do not concentrate on what you are doing, and it normally does not end well after that.
Oscar Goudriaan.
(btw, I dont even get commision for this, nor paid for my time to write these posts 😊. I'll send you an invoice Leo)

[OG]

And then of course there is the Jet. There is no better way to bring out the little boy in a man when you light that stove😄

[Tom Kelley #711]

On Friday, May 15, 2015 at 1:34:44 PM UTC-6, OG wrote:
> I've read the posts with interest, and some valid and some invalid points have been made. Looking at performance, the 29 is is really good, and had the edge on both the V2 and the old JS, especially so in good weather, when running hard. The 29 handles really well, but the 18m JS handles better, and gives more input to the pilot on where the energy is, especially at mauw. The V2 climbs well, but cannot run with either the 18m JS or the 29. Rigging the 29 is easier, as the JS inner wing is heavy, but if you have a hangar or rigging aid this is a moot point. Very little to choose between the JS and the 29' although I believe the finish on the later JS's are slightly better than the 29, and the 29's wings warp after the 2nd season. Also, the new evo has the edge on the 29, judging by the runs we had at the Grand Prix in Worcester.

> Oscar Goudriaan.
> (btw, I dont even get commision for this, nor paid for my time to write these posts 😊. I'll send you an invoice Leo)

Oscar, if you said anything different, them brothers would feed you to the lions! Isn't that a hard glide comparison with only one 29 at Worcester(see below)? The 29's wing warp???....Oscar...it must be close to feeding time for them cats!
Seriously, what all these fine machines do show is they all are capable of producing a winner. The winner being the pilot who makes the best decisions during that time frame.

Best regards, #711.

African Sailplane Qualifying Grand Prix 2015
Worcester, Western Cape, South Africa, 03/01/2015 - 11/01/2015
<< Previous day Task Meteo Daily Total Next day >>

18-meter
Overall results after day 7

# CN Pilot Team Glider Total
1. LG Laurens J. Goudriaan RSA JS 1c-18 evo 57
2. AJ Uli Schwenk GER JS 1b evo 50
3. SJ Holger Karow GER JS 1b 41
4. UJ Claus Triebel GER JS 1b evo 36
5. OG Oscar Goudriaan RSA JS 1c-18 evo 34
6. BAT John Coutts NZL JS 1a 25
7. JS1 Klaus Kalmbach GER JS 1a 22
8. EG Sven Olivier RSA JS 1b 18
9. WL William Whittaker RSA ASH 26 5
10. 133 Bernd Hubka GER ASG 29 3

[benso...@gmail.com]

OG, thank you for your JS-1 feedback. Respectful congratulations; your accomplishments in the JS-1 21m are nothing less than world class outstanding.

You are one of the few people in the world who has the experience to answer these questions. I'm assuming the JS-1 C 18/21 model uses the 18m EVO tips when in 18m span. Since the center section of the JS-1 C 18/21 has to be stronger (meaning stiffer) to handle more wingspan load, how much more does it weigh than the center section of the JS-1C 18m EVO? When in the air, is there a noticeable difference in energy "feedback" between the JS-1 C 18 EVO and the JS-1 C 21 with 18m EVO tips? In your opinion, does the JS-1 21 flying the 18m EVO tips give up any performance to the "pure" JS-1 18m EVO?

Thank you for your responses.

[Jim Pengelly]

Ben - i came to the same conclusion as you from Jonker's website. If I have understood well from Andy Davis (UK distributor) then the JS-1C is one model with three tip options: 18m, 18m Evo and 21m. The inboard wing section, and indeed everything else apart from the tips is the same regardless of which tips you choose. If you buy a JS-1C 18 Evo then you are buying a JS-1C with 18m Evo tips rather than the standard 18m tips.

[John Galloway]

For all the JS1 C s there is only one type of inner wing panel.

At 20:28 15 May 2015, benso...@gmail.com wrote:
>OG, thank you for your JS-1 feedback. Respectful congratulations;
your

>acco=

>mplishments in the JS-1 21m are nothing less than world class
outstanding.
>
>You are one of the few people in the world who has the experience to

>answer=

> these questions. I'm assuming the JS-1 C 18/21 model uses the 18m
EVO

>tips=

> when in 18m span. Since the center section of the JS-1 C 18/21 has
to be

>s=

>tronger (meaning stiffer) to handle more wingspan load, how much
more does

>=

>it weigh than the center section of the JS-1C 18m EVO? When in the
air, is

>=

>there a noticeable difference in energy "feedback" between the JS-1 C
18

>EV=

>O and the JS-1 C 21 with 18m EVO tips? In your opinion, does the JS-
1 21

>fl=

>ying the 18m EVO tips give up any performance to the "pure" JS-1
18m EVO?
>

>Thank you for your responses.=20
>

[OG]

You hit the nail on the head Tom. It's still the pilot that makes the difference, and dont get me wrong, the 29 is still a brilliant machine. If I lived in Europe, I would own one.
Need to go and face Uys now😜

[OG]

Ben, I believe the inner wing weight is only a function of where the wing is cut (for the tips). The V2 and 29 inner wing panels are shorter than the JS, hence the lighter weight. Personally, I prefer the handling and ride of the 21m, but I am biassed to longer wings😄

[benso...@gmail.com]

Thanks OG. The JS-1 self launch has been mentioned. Pardon my rudeness for "pinching" you but is the prototype flying?

[Andrzej Kobus]

On Saturday, May 16, 2015 at 8:37:35 AM UTC-4, benso...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks OG. The JS-1 self launch has been mentioned. Pardon my rudeness for "pinching" you but is the prototype flying?
>
> > Ben, I believe the inner wing weight is only a function of where the wing is cut (for the tips). The V2 and 29 inner wing panels are shorter than the JS, hence the lighter weight. Personally, I prefer the handling and ride of the 21m, but I am biassed to longer wings😄

It is not even close to being built.

[gku...@gmail.com]

Meanwhile another Js 1C went down...

http://lotniczapolska.pl/Wypadek-szybowca-w-poblizu-Stalowej-Woli,37381

[Craig Funston]

Slow tow with full water?

[jpg...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, May 17, 2015 at 2:43:09 PM UTC+1, Craig Funston wrote:
> Slow tow with full water?

I don't know anything about the circumstances but there has been an advisory email to all owners to emphasise the need to make sure that tug pilots are briefed that the minimum aerotow speed for a fully ballasted JS1C/21m is 70 knots (130 km/h) in turbulent conditions. The minimum in calm conditions is 65 knots.

The wingloading of a 21m JS1 at the MAUW of 720Kg is 58.7kg/m2 which is higher than any other glider that is likely to be regularly aerotowed in any numbers. The only other production gliders with similar max wing loadings are the Quintus and the EB29 with its shortest 25.3 tips (which are all self launchers) and the Antares 23T of which there are not likely to be many. It is this unusually high wingloading that needs to be fully appreciated at both ends of the tow rope IMHO.

John Galloway

[Jim Pengelly]

Moving away from the subject of crashes momentarily (I hope!) - i'm test flying a JS-1 on Saturday if the weather in the UK is kind. It'll be unballasted and likely in 18m mode. I'm just a little bit excited.

[Tony]

Jim I've got a couple short flights in a dry 18m JS1. You'll be smiling for weeks.

[OG]

I really dont know what the status is, or when it is expected to fly

[Jim Pengelly]

Weather looking crappy for my test flight on Saturday but I'm not giving up hope yet. Does anyone have a view on 'time to power' for jet sustainers? I'm not sure how long it takes to get to full power in my Discus bT if I'm honest but I'd guess somewhere around 30 seconds? I believe JS-1 TJ is about 45-50 to full power. Obviously I have more drag and I need to dive to start but I don't know how much time and height loss are factors compared to a jet. Anyone got experience of using a jet to avoid a landout?

[jpg...@gmail.com]

Jim, email me at jpg797 at the googly email. John Galloway

[Jim Pengelly]

On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 8:03:20 PM UTC+2, Tony wrote:
> Jim I've got a couple short flights in a dry 18m JS1. You'll be smiling for weeks.

You're absolutely right - I'm still grinning whenever i think about it...which is pretty much all the time :)

[Jim Pengelly]

On Thursday, May 21, 2015 at 9:48:29 AM UTC+2, jpg...@gmail.com wrote:
> Jim, email me at jpg797 at the googly email. John Galloway

Hi John - i dropped you a mail. Not sure if it got past your spam filter?

[jpg...@gmail.com]

Yes I got your message and sent you an email back.

John Galloway