Undercarriages
Dave Piercy
rough. The best of landings feels like riding over a ploughed field.
We want to move to a better? glider, with a cockpit that can accomodate
small and medium large pilots, and is suitable for low and medium hours
pilots.
We have thought of the ASW19, ASW20 and Mini-Nimbus.
Can anyone offer any advice on whether these gliders, or any others that
come to mind, have undercarriages that are susceptible to damage on rough
fields?
(Or put it another way. what gliders are best for rough fields?)
TIA
Dave Piercy
Bruce Hoult
Piercy" <davep...@lineone.net> wrote:
> what gliders are best for rough fields?
Anything designed in Eastern Europe...
-- Bruce
Eric Greenwell
davep...@lineone.net says...
> Can anyone offer any advice on whether these gliders, or any others that
> come to mind, have undercarriages that are susceptible to damage on rough
> fields?
> (Or put it another way. what gliders are best for rough fields?)
The ASW 20 B and C models have a sprung undercarriage that is better
on rough fields than the original ASW 20 - stronger and smooths out
the rough parts a bit.
--
Remove REMOVE from my e-mail address to reply
Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)
Robert Danewid
cockpit with very god comfort and very nice handling (long sentence!) is in
my opinion: LS4
Mini-Nimbus is not suited for low time pilots.
ASW19 has bad ailerons at low speeds, it is very roomy, flies well but it
requires a bit more from the pilot to get it climb well.
ASW20 B and C are nice, but perhaps not suited for low time pilots as it has
flaps and very powerful landing flaps (the original 20 has even more powerful
landing flaps).
Jantars are roomy, flies well (but compared to LS4/ASW19 etc it is very heavy
on the ailerons) ans very rugged (I have tried it!). One thing to consider is
that it is getting hard (at least that is our experience here in Sweden) to
get spare parts for Jantars.
I have flown all the above mentioned gliders quite a lot and I have owned an
Jantar Std, ASW19, 20, 20C and currently an H304.
Robert
H304 NS
Lars Peder Hansen
notoriously known for their weak undercarriages. The LS1f was a disaster,
the LS4 somewhat better, I do not know the -6, -7 and -8 good enough to
judge these. Hopefully, Schleicher has improved things over the years.
Anyway, the vast majority of broken, unintentionally retracted, or collapsed
during landing undercarriage incidents I have vitnessed, have been with
LS'es (who, btw, fly like angels)
Happy soaring (and smooth landings..),
Lars Peder
Mosquito OY-XIF (can, and unfortunally often does, land anywhere :-)
"Robert Danewid" <robert....@segelflyget.se> wrote in message
news:3B76452A...@segelflyget.se...
Al
Dual 5" cleveland hubs on a real nice shock system...
Want to land in the rough then the 22 is the one for you!!
Al
"Lars Peder Hansen" <l...@post1.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:3b7679f8$0$367$edfa...@dspool01.news.tele.dk...
Eric Greenwell
l...@post1.tele.dk says...
> Yes but, getting back to the initial question, the LS gliders are
> notoriously known for their weak undercarriages. The LS1f was a disaster,
> the LS4 somewhat better, I do not know the -6, -7 and -8 good enough to
> judge these. Hopefully, Schleicher has improved things over the years.
I'm sure you meant Rolladen-Schneider, not Schleicher.
Steve Davis
Check out the Genesis 2 at www.groupgenesis.com. The Genesis 2 has a
rugged Cleveland 5.00 X 5 Wheel/Hydraulic Brake system. It was
designed to take rough landings. The Scott nose wheel is the same as
the tail wheel used on the Pawnee. You won't (can't?) bang the tail
during a hard landing and you don't get the windmilling effect during
crosswind landings, so you are less likely to ground loop during
landings, or crosswind takeoffs with ballast. The cockpit is very
large and comfortable for all sizes up to very large. The Genesis is
an easy glider to fly and transition into for a low time pilot.
www.groupgenesis.com
Martin
> large and comfortable for all sizes up to very large. The Genesis is
> an easy glider to fly and transition into for a low time pilot.
> www.groupgenesis.com
A remarkable change of market positioning. It seems that chalenging the LS-8
wasn't such a good idea after all.
Martin
Robertmudd1u
>> large and comfortable for all sizes up to very large. The Genesis is
>> an easy glider to fly and transition into for a low time pilot.
>> www.groupgenesis.com
And then Martin wrote….
>A remarkable change of market positioning. It seems that chalenging the LS-8
>wasn't such a good idea after all.
I do not recall any promotion on the part of Group Genesis saying the Genesis
glider would out perform the LS-8. The target was always the Discus, which
still shows well in contests.
The Genesis has always been suitable for lower time pilots, it mostly depends
on what kind of gliders they have been flying and the quality of their
training, not hours in the log book. And for that matter the Discus is also
suitable and as is the LS-8. A local, low time, pilot bought an LS-8 and had no
problem transitioning to it from his L-33.
You are pretty quick off the mark to criticize the Group Genesis what is your
problem with them?
Robert Mudd
Janusz Kesik
been bought by private company, and they're started to supply spares for SZD
line.
The same factory is going to restart the production of Jantar 2b at a really
(REALLY!!! from what I've heard, at the production start it WILL beat the
Russia in price) bargain price, and continue production of Jantar Standard 3
(heard that there are some orders now).
The first J Std (SZD 41a) is hard on ailerons, but later versions (Std 2 &
Std 3) have this feature improved.
Best regards,
--
Janusz Kesik
Aero Club of Czestochowa, Poland
jant...@interia.pl
www.soaring.enter.net.pl
> Jantars are roomy, flies well (but compared to LS4/ASW19 etc it is very
heavy
> on the ailerons) ans very rugged (I have tried it!). One thing to consider
is
> that it is getting hard (at least that is our experience here in Sweden)
to
> get spare parts for Jantars.
> Robert
> H304 NS
Steve Davis
Martin, if you go back and read the original post by Dave Piercy it
just might dawn on you that my post was a direct reply to his
questions.
Al
how much for those?
Al
"Janusz Kesik" <jant...@interia.pl> wrote in message
news:9l931u$9nf$1...@news.tpi.pl...
Catherine Conway
video and guessed thats what it was.
I'd like a 59 too. Unfortunately the Australian $ isn't worth much against the
US$ but is ok against most european currencies. Must be really cheap to buy a
glider from the US at the moment.
I need a standard class glider for my club that will cost 20-25,000 Australian.
Can I have a 59 for that including shipping ;-)
-Cath
Al
Al
"Catherine Conway" <con...@agile.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B78A899...@agile.com.au...
Dave Piercy
Dave Piercy
Robert Ehrlich
Just 2 days ago I experienced a landing gear self retracting on ground just
after touch down on a Discus. My first thinking was that I may have failed to
properly lock the lever in the down position, since if I forgot this at the time
I lowered the gear, I can't remember later that I forgot it. But a furher
analysis convinced me that it was not the case. In fact the wheel hit the
ground normally and the ground roll began for a fraction of second, after
which the wheel hit a bump, the glider was shortly send back in the air a few
centimeters above the ground, the gear retracted and the glider landed again
on its belly, with the gear doors closed. If the gear had not be properly
locked, it should have retracted at first touch down and with the doors open,
probably ripped off. Our chief instructor also agreed on this analysis.
I heard later that it was not the first time this happened to this glider and
is common with Schemp-Hirth landing gears. This is also known to be common on
Pegases and at St Auban a small block of wood is used to block the gear lever
in the extended position. The same thing is now true for our Discus.
Marc Ramsey
of wood he used lock the landing gear down. He realized on final
that he had forgotten it, looked down briefly to put it in place,
and hit an obstruction short of the runway. You might want to
consider getting the landing gear properly fixed, or using some sort
of spring loaded permanently attached lock...
Robert Ehrlich <Robert....@inria.fr> wrote:
> I heard later that it was not the first time this happened to this
> glider and is common with Schemp-Hirth landing gears. This is also
> known to be common on Pegases and at St Auban a small block of wood is
> used to block the gear lever in the extended position. The same thing
> is now true for our Discus.
>
Marc
--
_____________________________
Marc Ramsey, ma...@ranlog.com
http://www.ranlog.com/ramsey/
Jjglider
position is a good idea. An even better idea is to properly inspect your down
locks on annual inspection.
Some down locks are made of fiberglass and will wear (round off) with use.
The down lock can be reestablished by simply filing the proper angle or seat
back into the fiberglass. A slight adjustment to the over-center mechanism may
be required to insure the over-center is still under load.
One more tid-bit, on the LS-3 & 4, There is an air strut in the retraction
system. If this strut becomes weak, the gear can collapse on landing. The strut
can be checked by trying to collapse the gear (with fuselage in the trailer
dolly, please). If you can collapse the gear by pushing forward on the drag
struts, then the air strut should be replaced.
JJ
Mike Brooks
I don't know about that ... have a look at the results of the
Canadian Standard class nationals. David Mercer placed second, beating
4 LS-8s.
Granted, an LS-8 won, but congratulations to David for the good
showing.
I'm reminded of the Baron von Richtofen quote:
"The quality of the kite matters little, it's the man who makes all
the difference."
Mike Brooks
Lars Peder Hansen
Yes I meant Rolladen-Schneider, sorry to the folks at Schleicher..
Lars Peder
"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
Martin
"Robertmudd1u" <robert...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20010813100815...@nso-cr.aol.com...
> Steve Davis wrote.
> >> large and comfortable for all sizes up to very large. The Genesis is
> >> an easy glider to fly and transition into for a low time pilot.
> >> www.groupgenesis.com
>
> >A remarkable change of market positioning. It seems that chalenging the
LS-8
> >wasn't such a good idea after all.
>
> I do not recall any promotion on the part of Group Genesis saying the
Genesis
> glider would out perform the LS-8. The target was always the Discus, which
> still shows well in contests.
>
The LS-8 is slightly better than the Discus. So if your goal is to out
perform the Discus, you end up in the same league as the LS-8. If I had to
position a ship in this market segment I wouldn't emphasize things like,
"for low time pilots" and "durable undercariage".
>
> You are pretty quick off the mark to criticize the Group Genesis what is
your
> problem with them?
>
No problems, just being amused by not very clever communication.
Martin