Which self-launching twin seat glider to buy?
ngu
from asphalt runway on its own power. Any recommendation?
I'm a newbie. I assume an "engine-sustained" (as opposed to self
launching) glider is unable to takeoff on its own and its engine is only
used for inflight height recovery. Am I right?
Bruce Hoult
> I'm a newbie. I assume an "engine-sustained" (as opposed to self
> launching) glider is unable to takeoff on its own and its engine is only
> used for inflight height recovery. Am I right?
You are correct, but "unable" is a big word. I've seen it done. Don't
try this at home, but if you've got a concrete or similar runway long
enough for jet airliners then you can take off with a sustainer. You do
tend to need a couple of people to give you a good push to overcome
rolling resistance at the start, and a *really* fit wing runner. If
there is a car that can tow you to 100 km/h or so then it's easy. You
do still need an unobstructed departure path.
We'll now hear all the reasons why you shouldn't do this. Which are
obvious :-)
-- Bruce
Scott
gliding simulator, one where you actually sit inside a cockpit and all?
"Bruce Hoult" <br...@hoult.org> wrote in message
news:bruce-A49737....@copper.ipg.tsnz.net...
ngu
resulting from such a takeoff, not to mention the displeasure of the
Civil Aviation Dept. :-)
Bob Kuykendall
>...Has anyone thought about making a gliding simulator,
> one where you actually sit inside a cockpit and all?
Anybody who wants to try this, I've got your forward fuselage and
cockpit. Several of them. Reasonable prices. No crating or delivery,
however...
Ian Strachan
Hoult <br...@hoult.org> writes
>In article <3E012677...@spam.com>, ngu <sp...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm a newbie. I assume an "engine-sustained" (as opposed to self
>> launching) glider is unable to takeoff on its own and its engine is only
>> used for inflight height recovery. Am I right?
snip
>We'll now hear all the reasons why you shouldn't do this. Which are
>obvious :-)
Like, it's illegal in countries subject to current aviation regulation.
Also, you would probably be un-insured in the (greatly increased) event
of an incident. Never mind the regulatory investigation, think of the
lawyers ....
A ground takeoff in a motor glider designed only for self-sustaining, is
really not to be advised. For your own good and, in my opinion, the
good of the world gliding community.
We should not gain the reputation with national and other regulatory
bodies, of being cowboys that are more than willing to break regulatory
rules.
Sorry to be a bit stuffy on this, but as a long-term motor glider
enthusiast (I flew a Nimbus 4DM today and my first MG syndicate was an
SF27M in the early 1970s) I think we should show a bit of discipline
and, dare I say, common sense over this.
Only self-launching motor gliders are certificated (by the appropriate
regulatory authority) for self launching. Self-sustainers are not.
Simple as that. Anyone who preaches the contrary is not doing the world
gliding movement a service, quite the opposite. Just think of the
difference in system integrity that is demanded for self-launching
capability compared to just starting at height and avoiding a field-
landing. Aside from what happens if things go wrong.
Oh, one answer to the question in the heading is the Nimbus 4DM that I
flew today. A marvellous glider, well over 1:50, world record breaking
machine (2600 km over the Andes by Klaus Ohlmann), self launch,
protection against "aux vaches" events, and so forth.
A bit better then the Grunau which I am old enough to remember ....
--
Ian Strachan
Robert Ehrlich
Even self-launching motor gliders may lack the power to ensure a secure
take-off. I witnessed during the Swiss National Championship 2001 some
motor gliders (among them an ASH-25) that were taking off by recommendation
of the contest director both towed by a 200 HP Maule and with their propeller
extended and engine running. The field was rather short and there was trees
and power lines at the end.
I wonder if the same is legal with a sustainer. Annyway some sustainers don't
even have a starter for the engine and must have some airspeed in order to
do a wind-milling start.
tango4
lawmower type pull cord that wraps around the propellor hub. I've done it
with the Ventus.
Exciting and very loud!
Ian
"Robert Ehrlich" <Robert....@inria.fr> wrote in message
news:3E0259D8...@inria.fr...
John H. Campbell
>from asphalt runway on its own power. Any recommendation?
I think you're looking for the Grob G103 Twin IIISL. More details about the
trade-offs and continuum from training motorgliders (SF-25), to tourers
(Katana) to exotics (Stemme) can be found at
http://pages.prodigy.net/egreenwell/ASA%20site/
Ian Strachan
<Robert....@inria.fr> writes
snip
>Even self-launching motor gliders may lack the power to ensure a secure
>take-off.
.... under critical conditions, that is, short field and vertical
obstructions on the climb-out path.
That applies to all aircraft up to Jumbos. It does not alter the self-
launch v self-sustain argument at all.
>some sustainers don't
>even have a starter for the engine and must have some airspeed in order to
>do a wind-milling start.
Quite. Not only un-certificated for takeoffs but difficult to start on
the ground anyway.
However, a winch launch followed by an engine start and climb away, is
entirely legal. As would be an air tow. Not sure about a bungee
launch, though (a joke, I think).
--
Ian Strachan
Ian
> In article <3E012677...@spam.com>, ngu <sp...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm a newbie. I assume an "engine-sustained" (as opposed to self
>> launching) glider is unable to takeoff on its own and its engine is
>> only used for inflight height recovery. Am I right?
>
> You are correct, but "unable" is a big word. I've seen it done. Don't
> try this at home, but if you've got a concrete or similar runway long
> enough for jet airliners then you can take off with a sustainer.
Maybe you have seen this done, but I have seen the oposite.
A Ventus turbo took an early aerotow but failed to find lift. The pilot
deployed the sustainer motor a few hundred feet above the airfield. The
Ventus was full of water, the runway was at 4000 ft ASL and the
temperature was over 40 deg C.
The pilot discovered that the rate of climb was "unsatisfactory". After
flying a few orbits over the airfield, he cut the motor and landed - still
full of water. Later he took another aerotow and set off on the task.
Yes, he could have dumped the water, but that would have messed up his
flight in literally world record breaking weather.
As regards the original thread. There are 4 privately owned DG 500 self
launchers at our club. From what I have seen, they are mechanically well
designed, pretty robust, practicle to own and operate with some good
safety features. Aerodynamically they outperform the 15m ships and
handling is reported to be user friendly. But if you want to win
competitions or break records you will need something like like a Nimbus 4
DM.
I note the original poster claims to be a "newbie". Perhaps he would be
better off getting his glider conversion and 100 hours or so in a single
seater pure glider before thinking about buying a self launching 2 seater.
Steve Beaver
"ngu" <sp...@spam.com> wrote in message news:3E012677...@spam.com...
> Twin seat, reasonably priced, docile handling, capable of taking off
> from asphalt runway on its own power. Any recommendation?
** Mine of course! Please see the Test Alpin DM-8 for sale at wings and
wheels and Barnstormers. **
Ronald
self-launching. Only 500 flighthours. Engine 100 hours (adjustable
propellor 0 hrs).
See for more details the wings & wheels site or www.segelflug.de.
ngu <sp...@spam.com> wrote in message news:<3E012677...@spam.com>...
Eric Greenwell
jh...@greeleynet.com says...
> I think you're looking for the Grob G103 Twin IIISL. More details about the
> trade-offs and continuum from training motorgliders (SF-25), to tourers
> (Katana) to exotics (Stemme) can be found at
> http://pages.prodigy.net/egreenwell/ASA%20site/
Or even easier: www.motorglider.org
--
Delete the REMOVE from my e-mail address to reply directly
Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)