Asw24
Jan
The B model was produced from late 1995. Many people think, only the
winglets changed from A to B model but also cockpit size, position of
some instruments changed.
By the way; She's okay I the wet, not like a PIK or Janus.
Jan
Oscar Alonso
I own an ASW-24a. The 24"A" has a large cockpit. I am a 5" 8" 207lb
guy that fits with extra room in a ASW-24a. The only problem with the
"A" model if you real tall. Anyone over 6 ft. would have a problem.
Regards,
Oscar.
Greg Arnold
than the A, but I still had to remove the seatback to fit with a chute (I am
6'). Width is the same in both models (that is, quite wide).
I don't know why AS can't make its cockpits as long as those in gliders
produced by its 3 competitors.
"Oscar Alonso" <oal...@cisco.com> wrote in message
news:3E3FEA25...@cisco.com...
Ian Spence
2. As far as I am aware, the actual cockpit size is
identical--the canopy shape is changed slightly and
the instrument panel may be slightly changed for the B.
I doubt this makes any real difference in usable space,
but I would be interested to hear from B owners.
3. Performance in the rain is degraded less than most
modern standard class (and I have flown in rain and
sleet several times, so I have first hand experience.)
4. Climb performance is not great in weak turbulent
conditions either with no winglets, or with factory
winglets. Nixon or M&H winglets make a BIG difference
here, with MUCH better climb in turbulent air. Nixon
winglets may be preferred since they plug in to the
existing factory sockets. M&H winglets require a
modification (cutting the outer panel) that is not covered
under the type certificate.
5. Doing the B-mod leading edge blunting may also
help the climb (esp. with factory winglets). However,
you may degrade the excellent high speed performance
of the ASW 24 slightly by doing this. I chose to use
Nixon winglets, but not do the leading edge mod
in the outer panels on my ASW 24.
Ian Spence
ASW 24 "WW"
Jan wrote:
--
Ian Spence, Department of Psychology spe...@psych.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto http://psych.utoronto.ca/~spence/
Toronto, Ontario (416) 978-7623 (Voice)
Canada M5S 3G3 (416) 978-4811 (FAX)
Eric Greenwell
Soa...@REMOVEcox.net says...
> I don't know why AS can't make its cockpits as long as those in gliders
> produced by its 3 competitors.
The ASH 26 has a noticably longer cockpit (I'm 6' and use pedals and
seat back in the middle positions), but I don't know about the other
newer models.
--
Delete the REMOVE from my e-mail address to reply directly
Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)
Andy Durbin
> In article <v%R%9.9761$tq5.2...@news1.west.cox.net>,
> Soa...@REMOVEcox.net says...
>
> > I don't know why AS can't make its cockpits as long as those in gliders
> > produced by its 3 competitors.
>
> The ASH 26 has a noticably longer cockpit (I'm 6' and use pedals and
> seat back in the middle positions), but I don't know about the other
> newer models.
I'm 6 ft 2 inch with a long torso. I was concerned about fitting in
the ASW 28 as I have little headroom in the ASW 19. Need not have
worried. The 28 fits me better than the 19.
I was previously thinking of a 24 and John Murray (US agent) warned me
of the longer cockpit in the B model.
Tall pilots need to consider not just their height, but also torso
length (seated height).
Tall pilots also need to consider side and rear visibility with the
seat back fully aft, or removed. The Schleicher gliders are much
superior to some in this respect.
Andy
Andy Durbin
> Soa...@REMOVEcox.net says...
>
> > I don't know why AS can't make its cockpits as long as those in gliders
> > produced by its 3 competitors.
>
> The ASH 26 has a noticably longer cockpit (I'm 6' and use pedals and
> seat back in the middle positions), but I don't know about the other
> newer models.
Jan
Oscar Alonso <oal...@cisco.com> wrote in message news:<3E3FEA25...@cisco.com>...
Ole
Do you know if there is any technical information available on the net
about the Nixon winglets? And how much did you pay for them?
Ian Spence <spe...@psych.utoronto.ca> wrote in message news:<3E3FF6B8...@psych.utoronto.ca>...
Ulrich
Just to let everyone know that there is an ASW-24 yahoo newsgroup at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ASW-24Sailplanes/
A lot of the questions being asked are covered on the web site and
being discussed by members. There is also a picture of the Nixon
winglets as installed on Ian Spence's -24. Hank is also a member so
you can ask him about his winglets directly.
By the way, I am 6' 2" and fit in the -24 quite well but without the
seat back. I made a new headrest and find the glider very comfortable.
Ulli Werneburg
ASW-24 "MZ" 24078
Ian Spence <spe...@psych.utoronto.ca> wrote in message news:<3E3FF6B8...@psych.utoronto.ca>...
Chip Bearden
32 or 36?) had smaller cockpits. "B" model added winglets and blunter
leading edges for better climb and handling.
I'm 6'3" (190 cm+) and 180 lb. (82 kg) and fit perfectly in my "A".
But that's because the factory built me the "Gerhard Waibel" version:
rudder pedals moved forward a few cm, no back rest (the left & right
baggage covers from the motorglider make a nice backrest), and
Streifeneder instrument panel with higher knee openings. The panel is
very nice: slightly smaller than the factory's but with flat top and
sides and a partially recessed compass mounting forward of the panel.
Pilot height is an issue, but, as noted elsewhere, also important is
ratio of torso height to leg length. The '27 and '28 are even better.
My 11-year-old "A" has always climbed great but I've been flying with
Hank Nixon winglets for 10 years. They, and the M&H versions, seem to
work much better than the factory winglets. With excellent climb, I
was never tempted to blunt my leading edges a la the "B" model for
fear of losing a little high-speed performance, which is very good.
Others don't seem to think it hurts at all.
Don't know where the comments started about sub-par '24 climb: I would
never accuse the other factories or their agents! :) Of course,
Gerhard's presentation on the problems of microturbulence didn't help,
either, but I charged that off to different meteorlogical conditions
in Europe...or to launching a new model glider [out with the old, in
with the new :)].
Ship handles very well. I headed for my first contest in it after only
one flight. Not the smartest thing I ever did but a measure of how
confidence inspiring it is, though you probably have to work a little
harder to squeeze the most out of a '24 than, say, a Discus.
Gel coat is in great condition after 11 years except for some
yellowing around the seams. Rigging is painless (even solo, which is
how I do it 99% of time). Wings are light. Structure is strong. And
the wing profile has remained amazingly accurate all this time (ran
the gauge on it again last season just to make sure).
And one big reason I picked the '24 was Gerhard's well-deserved awards
for safety. The energy-absorbing cockpit is a great feature the other
factories are finally trying to emulate (to be fair, the DG folks also
seem very enthusiastic about pushing safety innovations even when,
inevitably, they add cost). Same for the landing gear which, in an
accident, fails progressively and absorbs shock rather than
transmitting it into the structure and pilot. Plus the big 5" wheel
and hydraulic disk brake are comforting.
Negatives: (1) The dive brakes which are less effective than the big
ones on an LS glider (my previous glider was the strong,
sweet-handling LS-3; the '24 inspires love and confidence equally
well). But the '24 sideslips beautifully and comes down like a rock.
(2) The factory water ballast system (electric valves, tiny dump
ports) is unacceptable today. But U.S. dealer John Murray sells Hank
Nixon's water system with Smiley tanks which works well.
Don't know why another poster in a recent thread commented that a
prospective buyer wouldn't be considering top-level competition since
a '24 could "just about keep up with the old Discus or LS-4" [!!!]:
possibly he was (a) not familiar with the glider, or (b) if an owner,
trying to "psych out" his competition or make excuses for his poor
performance in advance. :) :)
Chip Bearden
ASW-24
Ole
said: if it indeed IS suitable for top-level competition then why is
it the Discus 2 and LS-8 that take all the prizes at those events?
jnbe...@aol.com (Chip Bearden) wrote in message news:<a8f4aa66.0302...@posting.google.com>...
Hank Nixon
Have to agree with Chip on most points.
Only point I would differ with him is with respect to "B" mod.
Increased radius
on leading edge does help with gust tolerance. It seems to help flow
reattach more quickly if you get a gust at high angle of attack. I
found that With really good winglets and "B" mod I could pull as hard
as anyone in thermals without loss of performance. This mod had no
effect on glide that I could see.
Tom Beltz has confirmed this having spent a lot of time in his very
good Discus A flying with my '24.
UH
Ian Spence
Hank would be the best to answer both questions :-)
Since he has already responded in this thread, you now have
his e-mail address to ask him directly.
Regarding Chip's comments, I must say I am in agreement.
Both Karl Striedieck and Hank Nixon won major contests
(including Nationals) in their ASW 24s flying against Discus
and LS8. On a lesser level ;-) I won the 1997 Canadian
Nationals in my ASW 24 against at least one very well-prepared
and well-flown Discus (by Jim Carpenter, who has placed highly
in more than one World Championships).
There is no question that the ASW 24 is still competitive--
there are some Wx conditions where ASW 28 and D2, and
maybe LS8, will have a small advantage, but on the whole
these differences are very small. In my experience, the ASW 24
is certainly superior to the older Discus (but again the differences
are very small.)
Finally, in general, I think that Schleicher design and construction
quality are both just a touch better than with Schempp-Hirth and
Rolladen-Schneider, both of which are excellent, I hasten to add :-).
Best, Ian
ASW 24, "WW"