>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I am looking for any advice as to which had a higher performance out of
>t=
>hese two gliders. I realise it will be pretty similar as they have the
>same=
> handicap, but anything you can tell me such as:
>>=20
>> Strong vs weak conditions?
>>=20
>> How well does each carry water?
>>=20
>> Anything else you can offer.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I realise they are hard to compare as they are from different classes.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Thanks
>>=20
>> RB
>
>I've flown over 500 hrs both (Discus b/WL and ASW20 "A"). Performance is
>pr=
>etty much the same. If you fly a lot without water ballast, ASW goes
>better=
> in strong conditions. Discus can be ballasted to 70kg more so that evens
>i=
>t out (fully ballasted ASW20 climbs better, though). Both suffer from
rain
>=
>and bugs. ASW is a bit more complex because of flaps, but it is nicer to
>fl=
>y and accelerates better, plus you can land it in tighter spot. With
>Discus=
> you have to get used to thermalling with controls crossed (it requires
>cou=
>nter-aileron when turning). Directional stability is better in Discus
>(more=
> so with winglets), with ASW you have to be more sensitive with rudder.
>Bot=
>h have roomy cockpits, back rest can be removed for long pilots.
>
>Discus is much easier to rig, ASW has heavier wings and manual
>connections.=
> *This is the only part where you notice the Discus is newer generation*.
>O=
>riginal gelcoat is probably long gone in both of them. You can put jet
>engi=
>ne to ASW, but on the other hand buy a used Turbo Discus.
>
>I have had water system issues both with Discus (those leaking S-H
>valves..=
>..) and ASW (leaking bag). Minor things.
>
>Both are very good gliders, but ASW gives you same performance little bit
>c=
>heaper.
>
Agree with all of the above, based on a fair amount of experience in both.
the only thing I would add is that, at more or less equal wing-loadings,
the ASW20 starts to do considerably better as you get above 80 - 90 knots.