Comments on the LAK 12?
dl...@my-deja.com
a brand new LAK 12 for $19,900 and a trailer for $5500.
Not bad. Add a $750 one person assembly dolly and
I'm wondering if this might be a good first glider?
David
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David Rolley
factory. Shipping is probably extra and could add another 10%. Then
you need instruments. A good quality, simple vario and basic air data
instruments (airspeed, altimeter) could run another $600 - $800. You
are now in the price range of an awlful lot of good used ships.
As to whether it would be a good first ship for you...
The gentleman that used to import them claimed that a solo student could
safely operate the glider. That maybe true, but there is far more to
soaring than flying the pattern or mechanically operating the glider.
Since I don't know your experience, I can't really advise you on how
well the LAK-12 would serve you. From my perspective, with several
hundred hours in my first ship (a Concept 70) before I bought my LAK-12,
the LAK-12 would not have been a bad choice for me as my first ship. But
I had a fair amount of high performance time (in general aviation terms)
and didn't have any real difficultly in my transition glass ships.
Remember, when the first of the 20 meter gliders came out, they were the
hottest thing going. While the LAK-12 is a good handling glider with
gentle manners, it still demands very good decision making and
airmanship skills. One of the most difficult skills to develop is the
ability to think and plan far enough ahead of the ship that you can
safely operate it. For instance, if you hit the pattern IP at your home
airport in a 2-33 (at 20:1?) the urgency of your decision making is
completely different than a ship at 45:1 (+?). Being "real high" on
short final in a 2-33 may mean full spoilers and an aggressive slip.
Being "real high" in a high performance ship may mean an off airport
landing, with its own set of risks.
Another challenage with any of the big ships is the wings are long and
you cannot let one touch while the ship is moving. Otherwise it is
ground loop time. Basically, if you can handle a Grob Twin Astir (the
tail-dragger version of the Grob 2 seater), the LAK-12 will be easy. If
you find the Twin Astir difficult, then something even bigger and
heavier (the LAK-12), even if it has docile handling, is not for you.
Of course if you are not yet a cross country pilot, you will have deal
with the learning curve for that. And that is a whole different set of
challanges. Which might be easier in a simpler glider.
You can't evaluate a glider on price (or L/D) alone. You have to
(objectively) evaluate your skills as a pilot and honestly determine if
your skills are up to the ship you wish to purchase and if you are
willing to spend the time and effort to improve them beyond what is
required to simply operate the ship.
Having said all that, I like my LAK-12.
Dave Rolley
Armand A. Medeiros
is what has been related to me.
I once considered it...getting a 304 instead.
Armand
<dl...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:80fkj6$km8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Al
have a cooler full of beer or $20 bills for the rigging crew.
You thought an ASW17 or Nimbus 2 was a pain to rig!! Wait till you try the
LAK.
Performance seams good bang for the buck and if you rig it at the beginning
of the season and put it away in the end its should do yo well.
I am sure Ken Ward who lurks on this group can shed some light on the
particulars of flying one.
David Rolley
would rig the ship every time I went flying. Normally from "trailer
open" to "its a glider" was about 30 minutes. Interestingly enough,
help from someone else usually slowed us down. (My kid is a GREAT crew,
and no, he is not for sale or rent)
The wings are heavy, around 230 pounds each. About the same as a Grob
103. However the tips are only 50 pounds, about the same as most mid
70s to mid 80s 15 meter ships. I have a Cobra rigging fixture, which
when properly placed carries the main weight of the wing leaving about
20 pounds on the spar tip. No one has to lift more than the wing tip
weight. Canon City has a nice paved ramp and that made the job much
easier.
I have rigged a LAK-12 with three people and no aids other than a wing
stand. That is a painful process.
I have also landed my ship in a plowed field. We were allowed to take
the trailer to the plane. The ground was too soft to use the rigging
dolly. Three of us were able to derig the ship without too much
effort. I plan to cut some plywood and carry it in the trailer so that
soft ground doesn't prevent the use of the rigging dolly next time.
Any time you are dealing with a large glider, it takes more time and
effort. But it is worth it.
Dave Rolley
David Rolley
On the ground it can be a bear. But that holds true for every other
open class ship from a Grob Twin to the latest Nimbus, ASW-22, or
AHS-25. There are compromises made to obtain the performance. Granted,
the current generation of 18 meter ship are approaching (perhaps
surpassing) the performance levels of the older design 20 meter ships.
The compromise there becomes the amount invested (aw the heck with it,
spent).
The roll rate of the LAK-12 at 60 knots is on par with most everything
I've flown with a 15 meter span. At 40 knots and below, call ahead for
an appointment. But at 40 knots the level flight sink speed is under 1
knot. I have found conditions where I could climb at 1/2 knot flying
straight ahead at 40 knots when the 15 meter ship on my wing was
wallowing and falling out of the sky. 30 minutes later I was in a
boomer thermal (and 1000 feet higher when I found the thermal), the 15
meter ship had to turn for home. All that means is the conditions
favored the ship and flying style I was using. The tables are just as
often tipped the other way.
I spent a lot of time talking to open class flyers before buying my
ship. One thing came out of those conversations. You fly an open class
ship differently than a 15 meter or standard class ship. You don't fly
as fast inter-thermal and you don't stop as often for thermals. Very
much like the difference between the way a 1-26 pilot flys with a
different strategy than an ASW-20 pilot.
None of this makes any particular glider right for all pilots. If I
sold my LAK-12 tomorrow, I'd be calling one of the folks that has a
Nimbus 3 for sale. Probably before the ink was dry on the bill of
sale. Which means I didn't learn my lesson about big and heavy. I am
convinced that open class ships are addictive. At least for me.
Dave Rolley
Bert Willing
David Rolley wrote:
> None of this makes any particular glider right for all pilots. If I
> sold my LAK-12 tomorrow, I'd be calling one of the folks that has a
> Nimbus 3 for sale. Probably before the ink was dry on the bill of
> sale. Which means I didn't learn my lesson about big and heavy. I am
> convinced that open class ships are addictive. At least for me.
Yep.
--
Bert Willing
-----------
Caproni Calif A21S D-6600
Come fly at La Motte du Caire in the French Alps:
http://www.decollage.org/la_motte/
Armand A. Medeiros
addited to soaring as I am!
LOL!
Armand
> I have also landed my ship in a plowed field.
<snip>
> Dave Rolley
>
G. Graham
The Lak has been perfect high performance glider for a very reasonable price
Very nice handling, very docile for large glider. out performs many gliders
twice to three
times the price. excptional climb rate. The draw backs are one piece wing.
Its a problem if you are not that strong. I am 100kg and can lift the wing
by myself. The whole wing is still only 10lb heavier the the ASW17 in board
section. A one man rigging system is available, you can either make it
yourself or buy one from the states. The landing in small
paddocks can be tricky because of the very shallow approach angle but with
practice you can consistently land in about 120mtrs, the use of negative
flap on approach is very effective for loosing altitude above 90ft as in
flight manual. also the very slow approach speed with landing flap. With
190ltrs of water in the Lak makes for a very fast machine with a great Glide
I have flown with ventus at high speed and the Lak pulls away.
but it still retains a very good climb rate. turning cirle for a large
glider is good.
You compare it with the german machines on the field and it hasn't got the
same finish
but is still not bad but in the sky it certainly gives them a big hurry up.
I would buy the same glider again if in the same situation.
A NZ pilot
Chris O'Callaghan
----------
>The Blanik web pages now suggest that one can buy
>a brand new LAK 12 for $19,900 and a trailer for $5500.
>Not bad. Add a $750 one person assembly dolly and
>I'm wondering if this might be a good first glider?
NO!
Al
> > Nimbus 3 for sale. Probably before the ink was dry on the bill of
> > sale. Which means I didn't learn my lesson about big and heavy. I am
> > convinced that open class ships are addictive. At least for me.
Burt see the light....
Acro ships are the way to go...
I have not had so much fun since getting into the SZD 59...
Its hard to give up them beautiful long wings and 60:1 LD but after a total
aerobatic workout there is nothing more thrilling.
so 13M or bust is the name of the game..
Al
> particulars of flying one.
Ken lurking away sent me this by mistake so I post it for him here.
Ken ward says:-
I like my LAK-12. However I've noticed that when I'm rigging it at the
start of the season, or derigging at the end, people will avoid looking in
my direction, much less walk in the vicinity. If they do stop by and then
catch on to what I'm doing, it's "Oh my, look at the time! Gotta go!" I
leave it out all summer w/o bags, due to its polyurethane epoxy finish,
and just give it a bath with clean water while filling the prodigious
water ballast tanks. It fills and drains quickly and easily (unlike an
ASW-22 wink wink nudge nudge say no more!) and I think it flies better
when full of water. It climbs real good with the flaps in thermalling
position, and scootivates when they're reflexed (and coupled to the
ailerons).
People like to make fun of the weight of the wings, but they are perhaps
unaware that each wing at 220# is only 30# more than the weight of a
ASW-17 inner panel alone. Most of these people have never actually helped
in the process, or they'd know better. I invite them to help me next
time, if they dare!
I think it's a piece of cake to fly. Any licensed glider pilot can handle
the mechanics of it, but David is right about needing good decision making
skills due to the wing span and performance.
The only thing that needs improvement is the brakes, and I hope to fix
that this winter. You won't find the same level of interior fit and
finish as on a German ship, but it's big and comfy.
A bonus is the respect that a trailer which measures some 45 feet from
hitch to license plate commands out on the open road, especially when
being towed by a Honda Civic Wagon! Even Chevrolet Subdivision drivers
towing Jet-skis will avert their gaze.
Ken
San Jose, CA
Al
> Gosh Al, I think you may change your mind once the xc season comes around.
> 60/1 sure is nice compared to 35/1.
Hey 36 on the short wing 40 on the long..
Anyway craig I was hoping to borrow your Nimbus 4 ;-)
I'll trade you Acro time in the 59
Al
Shaber CJ
>I have not had so much fun since getting into the SZD 59...
>Its hard to give up them beautiful long wings and 60:1 LD but after a total
>aerobatic workout there is nothing more thrilling.
>
>so 13M or bust is the name of the game..
>
>Al
Gosh Al, I think you may change your mind once the xc season comes around.
Shaber CJ
It is nice to have goals.
Al
> It is nice to have goals.
I know Craig you have a burning desire to do Acro.. Dont live life in
denail :-)
Al
Armand A. Medeiros
> denail :-)
You start to smile at your own typos!!!
David Brunner
>denail :-)
Or DeScrew or De Nutzandboltz either
--
David Brunner
Technology Coordinator for GenEd
brun...@jmu.edu (540) 568 2508
G. Graham
G. Graham
Al
Still waiting for the big wave day, Tom is loving my tow bills at the
moment!!
We took a load of in cockpit video last weekend I'll put some up on my web
server when I get a chance.
It made a buddy of mine feel sick just watching it.
Spell check complete.. ok safe to post this one!!
G. Graham <ragp...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991116101128...@ng-fd1.aol.com...
Shaber CJ
>denail :-)
I fly an SNJ, so I do acro , and then climb back up under my own.
Craig
David C. Rolley
ratio!!
Actually, where I fly is pretty forgiving, so landing out is not usually
equipment or personally threatening. You still have to be careful.
The day I landed out I ended up less than 8 miles from home. I probably
could have made it back with at least a high base entry BUT I needed to
cross a creek drainage to rising ground on the other side. If I had run
into any sink in that 1 or 2 miles (crossing the creek drainage) my
landing choices would have been far less favorable. So I made my last
search for thermals within about 1/2 mile of the field I'd chosen (and
overflown to check it out) and when I hit my predetermined altitude made
a beeline for the field, did an overhead 360 to my landing.
I left my last turnpoint which was approximately 45 nm east of my
destination about 1000 feet below glideslope. But who give up 45 nm from
home? At the point I picked out the field I eventually landed in, the
computer said I'd get home with 600 feet to spare. That means that I had
found enough lift to offset the sink I found and really enough to get
home. But the computer can't see what I can by looking outside, and as
Al has already remarked about a marginal final glide in his ASW-22, it is
really nerve wracking to make a max performance final glide in any ship.
It turned out that I had landed on the "back 40" of someone's property
and the folks that were working the fence line near where I landed (I
always try to pick a field that has someone near by) turned out to be the
neighbors. I had to walk a ways to get to the owner's house. The lady
of the house and her daughter were in the process of unsaddling their
horses when the little girl saw me walking up from the back of their
property. The lady was really surprised when I told her how I came to be
on their property. I called my crew, then helped them get the rest of
the tack off the horses and put away. Washed, combed and fed two
horses. (When I'm technically trespassing, I try to be very helpful to
the owners! It leaves a whole lot better feelings with folks.) They fed
me dinner and helped us get the glider out of the plowed field and into
the trailer.
Yes, it was worth it. The flight was great, the folks I met were nice,
and I got another good gliding story to tell. We all need a "good"
landout every now and then. Just ask a 1-26 driver. They have the best
stories.
Dave
Ernst W. Schneider
I wanna see that "inifinite" long landing field :-)
have fun
Ernie
David C. Rolley <dro...@bewellnet.com> wrote in message
news:383215B3...@bewellnet.com...
David C. Rolley
If my glider was that good, I find that infinite length farmer's field.
That would be a challenge I couldn't pass up! :):)
I find it interesting that folks assume that as the glide ratio goes up,
the likelihood of landing out goes down. I will agree that the
likelihood of off airport landings might go down, depending on where you
fly. As the gliders get bigger, some airports become more dangerous
that an off airport landing in an agricultural field. One of our folks
landed on a crop duster strip a few years back in his LS-6. I'm
probably mis-remembering but I think he paced the distance between the
lights as less that 60 feet. He said he was glad he held the centerline
so well.
I think we all fly to the performance of the ships we operate. I do
have to admit that when I jump in the club Blanik after flying my LAK-12
I have to remind myself not to wander as far from the field in weak
conditions. I get really paranoid when I fly the club 1-26!!!
Interestingly, I've had a 1-26 further from my home airport in January
than I've had any glass ship at that time of year. I towed straight out
toward wave, hopped off in lift about 5 miles out, "penetrated" (if you
can apply that term to a 1-26 :) :) ) forward through at least 3 cycles
and finally hit the primary. By the time I turned for home I was 25 nm
out at 25,000' in a wave window. I later figured that with the
tailwind, I was making an effective 48:1 glide ratio going home.
Unfortunately, I didn't have a sealed barograph in the ship.
I have a ball no matter what I'm flying.
You should have seen the wave clouds along the front range of the
Rockies today! It was a sin to have to work...
later.
Dave
F.L. Whiteley
David C. Rolley wrote in message <38362CDA...@bewellnet.com>...
>You should have seen the wave clouds along the front range of the
>Rockies today! It was a sin to have to work...
>
Nice sunset too.
Frank Whiteley
G. Graham
;-)
G. Graham
Dan Marotta
dirt strip had no lights and would have been bette.
Dan
"David C. Rolley" wrote:
> Ernie,
>
> snip
> One of our folks
> landed on a crop duster strip a few years back in his LS-6. I'm
> probably mis-remembering but I think he paced the distance between the
> lights as less that 60 feet. He said he was glad he held the centerline
> so well.
>
> snip
G. Graham
G
Mike Lindsay
<dro...@bewellnet.com> writes
>I'm firmly convinced that I could land out with an infinite glider
>ratio!!
>
Our syndicate of three bought a very nice DG202 with nary a scratch on
her for about 2000 GBS less than she was worth. One of us got caught out
low about a mile and a half away. Low means 1000 feet. He opted to land
in a field, hit a bush with the wing-tip, wrote the ship off. I am
pretty sure he could have made it back.
He gave up gliding after that.
--
Mike Lindsay
David C. Rolley
kept coming back to it trying to figure out why it bothered me.
I've had at least one person (and it wasn't Mike) privately tell me that after
reading my landout story they think I seem to have a cavalier attitude about
landing out. I don't think that is the case, but then if I did I wouldn't
admit it (especially to myself). I've only had one out landing where I didn't
pick my landing site at least 10 minutes before I used it. (The one time was
when the ridge turned just enough that the wind no long worked. I still had
time enough to overfly 3 sites, pick one, and still get two 360's to look it
over before landing.)
First and foremost, if you fly cross country sooner or later you are going to
find yourself in uncomfortable positions. Hopefully your training,
experience, planning, and yes, luck will allow you to make the necessary
decisions that gets you back to a more comfortable situation. If you are
afraid, you need to work on the causes. And perhaps with the help of someone
else.
The situation Mike described should not have been a problem. Even the
American tin box, the 1-26, will make it back for at least a base leg entry to
a known airport from 1000 feet up and 2 miles out. Just not in a 20 knot
headwind. Without knowing anything else about the situation, it seems plain
to me that the person flying the DG202 was in over their head just flying the
ship. They probably could mechanically handle the ship in the pattern, but
lacked the decision making skills and experience to take the ship much beyond
the pattern. Remember, when I first responded to the question about someone
purchasing a LAK-12 I said there is much more to flying than operating the
controls. That is the true advantage to learning in a lower performance ship
before jumping into your dreamed about glass slipper. You get to have those
experiences closer to home. It probably helps that you gain the experience in
a club ship, 'cause there is always someone waiting for you to get back and
you don't dare landout. That seems to temper some folks adventurous natures.
Usually "low" isn't that low and you just don't know it yet. High performance
has a siren song that calls for us all to use it. It is an interesting
balancing act, listen to just enough of the song but not so much that you end
up on the rocks. That places a responsibility squarely on the pilot to obtain
the knowledge and skills necessary to safely and effectively operate the
chosen glider.
A high performance ship doesn't make you a better pilot. It requires you to
be a better pilot to safely enjoy the benefits of that performance.
Dave Rolley