DG-300 or LS-3?
noel.wade
Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
your logbook. You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
find them highly enjoyable. You begin to make plans to buy a partial
share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
gears financially and keep costs in check.
Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). The ship has
spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.
2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
- but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. The ship
has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. Assume that it is
only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.
According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
at slower speeds. Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.
What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? If you owned
one of them, would you sell it to get the other?
Thanks for the assistance,
--Noel
Andy
> Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out there:
My opinion - spend your time/money on getting more contest
experience. The glider won't make any difference, unless for some
reason you really don't like the DG.
Andy
Mike the Strike
Actual cross-country performance of the two ships won't be much
different - pilot skills will easily outweigh any difference in
aerodynamic performance. I used to have an ASW-20 and flew regularly
with a friend who had a DG-303 and the performance differences
weren't large enough to be noticeable.
I would base your decision on other factors, such as auto-hookups,
whether you want a flapped ship, instruments, trailer and maintenance.
In choosing my latest ship, I gave a higher weight to automatic
hookups and a nice trailer than pure performance. Choose according to
your own preferences.
Mike
glider
> your own preferences.
>
A good refinish is very, very expensive.
If damaged and repaired ,was it done by someone that knows repairs?
GA
AK
If you are talking about Andy's LS-3 then I can tell you his glider
climbs really well. I used to fly a very good climber SZD-55-1 and I
climbed with Andy in the same thermal a few times. I was surprised
how
well he climbed. It is also an excellent runner. I would choose the
LS-3 if performance was what I were after. Plus paint finish is ever
lasting.
Peter Smith
If you opt for the LS-3, you'll want to add the cost of a Wing Rigger
to the price. Those wings are really heavy.
Greg Arnold
Changing gliders is expensive. You lose money on the one you sell, then
you spend a fortune upgrading the one you just bought.
Keep the one you have, and spend the money on tows.
Brad
Noel,
John Cochrane makes a good point in his paper "a little faster please"
I don't have it in front of me, but basically he say's the top pilots
will always finish in the top spots even if they flew 20 year old
sailplanes. So save yourself some money and implement the concepts
he's put forth.
Ron sure does well in that LS-3, but, he also did really well in his
LS-1. With the legs the LS-3 has over the LS-1 it is becoming obvious
to all of us that fly with him that indeed it is a big asset. I think
you might want to fly with him and see how the DG-300 compares to the
LS-3.
My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
glider!
Brad
noel.wade
> My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
> glider!
Yeah, but even your 13M ship has a flap handle... I want one of
those!! I feel so inadequate without one... ;-)
--Noel
P.S. I slacked off at work today and correlated data from Idaflieg and
various Johnson Reports. At 80 knots the DG-300 achieves a glide-
ratio of about 27:1. By comparison, the LS-3 can get 31:1. When
Moffat and Johnson and others wrote a lot of their reports back in the
1970's and 1980's, the idea of high wing-loadings for faster
competition flying was not yet in-vogue... so they didn't cover it
much. But in strong conditions (i.e. Ephrata or other competition
sites in the western USA), the benefits of a heavier flapped ship like
the LS-3 are pretty significant (on paper at least).
Greg Arnold
> On Apr 23, 5:04 pm, Brad<apispi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My 2-cents worth..............coming from a guy who flies a 13m
>> glider!
>
> Yeah, but even your 13M ship has a flap handle... I want one of
> those!! I feel so inadequate without one... ;-)
>
> --Noel
> P.S. I slacked off at work today and correlated data from Idaflieg and
> various Johnson Reports. At 80 knots the DG-300 achieves a glide-
> ratio of about 27:1. By comparison, the LS-3 can get 31:1.
That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.
noel.wade
>
> That is a difference of only 30' of altitude each mile.
>
Greg -
Yes, it does seem like a paltry difference in altitude-per-mile.
But when you look at it in terms of competition flying, it equates to
a good 5 - 7 knots faster during inter-thermal cruising, for the same
sink-rate.
If you figure that 70% of a task is spent in cruise, that's a nice
advantage! Flying 85 knots versus 80 knots yields a 6% speed
difference in cruise. If you assume a similar climb rate (I know,
they may not be similar) and you assume that you spend 70% of your
flight in cruise, then the total performance advantage is 4%. But the
handicap difference between the DG-300 (0.95) and the LS-3 (0.937) is
only 1.4%
I know that the pilot matters more than the ship. I come from the
world of auto-racing and have experience in competition where bad
people think that fancy equipment will solve all of their
deficiencies. That's not the issue here... The issue for me is
whether its worth it to get the good ship *now* and have it for
several years, versus "practicing" with the DG-300 for a few years and
then moving over once I am "close" to winning...
--Noel
rlovinggood
Screw the glider....
Get the one that has the better trailer!
Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
noel.wade
wandering off into "buying your first glider" territory:
1) I've already owned 2 gliders.
2) The DG has a mid-80's metal-top Cobra trailer. The LS has a
late-80's/early-90's fiberglass Komet trailer. Slight nod goes to the
Komet, but its a razor-thin margin (we're talking about little details
like a foot-pump jack versus scissor/jackscrew-type jack).
3) Both ships have auto-hookups. I fit well in both (I haven't flown
an LS-3 but I have flown an LS-4 and loved it; but I've also flown a
lot in a DG-300 and love it).
4) I have a one-man rigger. (www.wingrigger.com) :-)
5) The DG-300 has slightly "simpler" instruments; but still more than
enough for effective contest soaring and with really nice new wiring.
The LS is what I would call "fully loaded" on the panel with a lot of
LCD screens and backup computers (too much if you ask me - and I'm an
IT professional!) ...But likely with older wiring behind the panel
(though haven't inspected it).
Thanks!
--Noel
Bob Kuykendall
> What would _you_ consider to be the better ship to own? If you owned
> one of them, would you sell it to get the other?
Ondulation nonwithstanding, I'd go with the DG300. It's a newer
design, it has autoconnects, and I think that its cockpit has a bit
better crashworthiness than the LS3.
Thanks, Bob K.
Darryl Ramm
I decided to by a nearly new DG-303 Acro as my first glider, auto
hookup was a required item.
Are you sure the LS3 has auto hookups? On everything?
Darryl
noel.wade
>
> Are you sure the LS3 has auto hookups? On everything?
>
> Darryl
Darryl -
I know, I didn't realize it either back when I was researching my
first ship. But from the DG website:
"The LS3 has automatic connections of the ailerons, the flaps and the
air brakes"
(My research & photo-study revealed that this is because the one-piece
flaperons were driven at the root by pins sticking out from the
fuselage)
The LS-3a (which split the flaperon into separate flaps and ailerons)
requires manual control connections.
--Noel
joesimmers
> air brakes"
>
What about the elevator? The most important one of all.............
Brad
that one too..........
Brad
Dean
First of all, I have owned a grand total of one glider(DG303) and
done one contest, so I may not be the greybeard you want to hear
from! If you are planning on flying in sports class, the DG300 has
the better handicap(at least for OLC, 106 vs. 108), so if you fly even
with an LS3 you will win the day.
The responses on the thread have indicated years of experience and
multiple glider ownership. My gut feeling, from observing pilots and
gliders on fun days and contest days, is that you and I would
probably have to move up to ASW27 or comparable to get to the next
level in performance. Just fly the heck out of your DG300 until then
and have fun. I really feel it comes down to experience and comfort
level in varying conditions and terrain rather than equipment unless
you are at the top level.
Is it possible that I got a letter from you when you were searching
for a DG300/303?
Good luck in your quest, and I echo some other posters here
regarding the auto hookup on the LS3 elevator. And I concur with you,
loved the LS4, almost bought one!
Dean "GO"
jcarlyle
What's an "ondulation"? Is it just a mis-spelling of "undulation", or
is it some other kind of animal entirely?
-John
Myles
Myles
Morgans
"Myles" <mylesb...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bd48eb5a-0c61-4e37...@w32g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
I'm curious, too. Ondulation isn't in my OED.
It wasn't in your Original Equipment Delivered? ;-)
I'll be quiet, now! :-)
--
Jim in NC
brianDG303
> "Myles" <mylesbrad...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Go to the DG web site:
http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de
Select your favorite language, as long as it's English.
In the search box, enter 'Ondulation"
there you will find the special lift-enhancing feature that some
DG300's have.
Brian
Eric Greenwell
What contest class do you want to fly it in? Sports class: I suspect the
handicaps are closer to correct than you would think from your
calculations. 15 M: the newer gliders like the ASW 27 are much better
than the LS3. Standard class: you can't fly the LS3 in Standard.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz
noel.wade
being sold for nearly $42k firm, no negotiation. Even though it's
been refinished and is a great ship, there's no way I'm paying that
kind of money for a 1970's airframe/design!
--Noel
(continuing as a DG-300 pilot for now)
mike
Become a Master of the DG-300 Noel.
You have a great ship. It was in Moriarty for a while and I remember
it as an excellent sailplane.
JAS
> Hello all - I've got a question for the competition pilots out there:
>
> Imagine you're a budding competition pilot with about 300 hours in
> your logbook. You've done a couple of Sports-class competitions and
> find them highly enjoyable. You begin to make plans to buy a partial
> share in a high-end machine in 2010/2011; but then have to change
> gears financially and keep costs in check.
>
> Now imagine you've standing in front of two aircraft:
> 1) A near-mint-condition DG-300 (with auto-hookups, great
> instrumentation, and DG's ergonomics and visibility). The ship has
> spent its life in the desert southwest of the USA.
>
> 2) A recently-refinished LS-3 (_not_ an "a" model) with good equipment
> - but an airframe that's a full 10 years older than the DG. The ship
> has spent its life on the East coast of the USA. Assume that it is
> only $3000 cheaper than the DG-300.
>
> According to some old Idaflieg data, the LS-3 is significantly better
> above 60 knots while the DG-300 has a noticeable climb-rate advantage
> at slower speeds. Not sure how accurate the Idaflieg data is, though.
>
> one of them, would you sell it to get the other?
>
>
> --Noel
I would go for the 300, very tough gel coat and superb to fly. Good in
weak thermals as well
Jackie
Papa3
>
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Expanding on Eric's point for a minute. If you're looking to fly in
Sports Class primarily, then the observations on wingloading and
ballast you made earlier are irrelevant - Sports Class (at least here
in the US) is flown dry. So, the handicaps as established will be
close enough to "correct" that it's a toss-up as to which is more
competive. If that's the case, then I think there might be a slight
nod toward an LS3 in very good condition. Flaps are nice, especially
if you routinely fly in an area where you need to go fast (ridge or
strong conditions) or land in small spaces. I fly at a field that
has at least a half-dozen LS3s based there, and it's fun to watch the
good guys come in over the trees and get stopped in very short order
(it's no ASW20 mind you, but it's still pretty good at getting
down).
Now, if you're thinking that you'll also attend the local Regional in
the respective FAI class from time to time, then I firmly believe the
nod goes to the DG. Especially if you fly in the East and/or in a no-
water regionals, the DG300 is "pretty close" to current ships. Not
quite there of course, but not so far from the D2, LS8, or ASW28 that
you'll always be left in the dust. There's a well-flown DG 300
campaigning in Standard Class here on the East Coast, and he routinely
finishes in the top half or better of races.
The LS3 IMO is a wonderful ship, but it seems to be relatively less
competitive within 15M. The ASW20, LS6, and of course current
generation ships all have a significant advantage over the LS3 at the
higher end. I say "seems", because there are folks who have shown
that a well-prepared LS3 is pretty much as good as an ASW20 (google
this group for some threads on that topic, especially relating to wing
profiling). I've only got two flights in an LS3, but it handles like
a dream and is just so pleasant to fly. Then again, maybe I'm biased,
having owned an LS4 and now an LS8.
Erik Mann
LS8-18 (P3)
Andy
This is all in theory now, but everything else being equal I'd take
the LS-3 if all you are thinking about is contest performance and you
fly out west. The LS-3 has a 1.4% less favorable handicap, but it is
a heavier glider due to all the mass balancing in the wings. Handicaps
are designed for average conditions - a heavy ship in strong
conditions gets an edge.
Plus with the LS you don't have to spray paint your sneakers black to
see forward...
Honestly though practice and familiarity with your ship and
instruments will account for more than the differences in gliders.
9B
glider
Well, it is a fact the DG has the very best visibility of any
sailplane. Even better than open cockpit.
Down south, so few of us wear shoes. SPF 30 on the toes is good in
single seat DG's.
GA
Papa3
> Papa3 wrote:
> > I've only got two flights in an LS3, but it handles like
> > a dream and is just so pleasant to fly. Then again,
> > maybe I'm biased, having owned an LS4 and now
> > an LS8.
>
> compare with the Discus 2?
Yeah, the LS8 is quite a bit better than the LS4 in two areas:
- Go fast. Anything above 70 it just walks away from the -4.
- Heavy. Handles water way better.
Having said the above... I know it may be heresy, but I actually think
the LS4 is a tiny bit better for choppy/broken thermals. I could slam
it around with rudder, haul back on the stick, and it doesn't protest
(with the CG properly set up). Nobody EVER outclimbed me when I was
flying the LS4.
P3
Brad
Noel just had an excellent flight today in his DG-300, he flew for
several hours with Ron in his LS-3. They both got back in the Cascades
up by Mt Baker, conditions got weak when the high cirrus moved in, but
they both made it home. I know I am looking forward to Noels
report........he sure seemed happy when he did his fly by!
Brad
Scott Alexander
I have bought 3 gliders in the last 3 years. And I can tell you from
experience that one thing that needs to be at the absolute top of the
list when considering buying a glider is - Comfort.
I bought an ASW-15B which is a wonderful glider. It flies great,
thermals well and overall a terrific glider. But I had to sell it
primarily because I was two inches too tall for it. I then bought a
Standard Cirrus which has a couple inches more legroom. Now I can fly
all day long without getting cramped up. It really really makes a
difference being able to stretch out and relax during a 4-5 hour
flight.
Cockpit comfort is essential. If you ain't comfortable in it, then it
isn't worth buying it.
Hope this helps,
Scott
Papa3
> Papa3 wrote:
> >> Is the LS8 much better that the LS4? How does it
> >> compare with the Discus 2?
> > Yeah, the LS8 is quite a bit better than the LS4 in two areas:
> > - Go fast. Anything above 70 it just walks away from the -4.
> > - Heavy. Handles water way better.
> > Having said the above... I know it may be heresy, but I actually think
> > the LS4 is a tiny bit better for choppy/broken thermals. I could slam
> > it around with rudder, haul back on the stick, and it doesn't protest
> > (with the CG properly set up). Nobody EVER outclimbed me when I was
> > flying the LS4.
>
> (yes, I know) which one would you rather do it in?
Not that I've ever done that... wait, actually I did that just last
week! :-) I think a slight nod to the -4. It just felt a little
more forgiving if you had to get it down and stopped using full
divebrakes and minumum safe airspeed. It just seems like the
airfoils is a tiny bit more tolerant of being mis-handled. That's a
very subjective answer, so it could be completely off base (could be
the entire system, could have just been me, who knows). FWIW, both
share the same (miserable) landing gear and brake (except I believe
the most recent DG-produced LS8). So, neither is as forgiving as the
Schleicher designs (for example) in a rough field or hard braking
situation.
My 0.02. YMMV.
P3
Brad
> Papa3 wrote:
> > S.B. wrote:
> >>> I actually think the LS4 is a tiny bit better for choppy/broken
> >>> thermals.
> >> (yes, I know) which one would you rather do it in?
> > Not that I've ever done that... wait, actually I did that just last
> > week! :-) I think a slight nod to the -4. It just felt a little
> > more forgiving if you had to get it down and stopped using full
> > divebrakes and minumum safe airspeed. It just seems like the
> > airfoils is a tiny bit more tolerant of being mis-handled. That's a
> > very subjective answer, so it could be completely off base (could be
> > the entire system, could have just been me, who knows). FWIW, both
> > share the same (miserable) landing gear and brake (except I believe
> > the most recent DG-produced LS8). So, neither is as forgiving as the
> > Schleicher designs (for example) in a rough field or hard braking
> > situation.
>
> glider, so interested in what owners think of theirs. The Standard
> Cirrus was the first glider I flew that really impressed me with its
> performance (it was back in the '70s), so, without knowing anything
> much about the competition, I'm attracted to the Discus 2 and
> Schempp-Hirth's generous cockpit. I've flown the LS4 a bit and
> liked it, and the LS6 which I didn't much like. The LS8 with the
> bigger wheel looks good.
Hi,
I'm curious, what didn't you like about the LS-6. I've heard the
handling is superb, but the cockpit a bit cramped.
Thanks,
Brad
kirk.stant
>
> I'm curious, what didn't you like about the LS-6. I've heard the
> handling is superb, but the cockpit a bit cramped.
>
> Thanks,
> Brad
It's only cramped when you lose - when you win if fits like a glove!
66
(1K hours in my 6 and still loving it - keeps me on my diet!)
glider
mechanism on both are equally poor and like to fold when they
shouldn't. Not so bad on the DG 300 but earlier designs were prone to
collapse. Same as the LS-4. I think Dirks and Lemke were is same gear
class at the university.
GA
On FWIW, both
Bob Kuykendall
> I seem to recall that DG has the larger 5" wheel...
Yes, and that makes the glider a lot easier to push around, especially
on soft ground. However, the actual drum is not substantially (if any
at all) larger than that of the 4" wheel, but the larger tire OD
(14.5" vs 11") gives it more leverage over the brake and makes the
brake that much less effective.
Thanks, Bob K.
noel.wade
> mechanism on both are equally poor and like to fold when they
> shouldn't. Not so bad on the DG 300 but earlier designs were prone to
> collapse. Same as the LS-4. I think Dirks and Lemke were is same gear
> class at the university.
> GA
Yes, the DG has the larger gear (but for the record the LS-3 - and I
think the 4 as well - has rubber "donuts" that act as minor shock-
absorbers).
Both the DG-300 and LS-4 have factory mods that prevent the gear
collapse that plagued early units. Don't know what the LS "fix" is;
but on the DG it was simply a spacer and a spring to keep the gear-
handle torqued over - so its locking "tab" doesn't bounce out of the
associated notch in turbulence or upon touchdown. My DG has over 1500
hours on it, without a single gear collapse!
--Noel
(who accidentally load-tested the gear mechanism on his DG on Sunday,
keeping too much spoiler out in the flare)
Andreas Maurer
<noel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>--Noel
>(who accidentally load-tested the gear mechanism on his DG on Sunday,
>keeping too much spoiler out in the flare)
... not keeping too much spoiler out in the flare, but rather being a
tad too slow on final approach... :)
Andreas
Brad
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:05:51 -0700 (PDT), "noel.wade"
>
> >--Noel
> >(who accidentally load-tested the gear mechanism on his DG on Sunday,
> >keeping too much spoiler out in the flare)
>
> ... not keeping too much spoiler out in the flare, but rather being a
> tad too slow on final approach... :)
>
> Andreas
Nomex for sale................anybody want some
Nomex?..................:)
Brad
Doug Hoffman
Sounds like a job for... The Tillmann Steckner mod!
Regards,
-Doug
Grider Pirate
Which improved the braking in MY glider somewhat, but not enough that
I consider it adequate.
Darryl Ramm
Actually sounds like a job for the Tost disk brake kit. The "DG-100"
kit fits the DG-30x. An obvious serious improvement in braking
performance and no more dealing with cable adjustments. Doing that was
a kind of obvious upgrade to improve the glider for XC/safety.
On the handle mod that keeps the U.C handle from popping out--I'm
amazed when I keep seeing DG-30x without this mod. It is a very easy
fix and cheap insurance especially when landing out on a rough
surface. I brought a used DG-303 which turned out to have had a gear
collapse on a (not rough) grass runway, it did not have the spring mod
installed. Maybe the reason it had 15 hours on it and was then put
away in a hangar for a few years. I really liked that glider.
The DG-30x and LS-4 (and presumably LS3?) require proper inspection
the gas strut in the U.C. mechanism as well, I think covered in past
posts on r.a.s.
Darryl
Ramy
in a thermal (assuming we compare modern 15 m ships) is 90% pilot and
10% glider.
Ramy
AK wrote:
> If you are talking about Andy's LS-3 then I can tell you his glider
> climbs really well. I used to fly a very good climber SZD-55-1 and I
> climbed with Andy in the same thermal a few times. I was surprised
> how
> well he climbed. It is also an excellent runner. I would choose the
> LS-3 if performance was what I were after. Plus paint finish is ever
> lasting.
kirk.stant
> Well, it was a while ago and only one long flight. It didn't
> climb that well, didn't feel happy flying slowly, and was
> cramped. The flaps were an unnecessary distraction.
> But the day after I flew it, someone did 750 km in it.
Interesting, because I find that the 6 will climb with just about
anything, if flown correctly. But it does take some time to get the
feel of it and how to use the flaps - totally different from a Ventus
B or ASW-20, for example.
It does like to go fast!
Cheers,
Kirk
66