Grob 109

[Brien]

Thinking of buying a 109A need to know the good the bad and the ugly of it.
Just what do I need to know about it, I have had people say stay away from
it others say it is good if you know how to fly it ?

[John Smith]

Brien wrote:

The first question you must answer is what do you want to do with it.
(Yeah, fly, I know... but what kind of flying.)

[brianDG303]

There is a G190 near Seattle that I've flown and will use to get the
MG endorsement when I get time. You might want to find a rentable one
if you can and try it out. Fun little plane, but has it's limits. Like
you can land on strips way too short to take off on.

As a glider pilot it's been fun to fly routes and to land on fields
I'll try in the glider someday.

[Cats]

I had a flight in a Grob 109b - sorry I've no idea what's different
between that and the a. We were soaring most of the time, it being a
good day. It was OK to fly - heavier on the controls than my glider
is, and of course a side-by-side arrangement is a bit odd for a glider
pilot. The visibility wasn't as good as in a fore & aft glider when
flying, and being vertically challenged I realised when landing that I
needed to sit on a cushion. (I hadn't realised I would be flying the
landing when we took off!) It has effective air brakes and is a
better tool IMHO for field landing practise than a Falke, and I was
told it is well capable of doing aerotows of quite heavy gliders. In
other words it's a jack of all trades, with not too much compromise
IMHO. I was also told it was much more economical on fuel than
Pawnees and so on. As someone else said, what do you want to do with
it?

[BT]

underpowered for departures on hot high density altitude days..
so part of the question will be.. where will you be doing most of your
flying.
around Whidbey .. most likely not a problem..
at Max GW in the Nevada or southern California desert at 2-4pm.. may not be
a good idea

BT

"Brien" <br...@whidbey.com> wrote in message
news:e4Gdnbaq9d8IhFDV...@whidbeytel.com...

[Gilbert Smith]

"Brien" <br...@whidbey.com> wrote:

The wing section is much thicker on the 109A, and pretty poor IMHO.
The A will spin of a 50kt turn, and don't ever think of attempting a
take-off with water on the wings. I saw one go through the upwind
boundary because the under surface got wet from the grass.

It has a 2 litre Limbach engine, while the 109B has 2.5 litre.

[jeplane]

I have over 800 hours in motorgliders, half of that in the G109.

Here is the scoop:

- Grob is no longer represented in the US. Parts availability is
starting to be a problem.

- It's not a good power plane (probably the performance of a C152) and
it's not a good glider either. (heavy and glider ratio of 27)

- Over density altitude of 7000', forget it. You will scare yourself,
and must be ready for slow climb, using thermals to get up. Had to do
that at the end of the runway once, which kind of stopped anybody
behind me from departing...

- You MUST sign to the G109 Yahoo list, where all the G109 and G109B's
owners are trying too help themselves with maintenance, tips,
pictures, etc...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/G109_Pilots/?v=1&t=search&ch=web&pub=groups&sec=group&slk=1

- The canopy in the first model (there is no A model per say) is a
pain in the butt. Lot of them have cracked as results. This was
corrected in the B model which has two doors instead.

- Taxiing in the first model is also something to get used to. This is
different in the B I understand, although I've never flown it.

- You can't beat using only 4G/hr, and you can soar quite some
distances. I flew from Vegas to the Lake Powell once, a 6 hrs flight
only using the engine 2 hrs. Pretty amazing and fun!

- Never put yourself so low that if the engine does not start, you are
going to crash land it somewhere. It is still a glider after all, not
a get out of jail card.

- Once the engine has restarted airborne, plan on losing another 1500'
before you can move the throttle forward. Just a technique, but one
which will preserve cylinder temps.

- In case of an engine failure on take-off, you will be able to come
back to the runway from 300'AGL. This assumes gross weight, near sea
level, no wind. Practice first at altitude, or with an experienced
CFI.

- In the pattern, you will be wearing two hats: T/O like a power pilot
with your left hand on the stick, right hand on the throttle. From
half downwind, change your hat to a glider pilot, throttle idle, with
left hand on the airbrakes, and right hand on the stick!
Different mentality. If you are already rated in airplanes, this
should be an easy transition. Otherwise.... Well, it's good training
anyway...:-)

Motorgliders are definitely fun, and I've had some good flights in
them, but the Grob is a different animal as it is getting old, and
maintaining them are going to be challenging...

[Vaughn Simon]

"jeplane" <jep...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:f30721f7-df88-4046...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> Motorgliders are definitely fun, and I've had some good flights in
> them, but the Grob is a different animal as it is getting old, and
> maintaining them are going to be challenging...

Perhaps 15 years ago, we had a G109 at our local field. I was lucky enough
to use it for the first few hours of my glider flight training. On the surface,
a motorglider seems like a wonderful idea. It is a glider (sort of) and as a
power plane it cruises faster than a 152 on much less gas. The reality was not
so great.

In the year that I knew it, the engine was off several times, twice for major
work (they are notorious for burned valves) and at least once to simply replace
the generator belt (yes, you have to remove the engine to do that). It once
suffered a prop strike in a bad landing and sat for over three months waiting on
prop parts from Germany.

It barely had enough power to taxi on grass. The technique to start it
rolling was to apply full throttle and then fan the rudder to sort of jar the
thing into motion. A push from a bystander was a much better option if
available. Once in motion, it was OK.

All-in-all, my impression was it might still be an OK plane for a careful,
mechanically-inclined owner, but you must go into the deal understanding its
limitations.

--
Vaughn

........................................................
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest, use
http://news.aioe.org/ for free and/or http://www.teranews.com/ for a one-time
$3.95 setup fee.
.........................................................

Will poofread for food.

[Andreas Maurer]

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:15:27 -0700 (PDT), Cats <ramw...@uk2.net>
wrote:

> I was
>told it is well capable of doing aerotows of quite heavy gliders.

Onle the G109 Turbo which is equipped with a Limbach 2400 DT engine
with 135 hp (compared to its standard engine of 80 or 100 hp).

Bye
Andreas

[John Smith]

Andreas Maurer wrote:

> Onle the G109 Turbo which is equipped with a Limbach 2400 DT engine
> with 135 hp (compared to its standard engine of 80 or 100 hp).

I'm not sure this option is available for the A model. The turbo charged
engine surely transforms the B model into a pretty powerful touring
airplane and adds tow capability. (Range around 500nm, cruise speed 110
knots, fuel consumption between 4 and 4.5 gph, and service ceiling over
18.000 ft!) I sometimes use it in winter to do "power flights" on my
glider pilots license. I rarely fly it in glider mode.

These numbers are with the new supercharged engine. This new engine
isn't exactly cheap, though.

[chris]

I was wondering if anyone has fitted winglets on the 109, it seems
like that might help control effectiveness and maybe add to climb
[power on and off].
Chris

[Andreas Maurer]

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:03:27 +0200, John Smith
<jo...@nosuchaddress.com> wrote:

>I'm not sure this option is available for the A model.

You are correct - the new Limbach/Korff engine (the turbocharger was
actually developed by Korff who also does the retrofitting) is only
available for the 109B.

>These numbers are with the new supercharged engine. This new engine
>isn't exactly cheap, though.

Unfortunately - but there have been one or two used 109 Turbos for
sale which were in the 60.000 - 70.000 Euro range, which is
affordable.

Bye
Andreas

[Hellman]

On Sep 14, 7:02 am, "Brien" <br...@whidbey.com> wrote:

To add to what the other posters have said, there's a huge difference
between the 109A and 109B. The B model is usable at places like Minden
(elevation 4720 feet), whereas the A model will need a thermal to gain
altitude there. I know because a friend of mine flew with me there.
There's also a big difference in price. When I was thinking of
possibly buying one back in 1994, I think the A model was going for
about $35,000 while the bee was going for about $50,000 and up. I
spoke with owners of both models, and each one loved what he had. The
A owners told me that the B was overpriced, while the B owners told me
how underpowered the A was. Lots has transpired in the intervening 14
years including parts issues etc. discussed by others, but I hope this
adds some useful information.

Martin

[fredsez]

On Sep 14, 7:02 am, "Brien" <br...@whidbey.com> wrote:

Ok, here is my thinking. I have time in both. Someone said never fly
the A model of anything.

The A does not have a steerable tail wheel. The B does and it is a BIG
advantage.
The A does not have toe brakes, the B does.

Both head for the right side of the runway on takeoff. A student of
mine thought we had a bad cross wind from the left. She put the left
wing tip on the ground to correct for the "Cross wind."

We made a trip from California to Arkansas and used gas all the way.
We had to clear an 11,000 mtn. range in New Mexico...Just barely made
it.

Over the Ark Ozarks, just really hills, she asked me what we would do
if the engine quit. With nice cu's alll around, I told her that we
would reach our destination on thermals.

I like the B, but not the A. Fred

[a_b...@hotmail.fr]

Is it possible to change limbach 2000 motor by and other and keep ajustable propeller.
I thinck to a continental or lycoming about same horse power or little bit more.
The airplane in consideration is a grob 109 with limbach 2000.

Anndrew from qquebec city canada

[Darryl Ramm]

2008 called, they want their thread back.

[tolso...@googlemail.com]

I have flown and instructed in both the A and B models and also flown the A with the L2400(non turbo) engine and constant speed propeller. One big advantage of the B is that the wings can be folded and hung off the fin allowing it to fit in a 40ft container. Personally I think the A with the L2400 is the best option. The extra horsepower and wobbly prop mean the Take off run is reduced and climb rate and cruise are significantly better than the standard 109A and on a par with the B if not a little better. The bubble canopy is much better than the B arrangement as in a right hand thermal you cannot see into the turn very well in the B which is a little frustrating in a busy thermal. Both have benign stalls around 40kt and tend to mush rather than break unless at very high angles of attack, much better than tne H36 Dimona which drops the left wing consistently (this was one of the reasons the RAF bought the 109 rather than the Dimona) economic cruise seems to be around 85kts using 11-12 litres an hour regardless of the model and the L2400 and the B will cruise around 110kt burning 15l per hour. Handling is turgid and stodgy in all models rather than crisp compared with the dimona or the IS28 which is the best handling motorglider i have flown. The Schempp airbrakes are very powerful compared with any other motorglider out there and give a nose down pitch when opened. Approaches flown like a glass two seater but at 55-60kt work well using the airbrake as you would in a glider remembering to flare just a little higher because of the undercarriage. Two potential gottchas are 1. Flying from the right seat means left hand stick right hand airbrake which is uncomfortable for glider pilots and has resulted in a number of broken grobs. Power pilots cope better with this but need to get usedto the powerful airbrakes as opposed to flaps. 2. Don't land pulling excessively on the air brakes as the wheel brake is the last part of the travel and you can stand the aircraft on its nose this way. On the other hand its also possible to stand it on its nose with the toe brakes or ground loop and brake the tail. I find the best technique is to land with 1/2 to 2/3 airbrakes and then EASE the brakes on on the ground using the wheel brake lever. I only use toe brakes to keepitstraight in a very strong crosswind or manoeuvring on the ground.

A word about takeoff techniques. Motorgliders have marginal power and the best way is to make the wing do the work not the engine. As a taildragger on takeoff the wing is presenting a high angle of attack and is very draggy so a neutral stick or stick back takeoff prolongs the ground run. Stick forward to get the tail up and reduce the angle of attack and drag allows tne aircraft to accelerate faster and then you can "ease" it off when she is ready to fly. Obviously you have to be ready to catch the swing when the tail comes up and in a strong crosswind you might need a gentle dab of toe brake to hold it straight. Again wherever possible I will angle across a runway or strip on take off and landing to maximise the into wind component. In the cruise climb if you allow the aircraft to accelerate it will then start to climb gently this is a better option than raising the nose like a normal aircraft which just increases the drag and speed will bleed in the climb. The aircraft isn't particularly prone to icing but the carb heat is there for a reason. I always pull it while the engine is in cruise power before closing the throttle for a descent to get a big blast of hot air into the carbs. The cabin air choke and carb heat are all the same shape and grouped together on the pannel so its easy to grab the wrong one in a hurry. If you can change the shape of them or colour code them it helps. When air starting the engine its better to start on the ignition than air start in fine pitch as the engine will scream round to the red line at the 75-80kts required to get the prop spinning which is not a great way to treat a cold soaked engine. Obviously turn off as much power when soaring engine off and feather the prop 50kts seems to work ok in thermal turns and the thicker A wing profile seems to have the edge on the B for soaring. Be careful not to turn the key to park when soaring or the key can fall out and bugger off out of reach (don't ask me how i know). Unfeathering starting and increasing power to stop a descent takes about 200ft in grobs with the 3 position prop.If its an electric constant speed unit this can take MUCH longer to unfeather and upto 500ft can be lost even in still air. Also remember in fine pitch throttle closed you have an airbrake effect from the prop. On that note you will only try a course pitch takeoff once unless you have over 500M TORA and nothing in the way!!! If roll gets excessive at taxi better to stop and start again. A slightly faster taxi speed might help. Remember to taxi into wind stick back downwind stick forward and try not to use power against brake to turn, especially if turning out of the wind you can stand it on its nose. Be ready to catch the tail coming up if taxiing over a lip from one surface to another or if you hit a rut or pothole
One final point I always suggest turning off the master then the ignition unless youneed the radios at shutdown. This way you know you have left a dead aircraft and will not result in returning to a flat battery.
Most people dismiss motorgliders as not real aircraft but a grob will do pretty much anything a 150 or 152 can more efficiently, and they require a real feel and some skill to get the best out of them which can make them very rewarding aircraft to fly.

[Dan Marotta]

Do they still make the G-109?  Anyone seriously considering this type of aircraft should also take a look at Pipistrel and Phoenix.

Dan Marotta

[dale...@charter.net]

I purchased a 109B in the late 80's and formed a consortium of eight pilots to own and operate it. I was the check pilot and instructor for the group and I developed a low opinion of the design for many pilots. It is a complex little airplane. It is a true taildragger and has a Mickey mouse shifting mechanism to transition from cruise to climb and visa versa. It will not climb in the cruise setting and if you inadvertently miss the shift on downwind you will not be able to go around. I had students do this a few times fortunately with enough runway to roll out and taxi back. The single ignition version is prone to plug fowling, which happened to me twice on cross country flights necessitating finding an airport quickly. It took me 30 hours of instruction to ready one of the members to safely operate the aircraft, and he was both a licensed power and glider pilot.

I sold my share in about 1993 and the new member ( I did not check out) was overflying his vacation home in central Oregon and was unable to climb away and crashed with the engine at full power. I think they concluded it spun in. He probably missed the shift into climb mode. Neither the 109 or the pilot survived.
The 109B is a busy, underpowered aircraft. (neither beast nor fowl) and if the A is even worse It would probably be a poor option.

Having said that, I had a lot of fun in the airplane. I flew it from Tennessee to Oregon and up and down the west coast a few times, I just don't think it is for everyone. .
Dale Bush

[Colin Wray]

I have owned a G109B for 30 years, initially as a syndicate and now as sole owner. Although I agree with much that tolso...@googlemail.com has posted, I do not share his conclusions. (I expect you will say "of course").

Here is re re-post from earlier in this thread:

"The wing section is much thicker on the 109A, and pretty poor IMHO.
The A will spin of a 50kt turn, and don't ever think of attempting a
take-off with water on the wings. I saw one go through the upwind

boundary because the under surface got wet from long grass during taxying.

It has a 2 litre Limbach engine, while the 109B has 2.5 litre."

My G109B has been used primarily for soaring (3800 aiframe hours / 1850 engine) and has motored to the European Alps on 17 occasions, where the conditions are rather better than in the UK. Having said that, it has done 100 hours for 20 engine in most recent years in UK.

I have never spun off a turn, even thermalling down to 42 kts. It could do with a bit more rudder power to overcome the adverse yaw at high roll rates, making it reluctant to turn, but a chunk of opposite aileron gets the turn going nicely once the desired bank angle is achieved.

I mostly "bump start" the engine when preparing to land, but the best technique is to dive to 80kts while exercising the prop between feathered and coarse to find the sweet spot.

My model does not have the wheel brakes activated by the airbrakes, being a later mod-state (post Sno. 6340), but although the toe brakes are very effective you would be hard pressed to get the tail up, especially on grass.

My one-man wing folding attachment means I can store it in its shed after every flight. The time taken to do this is the same as that required to fit wing and fuselage covers, making it the best option.

[Larry Roberts]

Brien,
Contact Yankee Composites in Lakeport, CA. He is just finishing a Grob 109 that he says the owner is thinking of selling.

[bnetp...@gmail.com]

can you airstart the motor if battery has too little power ?

Cheers Peterd

[Colin Wray]

Yes, I do it all the time.

[Robert M]

On Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 8:35:28 PM UTC-6, jeplane wrote:
>
> Here is the scoop:
>
> - Grob is no longer represented in the US. Parts availability is
> starting to be a problem.

Grob gliders and motorgliders are not orphans.

I represent both Grob Aerospace, who support both models of the G-109 and Fiberglas-Technik Rudolf Lindner who supports the G-102, G-103 and G-104 gliders and selflaunch gliders.

Grob Aerospace has a friendly customer support lady who has been very helpful in making sure I order the correct parts for customers and getting them out the door quickly.

Lindner has provided wonderful support the the 102, 103 and 104. Almost every part customers have needed have been available off the shelve. Including canopies.

I am authorized to repair all Grob models mentioned above.

Motors for the 109s is an issue. Almost all owners I speak to want more power. The problem comes when thinking about alternative motors for a U.S. Type Certificated aircraft. I know of no reasonable priced alternatives but if some one comes up with a viable option and has the money to make it happen I'll help in any way I can.

Robert Mudd
A&P, I.A. Commercial and CFI for Gliders and Airplanes, Single and MEL
Composite Aircraft Repair LLC
Moriarty, New Mexico USA

[914.dan...@gmail.com]

Robert,

As I recently purchased a Grob 109a, this thread popped up when I searched for parts.

If you still have access to parts I'd love to talk to you; actually I'll talk to anyone with parts availability.

Thanks, Dan
914dan.senecal at GMail dot com

[bipla...@gmail.com]

Dan
I own a G-109A in eastern Tennessee.
I have had great response from contacting grob directly, the service rep I have worked with is Kim, e-mail below.
Jarmer Kim <K.Ja...@grob-aircraft.com>
If you are associated with a club mention it, I received a club discount from them.
bob

[tudorg...@gmail.com]

Dan I have a 109 that I am parting out. If you need anything let me know. No wings engine or prop. Great leather seats and most of the control linkage.
instruments and radios being tested. DAVE San Francisco 415 563-4803

[uffa.no...@gmail.com]

Hej jag undrar var typ skylten sitter på en Grov G109 jag hittar inte den

[sbair...@gmail.com]

I delivered a 109A from Arizona to the east coast. Out west, it didn't do well with the density altitude. I could climb OR keep the engine at a reasonable temperature. It couldn't do both at the same time. It was more manageable once I got to lower elevations of the midwest.

Once you eventually get up to altitude, it does scoot along pretty well. That's about the only thing that it did well.

I worked a few strong thermals in Arizona, but you have to imagine flying a 2-33... ballasted to double its gross weight. I wouldn't plan on doing much soaring unless you live somewhere with strong conditions.

Its frankly not a very good airplane and not a very good glider. I'm not sure what your intentions and expectations are, but I think that most people would be better off buying a Cessna 150 and/or a Libelle.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 00:21:15 -0700, sbaircraft wrote:

> Its frankly not a very good airplane and not a very good glider. I'm not
> sure what your intentions and expectations are, but I think that most
> people would be better off buying a Cessna 150 and/or a Libelle.
>

I've seen that from the other side - I once met a G109 under a nice big
cloud while flying my H201 Libelle and hugely outclimbed it without
really trying. At the time I put that down the the 109 belonging to an
Air Cadet squadron and quite possibly being flown by the cadet.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org