Schweitzer sailplanes
Tony S.
Can any one tell me what models were produced by Schweitzer Aircraft??
Did they ever made anyone of fiberglass??? - were they all metal??
I heard there is a nice model #36, with T-tail, where can i find
information and pictures of this model. I have searched data bases and
classifieds (including Trade-a-plane) trying to find a used one for
sale. Was this glider the best ever produced by Schweitzer. Why did they
quit making gliders (or Sailplanes)??? - I personally tend to like metal
more than fiberglass or wood construction. Any help will be appreciated.
Regards, Tony S.
LarrySSA
The Soaring Society of America has a list of gliders made by Schweizer
Aircraft (as part of our Sailplane Directory). Also, SOARING Magazine has
a monthly listing of sailplanes for sale. You may contact our office at:
Soaring Society of America
PO Box E
Hobbs, NM 88240
505-392-1177 phone
505-392-8154 fax
Folks here can give you information on how to obtain this material.
FYI, Schweizer Aircraft did not make a compositie glider. They currently
do not make sailplanes because of the low market for new gliders. They
hope, according to Paul Hardy Schweizer, to get back into the business at
an appropriate time.
Hope this helps, Happy New Year.
Larry Sanderson
President, SSA
Bob May
The model you are reffering to is the SGS 1-36. It is an all metal
standard class glider. It has a conventional tail however, not a T-tail.
There was also a 1-36R model with retractable gear.
I won't start a debate by saying it is the best glider Schweitzer
produced, but it is certainly a fine glider for having fun in.
Bob May
Chuck Smith
> Tony S. wrote:
> >
> > Can any one tell me what models were produced by Schweitzer Aircraft??
> > Did they ever made anyone of fiberglass??? - were they all metal??
> > I heard there is a nice model #36, with T-tail, where can i find
> > information and pictures of this model. I have searched data bases and
> > classifieds (including Trade-a-plane) trying to find a used one for
> > sale. Was this glider the best ever produced by Schweitzer. Why did they
> > quit making gliders (or Sailplanes)??? - I personally tend to like metal
> > more than fiberglass or wood construction. Any help will be appreciated.
> > Regards, Tony S.
>
SGS 1-36 "Sprite"
span: 46'2"
length: 20'7"
Max Gross: 710#
Empty weight: 475# (with std interior,airpeed, altimiter and compass.)
Useful Load: 235#
The 1-36 has a fairly large cockpit
20.5" wide,49" long,and 34" high.
Metal monocoque with T-tail, cantelever wings
high-performance single seat sailplane.Dive brakes.
Fabric covering on rudder and elevator.
2 landing gear configurations:
1) nose skid, single main, solid mount tailwheel.
2) taildragger with sprung tailweel.
Performance:
Best L/D 30.9:1 @ 52 MPH indicated.
Min sink:2.5 ft/sec @ 42 MPH indicated.
MAx cruise: 108 IAS (L/D about 14:1!)
Vne:121 IAS
Vman.: 64
Wingloading at Max Gross: 5.05 lb/ft^2
I've been told that one of the goals of the 1-36 was to
create an affordable one-design class planform, with better
performance than the 1-26.
The 1-36 shows many common features with the SGS 1-34, in fact,
the wings appear to be common with the 1-34, but shortened at the
root.
I had the opportunity to fly the 1-36 owned and operated
by Schweizer a few years back. As I remember it was
not a particularly inspiring sailplane to fly. It was
difficult to keep good speed control in turns, mostly due
to poor "feedback" from the controls, and a lot of pitch sensitivity.
Not a bad sailplane by any means, just that it had to be flown
constantly. I flew it about 6 hours and it never got
"automatic".
As you would expect, with that wing loading it will climb quite well.The ailerons
are effective all the way to stall, so flying at min-sink is
no problem (unlike certain all-metal 17m homebuilts that will remain nameless!)
It just has a little problem getting anywhere once its up there. It has
the same "scrunched" polar problem the 1-26 has.
I also have distinct memories about the dive brakes. They
are incredibly effective and caused a nasty pitch-up which
required concerted effort for speed control.
Oh yeah, the stick was teeny too.
Hey, I wouldn't pass on a free one, or even a really good deal
on one, but for about the same money, the 1-34 is, and you can
quote me on this, a much better sailplane. It is more comfortable,
has the performance, and is about as nice a flying sailplane as you find.
Its not sexy looking, however. It (the 1-34)also has a handicap that makes
it lethal in sports class.
I've also heard RUMORS of catostrophic structural failures on the 1-36's
but I just can't beleive it with a Schweizer. The last thing I worry about
in a SGS is if it will stay together. I think Schweizer is probably the last
airplane company in the world with true integrity and not "goverment owned."
If you are worried call them and ask them. I'm sure they'll give you
the straight dope. You can then make your own conclusions.
Chuck
Raul Blacksten
"Tony S." <san...@ksc9.th.com> wrote:
>Can any one tell me what models were produced by Schweitzer Aircraft??
They manufactured 36 different types of sailplanes over their
60 years in business.
>Did they ever made anyone of fiberglass??? - were they all metal??
All metal after WW II
>I heard there is a nice model #36, with T-tail, where can i find
>information and pictures of this model.
The Soaring Society of America (SSA) has a Sailplane Directory
(which was last published 1984 and is about to be published
again) which has data and a B&W picture. The SSA is also
probably the best place to find one for sale.
>I have searched data bases and
>classifieds (including Trade-a-plane)
Not many gliers here.
> Was this glider the best ever produced by Schweitzer.
No, but then that really depends upon your definition of "best"
> Why did they
>quit making gliders (or Sailplanes)???
Lack of market and liability laws.
--
***************************************************************
RAUL BLACKSTEN Wishing you green air!
Vintage Sailplane Association Archivist
ra...@earthlink.net
<http://www.earthlink.net/~raulb>
"It may not be smart or correct, but it's one of the things
which make us what we are" --Red Green, The New Red Green Show
Doug Haluza
Chuck Smith <csm...@eznet.net> wrote in article
<32CC9C...@eznet.net>...
>
> I've also heard RUMORS of catostrophic structural failures on the 1-36's
> but I just can't beleive it with a Schweizer. The last thing I worry
about
> in a SGS is if it will stay together. I think Schweizer is probably the
last
> airplane company in the world with true integrity and not "goverment
owned."
> If you are worried call them and ask them. I'm sure they'll give you
> the straight dope. You can then make your own conclusions.
>
They are not rumors. There have been at least two in-flight structural
breakups in 1-36's--one in Wurtsboro 2-3 yrs ago, and one in CO last year.
The one in Wurtsboro happened after the pilot apparently exceeded Vne
according to witnesses. I believe the accident report mentioned something
about modifications to the trim system.
I agree with your assessment of Schweizer aircraft being well designed, and
I don't know if these two accidents have anything to do with the design,
though.
Randolph E. Ross
"Tony S." <san...@ksc9.th.com> wrote:
>Can any one tell me what models were produced by Schweitzer Aircraft??
>classifieds (including Trade-a-plane) trying to find a used one for
>sale. Was this glider the best ever produced by Schweitzer. Why did they
>quit making gliders (or Sailplanes)??? - I personally tend to like metal
>more than fiberglass or wood construction. Any help will be appreciated.
>Regards, Tony S.
To correct another response to the contrary, the SGS-136 *does* have a t-tail. This
feature accounts for the model's above-average pitch sensitivity relative to other
Schweitzers.
The 136 actually was a modification of of the 135, which also has a t-tail. The
136, however differs significantly from the 135 in that the 136:
1) From the leading edge of the wing forward, has a less graceful, stubbier
cockpit; it looks a bit like someone stuck the nose of a 126 into a pencil
sharpener.
2) Has a shorter wings, parsed at the wingroot.
3) Has large dive brakes, not flaps; the dive brakes actually seem somewhat
ineffective (given their size) because they are located further aft (closer to the
trailing edge) than their more effective sisters on the 1-26.
Hope this helps.
________________________
Randolph E. Ross
<rer...@tribeca.ios.com>
Jim Kellett
"Tony S." <san...@ksc9.th.com> wrote:
> >Can any one tell me what models were produced by Schweitzer Aircraft??
> >Did they ever made anyone of fiberglass??? - were they all metal??
> >I heard there is a nice model #36, with T-tail, where can i find
> >information and pictures of this model. I have searched data bases and
> >classifieds (including Trade-a-plane) trying to find a used one for
> >sale. Was this glider the best ever produced by Schweitzer. Why did they
> >quit making gliders (or Sailplanes)??? -
1. Schweizer made the 1-21, 1-23, 1-26, 1-34, 1-35, 1-36, 2-22, 2-33,
2-32, and 2-37 (the last a motorglider). Models prefaced by a "1" are
single place, "2" are two place. There were several other one of a kind
or very limited run ships.
2. All were metal and/or steel tube/rag/metal. A few had composite
components (e.g., late model 1-26 noses). No "glass" as you know it
today.
3. Define "best".... I've owned a 1-26 and 1-23, and done tons of
instruction in 2-22s and 2-33s, and flown 1-36s and 2-32s, and they are
all different.. but best???
4. Schweizer quit making sailplanes because of the difficulty of making
a profit building them... they are, after all, businessmen!
Jim Kellett
John H Campbell
..."Schweizer" (no "t"), a German word meaning "Swiss" that identifies the
all-american and all-metal gliders (and agplanes and helicopters) made in
Elmira, NY by the family company founded by brothers Ernest, Paul, and
William, and now operated by their sons and nephews Les, Stu, and Paul H.
SAC produced gliders for the love of it from the 1930s through 1986 and
their products still comprise almost 1/2 the USA glider fleet.
See "Wings as Eagles" by Paul A. Schweizer (Smithsonian Press) and
"Soaring with the Schweizers" by Bill Schweizer if you're interested in
details on the company and product history.
The web has 2 ship databases [start at SSA, http://acro.harvard.edu/SSA].
A print "SSA Sailplane Directory" is expected late this year as an issue
of SOARING magazine. You can get an old one (1983, I believe) from SSA
starting with a request to 7452...@Compuserve.com. This would list all
Schweizer designs (the very last, the SGM 2-37, was in production then).
I'm sure you'll hear from the 1-26 Association about that deservedly
beloved model. It occupies a very special niche in the glider market
(most common glider in USA, lowest price, first one-design contest
series...). Other single-place gliders that are more mainstream are the
1-23, 1-34, 1-35, 1-36. The 1-34 is a USA favorite in clubs, the 1-35 is
a steal for price/performance but scares novices with its landing flaps,
the 1-36 was the spark for the FAI "World Class": mid L/D, mid price.
I happen to have an SGS 1-36, possibly for sale. Reply for more details.
John H. Campbell
Collegiate Soaring Association
Ralph Jones
Doug Haluza wrote:
>
> They are not rumors. There have been at least two in-flight structural
> breakups in 1-36's--one in Wurtsboro 2-3 yrs ago, and one in CO last year.
> The one in Wurtsboro happened after the pilot apparently exceeded Vne
> according to witnesses. I believe the accident report mentioned something
> about modifications to the trim system.
I had a look at a partially-failed 1-36 at Black Forest years some years
ago, and some photos of it subsequently appeared in _Soaring_. It
occurred just off a wave tow, and in his enthusiasm to get a nice deep
baro notch the pilot did a dive and pullup that were
incredibly...ahh...well...I wouldn'ta done it.
He then flew the wave for two hours or so, returning when he said he
couldn't get the seat out of an uncomfortable position. When he appeared
on final, longtime tow pilot Jim Foreman said "That thing's got too damn
much dihedral!" and he was right. The seat was stuck because everything
in back of the pilot was bent and buckled.
rj/NG
Anton Verhulst
Re: Schweizer 1-36
>I also have distinct memories about the dive brakes. They
>are incredibly effective and caused a nasty pitch-up which
>required concerted effort for speed control.
If the 1-36 dive brake response is similar to that of the 1-34 (since the
wings are similar), it is not as much of a pitch up as it is a speed reduction.
On the 1-34 if your left hand is coming back on the spoiler and you're not
simultaneously adding copious amounts of forward stick, you are wrong!
It's alot of fun to do steep spiral descents in the 1-34 with full spoilers -
very little of what ever's above the horizon can be seen from the cockpit.
Tony V.