Should a novice consider a 1-26?
stevo
I would like to fly for more than an hour and would like to trailer a
glider and fly at different sites. Therefore, I am looking into
ownership.
My question is : Would the 1-26 be a good first glider?
It appears that you can get a good one for around $9000.
Would this glider hold its value with other much newer ships costing
around $17-$20k?
I notice that the 1-26 is very popular (probably because it is a
classic). Is it suitable for a novice?
Is the 1-16 a fabric covered or a metal ship?
What year model do you buy?
How many hours TT are they good for?
Thanks and God bless you
Stephen
Mark Zivley
just not a whole lot of L/D, but it's a great start. If you can find an
E model, that was the last version built and has the most metal vs.
fabric. If you find one you like you can certainly get loads of info
from the 1-26 association on what to look for when evaluating for
purchase and for subsequent rigging, flying, etc. advice. Assuming
you've got some solo time in almost any two place you won't have any
trouble with the 1-26. Just don't get downwind of the airport on a
windy day until you've become familiar with it's performance.
Mark
BTIZ
http://www.126association.org/indexstart.htm
"Mark Zivley" <mzi...@hothotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3EC414C7...@hothotmail.com...
Jim Phoenix
pet). The A.B and C models are inexpensive ($7 to $9 for a good one) but the
D and E models are most popular bacuase the D model has the aluminum nose
and the E model is all aluminum (except the flight control surfaces) and has
a higher gross weight.
The E models have excellent re-sale value, in other words, they move quickly
because clubs like them. The D model is very popular among the connosiuers
(sic), but for cheap fun, you can't beat and A, B or C - especially with the
sports canopy. The A, B and C's have steel tube fuselages, metal wings with
partial fabric covering on the wing, but some (like mine) have had the wings
completely covered with aluminum (except the flight controls again). The A,
B and C's have a lower max gross than the D and E models, but not a big
problem normally unless you weigh 240 lbs. - then you'll want an E model.
The round tails are female and the square tails are male (credit to Jo Shaw
and Jayne Reid for that bit of technical data).
So, bottom line, for best value and possible re-sale, buy an E or D - if
you're going to keep it a while and want something less expensive, go with
the A, B or C. I know of no E or D models currently for sale anywhere in the
US, but a few A, B and C's.
<<How many hours TT are they good for?>> They are good forever, people keep
buying them and rebuilding them. Soetimes they get crashed real good and are
destroyed, but somehow, somebody buys it and eventually rebuilds it. If you
have to crash into a tree or the ground, (and you can't arrange to crash in
an Ag Cat) this is a good glider for it - I've seen lots of damaged 1-26's
and people just walk away from them - truly amazing how well they protect
the pilot from whatever they ran into.
My current A model cost me about a thousand bucks from the insurance
company, I've got about $65 worth of oxy fuel and another $100 worth of 4130
tubing into it and should be able to recover it and get it back in the air
fully restored for around $4000 total - but no labor cost because I'm an IA,
A&P, etc.
As BTIZ states, check out the 1-26 Association, lots of good data there.
Jim
www.jimphoenix.com
www.126association.org
"stevo" <stephe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com...
Lennie the Lurker
>
> My question is : Would the 1-26 be a good first glider?
>
You will soon get tired of constantly hearing of how soon you will get
tired of it, how it's performance is too low for any purpose, how you
will never be a "real pilot" if you stick with it, how they should be
banned as too ugly and obsolete, how it's time to replace them with
something more modern, more megabucks. Figure on losing at least
$1000 when you sell it, no matter if it's better or worse than it was
when you bought it.
Figure on dropping out after less than two years if you buy one and
want to stick with it, and the problem isn't the airplane. Then you
could be like me, no license, no log, no experience that there is any
record of. Even used up my 2003 allotment of time to waste at the
gliderport, all 12 minutes of it. Just the way I now want it.
Steve Wasilowski
(featured in the SSA's Soaring in America) after getting my glider
rating and had some successful cross country flights in it. Most of
all I learned to soar in it.
I remember Derek Johnson referring to it as the dinghy of sailplanes.
This is an apt description. It's simple to operate, maintain and
repair. Its very popular and liquid. It's held its value in the $10K
range for at least the past ten years. You will sell if for what you
pay for it. It's got the best smile per dollar ratio of any glider
ever made. The 1-26 Association is tops!
Parts are plentiful.
It's a great light air ship. It can stay up when nothing else can
(except maybe the Sparrowhawk). Long distances can be challenging
however.
This is a great glider to prepare you for glass. You'll learn to soar
in this ship. Assembly, disassembly and trailering are easy (with
the right trailer).
Go for it!
Mhudson126
page. As for your question about the 1-26, I think it is a fantastic
airplane!! I had a choice on my 15th B-day to spend my hard earned duckets on
a car or an airplane….And I still have the 1-26 and enjoy it every weekend
after 12 years of ownership. I would have wrecked the car long ago! As for
distance, I flew 209 miles two weekends ago in my 1-26, and the association
also holds a fantastic contest every year where pilots get together to fly
against each other, not against the latest technology or the latest "Clorox
bottle" sailplane. Once again, I send you to www.126association.org or please
feel free to E-Mail me with any questions.
-Mitch
BTIZ
weekend in the 1-26... and how many "old" not real pilots.. after owning
glass... go back to the 1-26 for the pure fun..
TZ
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
TIM WARD
flies.
> I would like to fly for more than an hour and would like to trailer a
> glider and fly at different sites. Therefore, I am looking into
> ownership.
>
> My question is : Would the 1-26 be a good first glider?
It can be. It is/was for me. They're rugged as hell, and easy to fly. They
are not high performance. You will undoubtedly see replies emphasizing
this, and encouraging you to buy something higher performance. If you are
primarily interested in high performance, then it probably wouldn't be a
good glider for you.
> It appears that you can get a good one for around $9000.
>
> Would this glider hold its value with other much newer ships costing
> around $17-$20k?
Yep. They sell for higher prices now than they did new. And because
they're a known quantity, they're fairly easy to sell. I get several
inquiries a year as to whether I'd be interested in selling mine. I paid
less than $8K for my E model five years ago, and I'm sure I could get my
money out of it If you buy a good one, and keep it maintained, it should
hold its value. I see Lennie posted that he lost a thousand dollars on his,
over a two year ownership. I have no idea of what the details were in his
case, but I don't think that necessarily needs to be the case. Hang out
with the 1-26 Association guys (even if vicariously, here on the net), and
you'll get lots of enthusiasm and encouragement. If you buy one, and have
even the slightest mention of a whisper of a chance to attend the 1-26
nationals, go. You won't regret it.
> I notice that the 1-26 is very popular (probably because it is a
> classic). Is it suitable for a novice?
Yes. Part of the popularity is due to the 1-26 Association, an extremely
nice and helpful group of people. You should definitely take a look at
their website: http://www.126association.org/indexstart.htm
> Is the 1-16 a fabric covered or a metal ship?
Yes. That's a smartass answer, but the A and B models are steel tube frame,
aluminum spar and leading edge, fabric covered. The C model, I believe,
went to an aluminum-skinned wing, with the ailerons still fabric covered.
The D model added balanced air brakes, and the E model has a semi-monocoque
aluminum fuselage. More information is on the 1-26 association web site.
If you're really interested in the guts of them, take a look at:
http://www.jimphoenix.com/
(I notice he posted earlier)
He's rebuilt two E models, and is currently rebuilding serial number 038.
He takes lots of pictures, and you can get all the details of how they're
constructed.
> What year model do you buy?
The D and E models seem to be a little more expensive, possibly because
they're newer, possibly because the balanced airbrakes are easier to use
than the top-side-only spoilers on the earlier models. The A,B,C models are
lighter and might climb a little better.
Fortunately for you, many clubs and commerical operations have 1-26es that
they will rent to relatively low-time pilots. Fly one and see if you like
it. I flew a 1-26 on my student ticket, and I don't think that's all that
unusual.
> How many hours TT are they good for?
There's no hourly life limit on the airframe that I know of. But you want
to get one that is in good shape and if you want to trailer it, make sure it
has a good trailer. This will be true whether you buy a 1-26 or something
else. Broken trailers are no fun, and they're often overlooked because you
can't tear your eyes away from the glider you're buying..
Liam Finley
winglets fitted. Winglets make a huge difference for these ships.
Another great thing about the 26 is you don't have to worry about
total energy compensation.
ch
I don't know how many Libelles are on the market in the US,
but if I would have the choice, then I would not waste 9000$
if I could get a Libelle for the same price.
- easy to fly
- quick to rig
- low wing weight
- good view to all sides
- better performance than a 1-26
- low stall speed (I even saw it towed with a trike)
I flew 1-26 in Hobbs and Black Forest some time ago.
Well - I fly an ASW-27, but just for fun I really like to fly sometimes
the Gliding Club's Libelle 304.
A day with the Libelle - watch >> http://www.sportavia.com.au/whataday/
Chris
"stevo" <stephe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com...
ch
I don't know how many Libelles are on the market in the US,
but if I would have the choice, then I would not waste 9000$
if I could get a Libelle for the same price.
- easy to fly
- quick to rig
- low wing weight
- good view to all sides
- better performance than a 1-26
- low stall speed (I even saw it towed with a trike)
I flew 1-26 in Hobbs and Black Forest some time ago.
Well - I fly an ASW-27, but just for fun I really like to fly sometimes
the Gliding Club's Libelle 304.
A day with the Libelle - watch >> http://www.sportavia.com.au/whataday/
Chris
"stevo" <stephe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com...
ch
being able to fly a 1-26 instead of not flying is fantastic too
but compared with quite anything else - I cannot call it fantastic - sorry
Chris
"Mhudson126" <mhuds...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030515233539...@mb-m12.aol.com...
> That last guy amazes me at the sheer amount of drivel he spews forth on
this
> page. As for your question about the 1-26, I think it is a fantastic
> airplane!! I had a choice on my 15th B-day to spend my hard earned
duckets on
> a car or an airplane..And I still have the 1-26 and enjoy it every weekend
Jim Phoenix
Or you can get the 1-26CJ with winglets and the J-85 mounted on top like the
Canadian C-119!
;-)
Jim
"Liam Finley" <fado...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d14b8f27.03051...@posting.google.com...
George William Peter Reinhart
I've been thinking for years of strapping on a small jet pack to an HP-11
or '14 for a homebuilt U-2.
All this time I was looking at the V-tailers because I was afraid of
melting the fin/rudder.
Now you're telling us somebody has already done it with a 1-26 and it
really wasn't any big deal.
With winglets yet
I'm crushed. My secret dreams are dashed.
Cheers! (but not very strong ones today), Pete
P.S. Next thing you know somebody's gong to tell us Al did it to the "Baby"
for get home insurance on his 1000KM flight.
Hank Nixon
Reply:
1-26 is a great way to enter glider ownership. I know nobody that has
lost money on them.
We've owned, restored, brought back to life, more than a dozen.
Easily the least expensive soaring there is when all factors are taken
into account.
E model is most desirable due to min fabric to maintain, plus any
sheet metal qualified mechanic can keep it alive.
We encourage all our club members to do Silver in 1-26. Usually
creates high likelihood of first off field landing in the very safe
ship.
E in my shop as we speak- coming back to life.
Good luck UH
stevo
How do I go about finding a good D or E model?
1. Could you guys give me some advice on the
finding/inspecting/purchasing process?
2. Does anyone know of a good one for sale?
3. I see a lot of "open trailers" for sales w/ 1-26s. I would think
an enclosed trailer would be necessary if you don't intend to hanger
it. Can I get some advice on trailers?
Thanks and God bless you
Stephen
stephe...@hotmail.com (stevo) wrote in message news:<25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com>...
TIM WARD
"ch" <cho...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:Gu1xa.426$Gl1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> here you get nice Glasfluegel Libelle 304 for 12'000AUS$.
How nice for you. Here a 201 is generally 15K US$ and up. A nice 304
would, I think, sell very quickly here at $12000 USD, never mind the $8000
USD the Australian price would be at the current exchange rate. Perhaps you
should begin an export business.
Still, Stephen has asked some reasonable questions:
(paraphrasing)
Is the 1-26 suitable for a low-time pilot?
Yes
Will a 1-26 hold it's value?
Yes.
Are there hidden "gotchas" like the end of airframe life on some ships?
No.
He's not asking "Is this the highest performance available for the dollar"?
Here in the U.S., that would probably be one of the HP ships.
But he's asking the right questions, and I think he could have a good time
with a 1-26.
Tim Ward
Lennie the Lurker
> lets ask how many of those "not real" pilots do gold distance almost every
> weekend in the 1-26... and how many "old" not real pilots.. after owning
> glass... go back to the 1-26 for the pure fun..
>
bout that, but if you're going to paint the "glowing, rosy picture",
it's a lie unless you also give out the downside, of which everything
has.
Mark Twain was a real pilot, but he never stepped into any glider.
Shirley
low-time pilot, that he hasn't flown it much -- that may or may not be the
case. One thing I haven't seen anyone say (maybe I missed it?) is that he
should FLY one for a while first and see if he likes it well enough to go BUY
one.
I am a licensed but low-time pilot and have flown the 1-26 for the last couple
of months. I'm not out for speed or high-performance. I like the 1-26 and feel
comfortable in it, and when thermals are abundant, it's GREAT fun -- had my
first two hour-long flights in it and they were wonderful. But when thermals
are few and far between, or if you have to go anywhere other than downwind,
that little thing sinks FAST! I would guess that with more time and experience,
one's ability to keep it up improves, and that challenge is likely part of the
fun. But if I had to make a decision right now, fun as it is in thermals and
without meaning to knock it, I don't know if the 1-26 is the plane I'd want to
run out and BUY before at least trying some other reasonably comparable planes
before deciding. JMO.
Jack
Jack
Liam Finley
> an enclosed trailer would be necessary if you don't intend to hanger
> it. Can I get some advice on trailers?
The whole point of buying a Schweizer is that you can leave it tied
outside for the birds to poop on. This fact alone accounts for about
50% of their resale value in the US, where hangar space is rare and
pilots are lazy. I've only seen one 1-26 in my life that had an
enclosed trailer.
I'd also like to point out that the E models are boxy looking and not
as classy or as fun to fly as the A or B models. A nice A model with
a round tail and clear turtle deck can be really cute, and so cheap
that you really need not worry about resale value.
Larry Pardue
stephe...@hotmail.com (stevo) wrote:
> Thanks for all the answeres!
>
> How do I go about finding a good D or E model?
>
> 1. Could you guys give me some advice on the
> finding/inspecting/purchasing process?
>
> 2. Does anyone know of a good one for sale?
>
> 3. I see a lot of "open trailers" for sales w/ 1-26s. I would think
> an enclosed trailer would be necessary if you don't intend to hanger
> it. Can I get some advice on trailers?
>
Enclosed trailers for 1-26s are huge because of the wind chord. There are
a fair number of them around but they tend to be unwieldy, especially in
crosswinds. They also tend to be more difficult to rig and derig from.
On the other hand, a well thought-out open 1-26 trailer can be a delight.
Larry Pardue
Robert de León
> How do I go about finding a good D or E model?
>
> 1. Could you guys give me some advice on the
> finding/inspecting/purchasing process?
>
> 2. Does anyone know of a good one for sale?
>
> 3. I see a lot of "open trailers" for sales w/ 1-26s. I would think
> an enclosed trailer would be necessary if you don't intend to hanger
> it. Can I get some advice on trailers?
>
-------------
First: log on and read over the National 1-26 website:
http://www.126association.org/indexstart.htm
Probably the best place to learn about the 1-26...all the models...and the
pros and cons of owning one.
There are a number of good ones around...and some real dogs. Since the
construction technique is along the lines of conventional metal aircraft,
any A&P should be able to conduct a pre-purchase inspection. Since this is a
glider, it should be a one day process (since there's no engine to look
over). Prices for this can range from $100 up...there is no criteria other
than the A&P's enthusiasm for doing it. But it's worth it especially if you
feel you have found a good, because he may find something that you (and the
owner) may have missed. It can save you $$$ in the long run.
Since hangaring it may be an issue you can't afford, take a close look at
the fabric covered parts. History, type of fabric etc. An open trailer will
be easy to work with as opposed to a closed one. If it's going to be tied
down outside, look into quality wing and canopy covers. Again...it will save
you $$$ in the long run.
Find some owners with the 1-26 Association in your area. They know where the
gliders are and there history, and should be easy to work with and help you.
Bob
Nyal Williams
it!!!
Lennie the Lurker
> I see Lennie posted that he lost a thousand dollars on his,
> over a two year ownership. I have no idea of what the details were in his
> case, but I don't think that necessarily needs to be the case.
Details:
Bought for $9k plus $600 state sales tax and registration, plus $150
for ratty trailer.
Sold for $8k to get it moved before the city told me to get it off the
back fence.
Point: Painting the rosy picture without mention of the derision and
downtalk his plane and he will take is nothing but another damned lie.
Update: The roughly $6800 total loss from soaring has been made up in
the last six months, and continues as I'm not throwing money down a
bottomless pit anymore. Happiness is another antique machine restored
to running condition. The downside, You've gotta work to make it
happen.
ch
Each one investing 6000 for something giving you more fun?
If you find out, that you need the glider more than the sharing
allowes, then you can buy the other half of the share or buy
your very own one.
I shared once a glider with a friend working on weekends - it
worked perfect. When I startet to fly more than one competition
and more than 150h per year, I bought my own.
Three friends of mine started like that. Now - each one owns a
modern single seater and all together share a ASH-25.
Additionally they insure the four gliders as a fleet and safe some
more money.
have fun
Chris
Jim Phoenix
I may be banned for life for this - but there is what appears to be a nice
Ka-8 for sale in PA. That's a very, very nice flying glider for the same
price range. You don't get the association and camaraderie along with it
like you do the 1-26, that's at least half the fun - but it is a nice
glider.
Before buying anything with wings in the US, get an AOPA chain of custody
search done to make sure it has a good title and have it thoroughly
inspected by someone who knows what they are looking at, that may not
necessarily be your local A&P, but could be somebody who has a lot of
experience (probably hard-won experience) with the type of glider you are
considering. It is very easy to dump a lot of repair money into any kind of
used glider - I'm pretty good at dumping money into gliders, but it keeps me
out of the casinos ;-)
A, B and C model 1-26's can have steel tube rust problems underneath the
fabric. The fabric might be OK, but the structure underneath needs a cynical
and experienced eye.
Jim
"stevo" <stephe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com...
Quietpilot
I have an E model, privately owned. Total time on it is right about 800
hours. Not sure if that qualifies as low time, but it provides a benchmark for
this thread.
Happy Thermals!
MG
Lennie the Lurker
> compared with a Cessna-150 it might be fantastic
> being able to fly a 1-26 instead of not flying is fantastic too
> but compared with quite anything else - I cannot call it fantastic - sorry
> Chris
>
>
Al
If you flew it any you would be ahead over rental costs..
But Lennie you are a Dodo so you didn't ....
I think its been proven that if you fly (or want to fly)over 100hours a year
its cheaper to own a glider.
Al
www.gliderforum.com
a Lennie free zone...
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
TIM WARD
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
news:<vc8up88...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > I see Lennie posted that he lost a thousand dollars on his,
> > over a two year ownership. I have no idea of what the details were in
his
> > case, but I don't think that necessarily needs to be the case.
>
> Details:
>
> Bought for $9k plus $600 state sales tax and registration, plus $150
> for ratty trailer.
>
> Sold for $8k to get it moved before the city told me to get it off the
> back fence.
>
> Point: Painting the rosy picture without mention of the derision and
> downtalk his plane and he will take is nothing but another damned lie.
Okay. I haven't had any more than good-humored derision. A couple of people
refer to it as the "Orange Overcast". I'm cheap. If I pay for a tow, I
wanna get some use out of it. I tell the club guys they have their gliders
trained wrong -- they're "hangar sour", and expect to come down after an
hour, like a "barn sour" rental horse..
And of course, flying with other 1-26's, there's no problem at all
So am I lying about it? Or just not having the problem?.
It's a shame you felt under time pressure to sell your glider. A little
waiting and a little advertising can do wonders. I've seen E models
advertised for $12K and go off the market fairly quickly. I have no way of
knowing what they actually sold for, of course.
OTOH, there are higher performance ships around that have been advertised
for a long time.
I'm sorry if you lost money on your 1-26, but I do think that it is probably
among the most "liquid" of sailplane "investments", because it is relatively
inexpensive and a known quantity. At higher price levels, Libelle 201s,
LS-4s and ASW-20s also seem to come onto, and go off the market fairly
quickly.
Anyway, I'm having fun in mine.
Tim Ward
Lennie the Lurker
> Why not share the first glider for the first years with a friend?
Why not spend a little more than half the price and own the whole damn
thing?
>
> Each one investing 6000 for something giving you more fun?
>
$6000 would buy you a nice A,B,or C model in it's enirety. Fun is a
subjective thing, I doubt that you'd enjoy stripping paint, rust and
corrosion off, then repainting, but I've never seen anything that was
as rewarding.
BTW, driving through the black ghettos you will see many vehicles that
are owned that way. Works for them too.
Andreas Maurer
Lurker) wrote:
>"ch" <cho...@gmx.net> wrote in message news:<b7fxa.102$7I4....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
>> Why not share the first glider for the first years with a friend?
>
>Why not spend a little more than half the price and own the whole damn
>thing?
I you had ever flown anything beyond your extremely limited horizon,
you would know wheat the difference ebtween 1 1-26 and a 37:1+ ship
is.
Been there, done that. The worst (performance-wise) glider I've ever
flown was a K-8, my first solo glider. Really nice plane, climbs like
a balloon.
These days I'm flying 40:1+ ships. I don't even think about flying
Ka-8 anymore.
What a pity that you will never know the feeling of a glider that
really glides.
LMAO.
Bye
Andreas
Lennie the Lurker
> You left out the fact that you had hail damage on your venerable tin can..
Had that when I bought it too. A few more dents in a 1-26 doesn't
affect it any.
>
> If you flew it any you would be ahead over rental costs..
>
Doing much better than that, not paying any costs. Happiness is not
caring what happens at the gliderport. Extreme happiness is never
having visited your "groups" and having no desire to. But it should
make you happy to know that I took my books back to the operation
telling them to give them to some other students. Then I destroyed
everything else I had connected with soaring, including setting the
killfile so emails that are soaring related from my buddy are deleted
before I see them. I don't see the rest of them, so they're just
killfiled outright.
But, I'd better go finish the last of the nine machines I've restored
in the last six months, I have three more coming next week. Strange
how that happens when one quits throwing his money down a bottomless
pit.
Al
F-Off Lennie do us all a favor...
Al
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
Lennie the Lurker
> Okay. I haven't had any more than good-humored derision.
I suppose it could have been refered to as good humored, but when it's
constantly repeated, several times every day that I went there, it
becomes nothing but an irritation. It's possible that I'm a little
more sensitive in this area than most people, as I don't spend much
time around other people. (My choice, I get more accomplished when
I'm alone.) I'm well aware that I sound bitter about it, but I'm
really not, it's just something else that I tried and failed, and that
doesn't happen often. I failed because I kept running out of money,
and going back to work to support a hobby doesn't make any sense.
As far as the $1k loss, I set the price to where I thought it would
move as quickly as possible, and it did. Getting it paid off and out
of my yard were the highest priority, and now that I can take the
money for other things, it's the best thing I could have done.
Putting all of my available "mad money" into one activity was probably
the stupidest thing I ever did. The one from the local group that
won't get off my back keeps equating my spending in terms of "tows",
("You paid 60 tows for the new mill?") Which used to be humorous, but
now is starting to get irritating. Not that he was alone, others have
mentioned that the price that I paid for something could equate to X
amount of air time. I'd rather have the cast iron in the garage than
entries in a log. Entries in a log don't have any resale value.
Mark James Boyd
big fan of the Studebaker for driving.
If I had to chose between a 1-26 or a 1/2 share in a
fiberglass glider (PW-5, PIK-20B, Brob 102, etc.),
I'd definitely take the latter.
And for some reason the fatality rates for 1-26s seem
fairly high compared to these other gliders. I suspect
that the lack of penetration really limits ones
landout options when getting low.
I learned in the 2-33 (VERY safe) and the 1-26 (a little
sketchy) and then moved on to a Blanik and then
glass and have been happy.
But if you like owning and driving a Studebaker,
then the 1-26 is definitely the glider for you ;)
Mark James Boyd
Having said I'd rather have a Grob 102 over a 1-26, I should
also mention what I consider advantages of a 1-26 over a 102:
1-26E metal wings weather well, so you can leave it out in weather
Insurance is lower 'cause it's cheaper
there's a big 1-26 die hard club
parts are easy to find because there are lots of them (wrecked too)
If you damage it it's easy to fix
since it's outside, you don't disassemble it every time
it floats really well and does tight thermals
Mark James Boyd
Nobody can use them enough to pay for owning one yourself...
Lennie the Lurker
>
> What a pity that you will never know the feeling of a glider that
> really glides.
> LMAO.
>
> Bye
> Andreas
Did someone write a song, "Anton aus Tirol" specifically for you?
Stick your high performance glider where the sun will never shine, I
flew because I thought it was fun, not as a status symbol as you do.
Your plane is probably pretty easy to spot, it's the one with the
enlarged canopy so you can close it around your fat head. Which also
explains why you never have a hangover headache, there isn't one big
enough to fit you.
What a pity that "Made in germany" rates just below "made in China".
Lennie the Lurker
> Lurker) wrote:
>
> >"ch" <cho...@gmx.net> wrote in message news:<b7fxa.102$7I4....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
> >> Why not share the first glider for the first years with a friend?
> >
> >Why not spend a little more than half the price and own the whole damn
> >thing?
>
> I you had ever flown anything beyond your extremely limited horizon,
> you would know wheat the difference ebtween 1 1-26 and a 37:1+ ship
> is.
About $30000. Anything else you don't know?
Lennie the Lurker
> really glides.
> LMAO.
>
NO, it's not a pity, it's a pity that people like you will never know
the satisfaction of being happy with what they have. It's a pity that
you will never know the pride of ownership that I felt with my "Sadie
Hawkins". It's a pity that you will never know the satisfaction I had
from being able to pay 100% of what the plane and flying cost. It's a
pity that you will never be capable of understanding that I could have
been happy flying only local, in a 1-26, for the rest of my life.
It's a pity that things that are important to you mean nothing to me.
It's a pity that I can drive within two miles of the nearest club, on
my way to my machinery dealer, and not feel any urge to stop in.
(Stopped there once, met the local fieldKop, once is enough.)
It's a pity that I was able to solo, transition to my own plane, and
fly several hours in it, because that meant I reached my goal, and
didn't have to go any further. I accomplished most of what I wanted
to do, but you seem to have a problem with that.
It's also a pity that I realize that people with a 1-26 are going to
have to put up with your malicious mouth, and not telling them up
front is a half truth. A half truth is still a lie.
And Andreas, the day that the souls of the damned are begging Satan to
turn up the heat will be the day before I trust any plastic airplane
to carry my ass.
Jim Phoenix
>>
Some parts are impossible to find - especially nose parts since so many of
them meet the earth nose-first. There's a guy somewhere in NY that bought
the Schweizer stock and he asks high prices for the spares, mostly we just
fabricate our own replacement parts. Sometimes that's tricky because it's a
TC'd airplane and you have to follow The Rules.
Jim
"Mark James Boyd" <mjb...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote in message
news:3ec67ebd$1...@news.ucsc.edu...
ch
Find out what your goal is.
1. Ask a good pilot for joining a cross country ride in a Blanik or an
IS-28 or something similar.
2. Then do the same in a DuoDiscus or a Janus - just a ship with more
than 1:40.
3. Eventually try to get a flight in a high performance ship like and
ASH-25 or a DuoNimbis at a competition as a passenger.
That will show you how older ships fly, how new ships feel and if
you eventually wanna fly competitions later.
If you have done that, then you can deside on your own what suits you
best, what you can afford alone or shared.
Ask Ron Tabbery how to own the first glider with little monney or
other pilots who own modern ships and do not look like millionairs.
Maybe 1-26 pilots just do not want another guy sit into a glas/carbon
ship which seldom carries the "proudly American made" tag.
But if you would not have enough money to fly 50-100h a year,
after spending too much on a 1:40 ship, then it might be better
to own a 1-26 or a Ka-8, Ka-6........
Most important - fly as much as possible in the first few years.
Only training and lots of experience makes a good pilot.
Chris
"stevo" <stephe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25cad608.03051...@posting.google.com...
Steve Bralla
lenniet...@lycos.com (Lennie the Lurker) writes:
>
>> If you flew it any you would be ahead over rental costs..
>>
including setting the
>killfile so emails that are soaring related from my buddy are deleted
>before I see them. I don't see the rest of them, so they're just
>killfiled outright.
>
Looks like your killfile needs more work.
BTIZ
Maine... not sure if he's still there.. its been about 10 yrs since I spoke
with him. He was asking as much for Schweizer parts.. as the cost for new
parts from the factory..
BT
"Jim Phoenix" <jphoe...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:-RqdnQRJ26i...@comcast.com...
Greg Arnold
> Then I destroyed
> everything else I had connected with soaring, including setting the
> killfile so emails that are soaring related from my buddy are deleted
> before I see them. I don't see the rest of them, so they're just
> killfiled outright.
It would seem only logical that you should take the next step, and set up
your computer so that you don't see soaring messages from any source,
including from this newsgroup.
Eric Greenwell
> And for some reason the fatality rates for 1-26s seem
> fairly high compared to these other gliders. I suspect
> that the lack of penetration really limits ones
> landout options when getting low.
Doesn't the pilot know about the lack of penetration before he goes
flying, and take it into account? Keeping a proper field in reach
should be a big priority for the pilot of any glider, whether it's
10:1 or 60:1.
The 1-26 actually has some advantages over the typical faster glider:
it's smaller wingspan and lower landing speed means more areas are
landable; it's lower speed and relatively strong structure make it
more crash resistant; and it's light wing loading can help keep it up
while heavier wing loading gliders will be forced to land.
I don't know if fatality rates are higher in 1-26s or not, but this
supposition seems unsupportable to me.
--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly
Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)
Lennie the Lurker
> You Moron...
>
Must be your family name, you capitalized it.
Go soak your head, you rejected Irishman.
Lennie the Lurker
> >
> Looks like your killfile needs more work.
Google doesn't allow me one, if they did, there are about three people
here that I like to read from time to time. My isp doesn't have a
news server, they went belly up.
Al
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
Scottish actually you ignoramus
Mc.. spelling is Irish Mac.. is Scottish spelling get it right you half
whit.
I even saw you lurking on Gliderforum.com yesterday in the logs.
The moment you sign up for an account to spew forth more of your garbage you
will be banned, unfortunately NNTP doesn't allow us that.
ch
1. Ask a good pilot for joining a cross country ride in a Blanik or an
IS-28 or something similar.
2. Then do the same in a DuoDiscus or a Janus - just a ship with more
than 1:40.
3. Eventually try to get a flight in a high performance ship like and
ASH-25 or a DuoNimbus at a competition as a passenger.
That will show you how older ships fly, how new ships feel and if
you eventually wanna fly competitions later.
If you have done that, then you can decide on your own what suits you
best, what you can afford alone or shared.
Ask Ron Tabery how to own the first glider with little money or
other pilots who own modern ships and do not look like millionaires.
BTIZ
1-26 pilots know they can "land just about anywhere" and get out of reach of
landable areas suitable to a glass ship... then.. when they try to "land
anywhere", they find there short wings are not that short, a two lane
highway has poles within the wingspan, and moving obstructions called
"Autos"
"Eric Greenwell" <flyg...@charterDECIMAL.POINTnet> wrote in message
news:MPG.1930b4cad...@news.charter.net...
Mark James Boyd
winds were stronger than forecast, and got blown quite
significantly downwind, very unexpectedly. I've also been
over rough terrain, at 7000+, and had trouble getting back even though
it was only 6 miles, due to wind (which shifted in flight).
On the other hand, I've gone twice that distance with half that altitude
in the PW-5, with no lack of confidence. When I consider that
having 2/3 the same radius of a circle (22:1 L/D vs 33:1 L/D) gives me
less than half the area of that circle to land, that's bad.
Now add 15 mph of wind, and things get really interesting.
If I have bad terrain downwind, in the 1-26, I just don't
continue to drift, I instead spend all my time fighting the
headwind.
Wind does shift over time, and it is very subtle for me. Of
course some people fly the 1-26 all over the place, and safely,
but this takes a LOT of experience and expert judgement, and
some additional acceptance of risk, and more times when
a pilot needs a crew. I
felt I could develop those same aspects in a faster ship,
and see more terrain in the process. I think about my last
two flights, over 3 hours each, into mountains, looking at
forest fires, checking out a dozen landout spots, and being
places I never, ever would go in the 1-26, because at cloud
base I wouldn't be high enough to have any landouts. In the PW-5
I had 2-3 landouts at all times.
"Doesn't the pilot know about the lack of penetration before he goes
flying, and take it into account?" The novice pilot (me) didn't
know or apply this knowledge. Now, the more experienced pilot (me)
knows about it and so selects other gliders to fly.
"Keeping a proper field in reach should be a big priority for
the pilot of any glider, whether it's 10:1 or 60:1."
Where I fly, with anything over 30:1, about half the days in
Spring and summer I am always within glide of a landable field
at 2/3 cloudbase and above. So keeping a proper field in
reach is a big priority AND is already done automatically
because the longest distance between airfields where I fly
is 24 miles. At 3000 above airfield elevation,
I'm always within 2/3 best glide from an airfield.
And since penetration isn't a problem in the PW-5, 2/3 of best
L/D is a sufficient safety factor for up to 15mph winds (I
don't fly when winds aloft exceed this, due to bad
bouyancy/shear ratio).
Where I fly, in a 1-26, I have never found any days where I
am always within glide at 2/3 cloudbase, unless I restrict
my path excessively. I just haven't had safe and fun X-C
experiences in the 1-26. And my landouts in the 1-26 have
cost me extra $s for the retrieve.
And what about workload? If common, 10mph wind shifts occur
and become the focus of my flight, and when I put the stick
forward in a 1-26, it feels like pushing on licorice. The
ASI barely nudges, but the VSI changes quite a bit.
"I don't know if fatality rates are higher in 1-26s or not,
but this supposition seems unsupportable to me. "
Total Aircraft Fatal Percent
Grob 103 133 5 4%
LET L-13 210 7 3%
SCHW 1-26 531 30 8%
SCHW 2-33 389 4 1%
PW-5 56 1 2%
PW-2 6 0 0%
C-172 24804 1387 5%
BABY ACE 98 4 4%
So the total # of aircraft is taken from the US national
database of registered aircraft (actually
http://www.qrz.com/air.html, since the feds no longer put
it out). The fatalities come from http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp.
Note that this is not a tracking of hours flown, but
of total numbers of aircraft vs. fatalities. One could
argue that many 1-26s are sitting and rotting while most
PW-5s are in very active service. One could argue that
the PW-5 drivers are more experienced than the average
1-26 driver, accounting for the lower fatalities. One could
argue lots of things, but from my experience I rank the
safest to least safe as:
PW-2
2-33
PW-5
L-13
1-26
which matches these stats. The PW-2 and 2-33 are good for
high wings, slow stall speed, and benign stall characteristics.
The PW-5 is good for slow stall speed, good penetration, and
short wingspan. The L-13 has long, low wings (bad for landouts),
wicked stalls, but OK penetration. The 1-26 has low wings
(bad for landouts), wicked stall (relative to PW-2 or 2-33),
and little penetration. I haven't flown a Grob 103.
The fatal reports themselves talk about undershoots,
stall/spin, and hitting a wing during landing/landout for
the 1-26.
The PW-2 and PW-5 stats may be a little optimistic, because
they haven't been around that long, and there aren't that
many in the US, but I think the 2-33 vs. 1-26 comparison
is very valid. I think the 2-33 is MUCH safer than the 1-26,
just as these stats (perhaps) show.
So if there is someone who finds this conclusion "unsupportable,"
I am very interested in any detailed critique. Until then I'll
leave the 1-26 to the more "experienced" pilots and stick with
being a partner in a glass ship club.
Would you rather parachute with an old, round WWII chute or
a new 9-cell rectangular chute? Would you rather drive a 77 Pinto
or a 95 Mazda Protege? Would you rather surf a 9' wooden
longboard or an 8' foamie? Would you rather fly to
Hawaii in a 707 or a 737?
Are you willing to pay 2x as much money or more for glass?
Mark James Boyd
"Doesn't the pilot know about the lack of penetration before he goes
flying, and take it into account?" The novice pilot (me) didn't
know or apply this knowledge. Now, the more experienced pilot (me)
knows about it and so selects other gliders to fly.
"Keeping a proper field in reach should be a big priority for
the pilot of any glider, whether it's 10:1 or 60:1."
Where I fly, with anything over 30:1, about half the days in
Spring and summer I am always within glide of a landable field
at 2/3 cloudbase and above. So keeping a proper field in
reach is a big priority AND is already done automatically
because the longest distance between airfields where I fly
is 24 miles. At 3000 above airfield elevation,
I'm always within 2/3 best glide from an airfield.
And since penetration isn't a problem in the PW-5, 2/3 of best
L/D is a sufficient safety factor for up to 15mph winds (I
don't fly when winds aloft exceed this, due to bad
bouyancy/shear ratio).
Where I fly, in a 1-26, I have never found any days where I
am always within glide at 2/3 cloudbase, unless I restrict
my path excessively. I just haven't had safe and fun X-C
experiences in the 1-26. And my landouts in the 1-26 have
cost me extra $s for the retrieve.
And what about workload? If common, 10mph wind shifts occur
and become the focus of my flight, and when I put the stick
forward in a 1-26, it feels like pushing on licorice. The
ASI barely nudges, but the VSI changes quite a bit.
"I don't know if fatality rates are higher in 1-26s or not,
but this supposition seems unsupportable to me. "
Total Aircraft Fatal Percent
If you are, I'd recommend finishing a license in a 2-33, then
fly a Blanik or Grob for some flights until you're
comfortable, then getting into a glass single seater. And
when you do, hire an instructor for your first few flights
in the solo glider. Sounds funny, but there are gotchas
in a solo ship (make sure dive brakes are locked,
trim forward for the PW-5).
Mark James Boyd
spots I find when I get lower... ;)
Marc Ramsey
> "I don't know if fatality rates are higher in 1-26s or not,
> but this supposition seems unsupportable to me. "
>
> Total Aircraft Fatal Percent
>
> Grob 103 133 5 4%
> LET L-13 210 7 3%
> SCHW 1-26 531 30 8%
> SCHW 2-33 389 4 1%
> PW-5 56 1 2%
> PW-2 6 0 0%
> C-172 24804 1387 5%
> BABY ACE 98 4 4%
>
> So the total # of aircraft is taken from the US national
> database of registered aircraft (actually
> http://www.qrz.com/air.html, since the feds no longer put
> it out). The fatalities come from http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp.
>
> Note that this is not a tracking of hours flown, but
> of total numbers of aircraft vs. fatalities.
Mark,
The 1-26 was produced from the early 50s until the early 80s (I believe),
and most are still flying today. The PW-5 (for example) did not show up
in this country until the mid to late 90s. The thirty fatalities you list
for the
1-26 go back to 1964. I will oversimplify here (but what you did was far
more of an over-simplification), but there have been 531 1-26s in service
over most of the 40 years covered by the NTSB database. This is
equivalent to saying that there have been 21240 aircraft years of
exposure, with 30 fatalities, or 1 fatality every 708 aircraft years. There
have been 56 PW-5s in service over most of the past 8 years, or 448
aircraft years of exposure, with 1 fatality, or 1 every 448 aircraft years.
BTW, the PW-5 fatality you got from the NTSB database was not
a factory built PW-5, so it probably shouldn't count, on the other
hand I do know of one fatal PW-5 accident which is not listed in the
database as a fatality (the pilot died a few days after the accident).
In any case, the PW-5 numbers are so small as to be statistically
meaningless...
Marc
Lennie the Lurker
> "Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
> > "Al" <ventu...@silentflight.com> wrote in message
> news:<3ec65...@corp-news.newsgroups.com>...
> > > You Moron...
> > >
> > Must be your family name, you capitalized it.
> >
> > Go soak your head, you rejected Irishman.
>
> Scottish actually you ignoramus
Same as rejected Irishman, even the Irish wouldn't have you. When all
else fails, the scottish will accept you, or anyone.
>
> I even saw you lurking on Gliderforum.com yesterday in the logs.
You're a fucking liar of the first magnitude. There's no way I'm
interested in anything you have on your miniscule and insignificant
"How great I am" excuse for a website.
What you don't know in your magnificent ignorance, is that I've thrown
lenniet...@lycos.com, password keytop out to anyone and everyone
that wants to use it. You don't know who it was, neither do I, and I
don't even fucking care. Not that it would matter, as it's probably
as I think it is, a lie. And anyhow, in your more magnificent
stupidity, and proof of your lie, "Lennie the Lurker" wouldn't show up
there anyhow, because it's only good for lycos and google, noplace
else. Oh, yeah. I don't originate email exchanges through the lycos
account, only respond to incoming mail. My isp allows the use of five
different identities, so maybe you better block anything that comes
from mia.net and lycos.
Mark James Boyd
the older gliders. I've noticed this too and am a bit more careful
in the PW-5 with regards to stalls. The thing has the same
wicked wing drop as the 1-26 in a stall, so I am careful to
keep airspeed for every landing.
I'm really not sure what landing stats or hours would add, but
unfortunately I don't have these available. I think in the
end each pilot takes these notes and later, after flying,
says "hey, I noticed that too, and that isn't that
important to me" or "god that was scary and that was mentioned
before in that newsgroup."
The only thing saving my butt in the 1-26 on one landing was my
habitual use of half spoilers for downwind. I got way
downwind and had to take out all spoilers to make the field.
After that, I said to myself "hey, that's what Dan
meant when he said it penetrates like a potato chip."
So I'd say read the stuff, add your own comments, and
with the precautions in mind, fly the glider. If one pays
a lot of attention to the flight and is critical of the
noted characteristics, I think in very few flights a pilot
can learn a lot about a glider.
Al
Your IP is in the header of this message and its banned already.
Carry on you dipshit.
Al
Lennie the Lurker
blurted:
> I dont have to
>
> Your IP is in the header of this message and its banned already.
>
The first and only logical question is "why would I want to?".
But you're still a liar. That will never change.
Nice to see that you're still 100% useless. That will never change.
Al
You sad little lonely man..
Al
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.0305...@posting.google.com...
Michael
> I may be banned for life for this - but there is what appears to be a nice
> Ka-8 for sale in PA. That's a very, very nice flying glider for the same
> price range. You don't get the association and camaraderie along with it
> like you do the 1-26, that's at least half the fun - but it is a nice
> glider.
Having flown both, I think the Ka-8 is a better glider than the 1-26
in all respects - save one.
It is generally cheaper to buy.
It has better L/D, but it will still stay right with a 1-26 in the
climb, so overall the performance is better.
It has better control feel - very light on the controls, but good feel
through the stick and rudders. The 1-26 isn't even close.
It lands shorter (due to the tailskid - a REAL taildragger).
The downside? The wings are wood and fabric, so it can't be kept
outside. And it's a pain in the ass to rig, so it must be kept
hangared.
Michael
Ian Strachan
<crwd...@hotmail.com> writes
snip
>it's a pain in the ass to rig, so it must be kept
>hangared.
Many gliders that are a pain to rig are kept in trailers and rigged
every day for soaring. That is one of the pains of our sport. But when
you are soaring you do not bother about the necessary fetish of
riggingandderigging .....
However, modern designs get better. My present one has automatic
control connections when you offer up the wings to the fuselage. Sort
of buckets into which the control rods are guided into their correct
position. Basic design that I am somewhat amazed was not thought of
decades before.
But when I started gliding in the 1950s it was a real treadmill of
effort at many clubs. People were actually proud of the sheer work that
was needed to get a little bit of soaring. Quite rightly the ethos has
changed and we now want lots of good soaring for minimal effort in other
directions.
--
Ian Strachan
Lennie the Lurker
> Is that the best you can come up with
>
> You sad little lonely man..
>
ever associate with scumbags like you. And as you have money to burn,
time on your hands, and no brain, that means that I have to stay away
from any airport. That's more than easy to do.
Lennie the Lurker
> Is that the best you can come up with
>
> You sad little lonely man..
>
I even saw you lurking on Gliderforum.com yesterday in the logs.
The moment you sign up for an account to spew forth more of your
garbage you
will be banned, unfortunately NNTP doesn't allow us that.
Al
You're still a liar al, get used to it. Hold your breath until I sign
up. Start now.
Al
As it is your IP has been blocked and your are not welcome there.
Any attempt by you to sign up will be blocked and even if you manage to
sneak an account on there it will be blocked the moment I get the signup
notification
Now go play with little bits of metal..
Al
www.gliderforum.com
a lennie free zone
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
Al
LOL
We should call you Lennie the Liar....
Al
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
Kirk Stant
The only person I know who badmouths 1-26's is you. I have the
piviledge of flying with (and in) everthing from BG-12s to 1-26s to
PW-5s to racing glass to Nimbus 3's - and you know what? NOBODY
BADMOUTHS ANYONE ELSES GLIDER! They are all fun in their own way.
And in polite society it is considered extremely poor form to
criticize something one has absolutely no experience in. Such as
glass, high performance gliders, in your case.
Now, we all like discussing the various pro's and con's of different
gliders - and pilots! - but that's normal "hangar flying".
Unlike the venom that you spew everytime you post here.
Bah, I can't believe I wasted bandwidth on you...
Kirk Stant
Who likes glass, wood, and even metal gliders.
E. A. Grens
> I think its been proven that if you fly (or want to fly)over 100hours a
year
> its cheaper to own a glider.
>
> Al
I must disagree. I own a glider (Phoebus A-1), which I do not currently
fly, and fly with a club, Silverado Soaring. For any number of flights the
tow charges balance out. With Silverado I can fly an unlimited number of
hours for $70 per month. For that $840 per year I can not tie down, insure,
and maintain my glider. And, I have available to me better aircraft than my
Phoebus. If you wish a state of the art sailplane, or wish to take it
anywhere, anytime, without restriction, owning your own sailplane is
definitely best. If you wish to fly 50 - 100 hrs per year economically, a
club is the way to go.
Ed Grens
Lennie the Lurker
> Lennie if I hadnt mentioned that you would still be lurking there.
>
I've never been there, never will. Sorry al, but you don't have
anything I want, now or ever. If you spent as much time on blocking
me as I spend on clicking on a url, you totally wasted that time.
Yup, you're sure scottish, the Irish wouldn't have you.
Lennie the Lurker
> Lennie, give it a rest.
>
> The only person I know who badmouths 1-26's is you. I have the
> piviledge of flying with (and in) everthing from BG-12s to 1-26s to
> PW-5s to racing glass to Nimbus 3's - and you know what? NOBODY
> BADMOUTHS ANYONE ELSES GLIDER! They are all fun in their own way.
Now you explain to me what it is when all I heard concerning my plane,
or the most common thing I heard, "You will soon get tired of it and
want something "better"". Once, I could have lived with, but
incessant and from multiple people, most of whom I didn't know, that's
just harrassment. NO, not from everyone, only a couple, but one is
more than enough. One fellow sat at the picnic table for over a half
hour making sure I knew "all the shortcomings" of my plane, and why I
would always be inferior if I continued to fly it. I hadn't flown it
yet. I got on the golf cart to try to get away from him, and he
jumped on the empty seat to continue. That is the moment that I
determined that I would either run out of time and money, or get my
license, but dropping out was predetermined at that instant.
>
> And in polite society it is considered extremely poor form to
> criticize something one has absolutely no experience in. Such as
> glass, high performance gliders, in your case.
>
You're assuming that I know nothing, but. I had ample opportunity to
look over several plastic planes while helping put them together or
back in the box, and DID NOT like what I saw. I spent 15 years as a
mechanical inspector, and learned one thing, I don't have to "like
it", but I also learned to trust my instincts. More than anyone elses
word. As my instincts have served me to much better end than the
advice of others, I'll continue to trust my instincts.
Go back and read the line of andreas that I quoted, then read my first
paragraph.
I will state this, I don't like having come that close to having the
license and not getting it. Even less do I like the idea of exposing
myself to the few everpresent idiots that I would have to to resume.
I enjoyed my 1-26, but didn't enjoy the "suggestions" that I try
something else, that I didn't really want to try. The negatives
outweigh the positives, and I won't be pushed into anything. I will
only be pushed out, as happened.
Al
Says it all..
Al
"Lennie the Lurker" <lenniet...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:15a48d98.03051...@posting.google.com...
Greg Arnold
"Lennie the Lurker" wrote in message
> Now you explain to me what it is when all I heard concerning my plane,
> or the most common thing I heard, "You will soon get tired of it and
> want something "better"". Once, I could have lived with, but
> incessant and from multiple people, most of whom I didn't know, that's
> just harrassment. NO, not from everyone, only a couple, but one is
> more than enough. One fellow sat at the picnic table for over a half
> hour making sure I knew "all the shortcomings" of my plane, and why I
> would always be inferior if I continued to fly it. I hadn't flown it
> yet. I got on the golf cart to try to get away from him, and he
> jumped on the empty seat to continue. That is the moment that I
> determined that I would either run out of time and money, or get my
> license, but dropping out was predetermined at that instant.
Like Kirk, I don't know why I get drawn into this. However, I can't help
but observe that this reasoning means you would divorce your wife if someone
criticized her. Too bad that you are so influenced by what other people
think, and that you don't have more confidence in your own judgment.
Eric Greenwell
> The only thing saving my butt in the 1-26 on one landing was my
> habitual use of half spoilers for downwind. I got way
> downwind and had to take out all spoilers to make the field.
> After that, I said to myself "hey, that's what Dan
> meant when he said it penetrates like a potato chip."
I don't see the connection: how did using half spoiler on downwind
help you? Didn't it just make you lower when you got way downwind, and
make it harder to get back?
ch
for your private battles
Chris
Al
I do have my own private newsgroup. its called www.gliderforum.com
come join the Lennie free soaring community there
Al
"ch" <cho...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:g4kya.297$Ac3....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
George William Peter Reinhart
$500.00 per year more to fly personal Nimbus 2 for 100 hours over 100 hours
in club owned Grob Twin.
Grob is available for only one hour at a time (usually) and not necessarily
on demand.
Tow costs at one per hour run up the hourly rate.
Cross country, while encouraged, has to be scheduled in advance.
In it's favor is, it's always rigged and ready to fly and... you can take
a friend.
Nimbus has longer legs and stays up better
It's always available but usually needs to be rigged to fly.
I can take it home to play with it.
I can take it with me on vacation.
Nimbus would be cheaper to fly than Grob if opportunity costs on the money
were not considered.
Grob would be still cheaper if flights were longer than one hour (and they
sometimes can be).
In both cases, lots of incidental costs weren't considered but would
probably be a wash for both ships.
Both are fun to fly.
So are 1-26 and 2-33, both of which would be cheaper still, either private
or club.
Food for thought.
Cheers!, Pete
Mark James Boyd
Because I use half spoiler on downwind, if I feel like I'm getting
low during the approach at that glide ratio, I can take out some
spoiler and get better glide and make it back safely.
If I used no spoilers on my downwind, then base, and then noticed I
was getting low, I couldn't take any spoilers out and extend
my glide.
Really just a matter of perception than reality. If I practiced
all of my approaches with no spoilers, the allowing myself
to get too far downwind would have been a bigger problem.
I also think that trying to judge glide ratios and the correct
times to turn base/final from downwind is harder with better
glide ratios. With some spoiler in a nice stabilized
descent/glide, I find it easier to judge patterns so I
don't undershoot or overshoot.
Don Johnstone
but you are all getting a little tightly wrapped. I
thought another perspective might help. It's meant
to be humourous.
Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember
what peace there may be in a 10 knot climb in wave.
As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms
with all persons, including those who don't have the
advantage of living in the UK.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to
others, even the dull and ignorant, including those
who live in the land of the free and those who allege
they fly a Discus of any mark inverted, they too have
their story, normally exaggerated but sometimes amusing.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons, especially glider
pilots from Minden, CFI’s, juniors, and especially
Lurkers
they are vexations to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others, you may become
vain and bitter, for always there will be greater and
lesser persons than yourself, but not very many greater,
and none who live outside the UK.
Enjoy your achievements, like winding up the gullible,
as well as your plans.
Keep interested in your own glider, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of
time, unless it's a big metal monstrosity built in
the USA or a PW5.
Exercise caution in your cross-country flying; for
the world is full of trickery, big areas of sink, nobs
in expensive plastic, and large metal objects travelling
at warp speed.
But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
mostly on small meteorologically challenged islands,
many persons strive for high ideals, long distances
and enormous heights; and everywhere life is full of
heroism and the chance of a big thermal.
Be yourself. Except when posting to URASb when you
should be anyone except yourself.
Especially, do not feign affection or try and bull****
those, like me, who know more than you do.
Neither be cynical about love, or people who don't
live in the UK, for in the face of all aridity and
disenchantment it is as perennial as the mandatory
check flight.
Take kindly to the counsel of the years, gracefully
surrendering the things of youth, like beat ups, knowing
everything there is to know about gliding, and inverted
flight.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden
misfortune, like landing out miles from a pub or finding
that your logger packed in after 5 minutes of competition
flying.
But do not distress yourself with imaginings, like
thinking Minden is the centre of the known gliding
universe, or that being top of the ratings makes you
good.
Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness, especially
if you are an obnoxious git.
Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself,
the fairer sex and gliders.
You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees
and the stars; you have a right to be here. (OK there
are exceptions to every rule and Lennie the Lurker
appears to be it)
And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the
universe is unfolding as it should.
Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive
Him to be, and whatever your labours and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace with your
soul and the CFI (Same thing really).
With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is
still a beautiful island, the UK that is.
Be cheerful, especially when reading this.
Strive to be happy, even when 20 miles from home with
sea air all the way and only little wings.
With apologies to Max Ehrmann
Lennie the Lurker
>
> Like Kirk, I don't know why I get drawn into this. However, I can't help
> but observe that this reasoning means you would divorce your wife if someone
> criticized her. Too bad that you are so influenced by what other people
> think, and that you don't have more confidence in your own judgment.
Apply that same reasoning to those that think having multiple owners
and a more expensive aircraft is the way to do it. A wife being a
high cost item, doesn't it make more sense to have four or five
partners there too? With my wife having been grossly overweight, you
don't want to know how cruel and crude people that are supposedly
"educated and sophisticated" can be. When the snide and stupid
comments about her became too often, we didn't go those places anymore
either.
I really don't care what other people think, as long as I don't have
to listen to it. To that end, I spend less than an average of one
hour per day in the company of other people, and I like it that way.
I have found that everytime I take the "advice" of someone else, I pay
the price. Far better that I don't have to listen to them, much
easier to stay away.
Illustration of point: Neither you nor stant are named "andreas".
Michael
> >hangared.
>
> Many gliders that are a pain to rig are kept in trailers and rigged
> every day for soaring. That is one of the pains of our sport. But when
> you are soaring you do not bother about the necessary fetish of
> riggingandderigging .....
Take this for what it's worth. While I am at least in theory a glider
instructor (I have a piece of paper from the FAA, which in reality
means exactly nothing) and have actually met the requirements of the
Silver (even if I didn't bother with documentation - in the US this is
more common than you might think) I am primarily a power pilot, not a
glider pilot. Also, while I wasn't born here, I am by temperament an
American. This of course colors my perception - but here goes.
Convenience is important, because unless you have no other life, you
will have many activities competing for your time. If you add hours
of overhead and effort to every glider flight, you will make few
glider flights. This may not be true of a dedicated enthusiast in
Europe, but it probably will be true for the average American. We
have few glider fields here, and few people live close to one. Fields
that offer power plane rentals and instruction are far more common,
and it's far cheaper than it is in Europe.
The bottom line is that if the day looks unsoarable or only marginally
soarable, few Americans will bother driving out to the club, rigging a
glider that's a pain in the ass to rig, flying a sled ride or two, and
reversing the process. They will have other things to do. If they
must fly, they are more likely to stop by the airport with powered
planes. The cost of two tows will likely pay for more airtime than
two sled rides will yield, it will be a shorter drive, and there will
be no effort to rig, stage, and then derig.
This is a self-perpetuating situation. The less you fly gliders, the
better the day has to be for the game to be worth the candle, and the
less often this occurs. Thus you fly gliders less. Thus your skills
deteriorate until you can stay up in only the best weather, and can't
go XC at all. At that point, ownership becomes pointless, and the
glider sits. I've seen it all too often. In fact, I've seen it
happen to myself. My glider mostly sits, because it's too much of a
hassle to get to it, and my power plane is convenient. And for that
reason I'm primarily a power pilot, not a glider pilot, and haven't
instructed a glider student or gone XC in nearly two years.
Maybe this is US-specific, but the original poster was from the US and
I stand by what I said. The Ka-8 needs to be hangared, or it won't
fly.
Michael
Bill Daniels
"Michael" <crwd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:449a3d6e.03052...@posting.google.com...
As usual, Michael, you have put it well.
However, speaking of gliders in general, one might take your argument and
make a case for rigging aids. Done well, rigging aids can be a joy. This
means that the glider lives in a covered trailer at home with zero hangaring
costs. It means that the glider can be towed to any location where launches
are available with a minimum of fuss. I have seen solo rigging in 10
minutes with the glider fully taped. It also might be an argument for a
self-launcher that lives in a covered trailer with solo rigging aids.
Since I enjoy fussing with gliders, rigging is not a bore.
Back to the 1-26. I have rigged many of them many times. With practice, a
10 minute rig is possible since the tailplane usually stays on the fuselage
while trailering. It has been my experience that each 1-26 has
idiosycrancies that, if known, make the rigging easier.
One thing that helps a lot is a bolt holder that allows the drag spar bolt
to be inserted and secured without contortions. Putting an inspection cover
in the fuselage fabric just below the drag pin is another option. Another
trick is to keep all wing fittings very clean and lubed. Still another
trick is to have a crew person that can feel and hear when the wings are
perfectly aligned for the main pins to be inserted.
Once the 1-26 rigging is mastered, the pilot will have to face the fact that
it will be done often since landouts are part of the 1-26 experience.
Bill Daniels
Jack
Jack
>
> Because I use half spoiler on downwind, if I feel like I'm getting
> I also think that trying to judge glide ratios and the correct
> times to turn base/final from downwind is harder with better
> glide ratios.
Quite true.
The steeper the glide the more accurately you can place the aircraft.
Half spoilers allows you to stay in closer to the landing area and
improves your ability to judge your pattern. It means you spend less
time in the pattern, improving overall traffic conditions, and you allow
less time for winds to affect you. You can correct both for over- or
undershoot instead of only for overshoot errors.
My only concern about the technique is in translating it to landouts.
Anyone have any thoughts on that specific scenario, esp. WRT to being in
position to make an alternate landing area?
I am beginning to see the wisdom of the advice to fly a lot and fill
_all_ the badge and achievement squares before you fly cross country.
One may not get enough landouts in the course of a normal recreational
glider career to become really good at them.
Jack
Al
"Don Johnstone" <REMOVE_TO...@bittering.gioserve.com> wrote in
message news:bademp$rem0g$1...@ID-49798.news.dfncis.de...
>
> Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and
CARRY A BIG STICK
Al
Lennie the Lurker
> http://www.gliderforum.nut/thread-view.rasp!threadid=2222222222222222222222222222222222222000&posts=.1010101999999222288837465qwertyuiop[]asdfghjkl;'zxcvbnm,./eatshit
>
> Says it all..
>
Hmmmm. There is no way that I'd ever try to post in your stupid
egotistical playground. I consider that YOUR personal playground,
where you can put on your dictators face and do what you like, being
king of nothing in reality. I don't play in your cesspool, al, never
will. I don't have an account there, never have and never will, and
you saying that I tried to log on is nothing but what I expect from
you , another goddam lie. IN other words, maybe you can understand
them, you dipshit, you can't take something away that I wouldn't
accept in the first place, I won't stoop that low.
That link is the only one you have ever posted that I clicked on, and
it will also be the last one. I HAVE NEVER TRIED TO LOG ON TO YOUR
PERSONAL CESSPOOL, AND I NEVER WILL! Please notice that I hashed it
so others don't have to review your personal stupidity. But al,
YOU'RE STILL A LIAR. Why am I not surprised????
Lennie the Lurker
> >
> what peace there may be in a huge Harley.
> As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms
> with all persons, including those who don't have the
> others, even the dull and ignorant, including those
> who live in the land of the free and those who allege
> they fly a Discus of any mark inverted, they too have
> their story, normally exaggerated but sometimes amusing.
> Avoid loud and aggressive persons, especially glider
> krauts,
> they are vexations to the spirit.
> If you compare yourself with others, you may become
> lesser persons than yourself, but not very many equal,
> and none who live within the UK.
> it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of
> germany or a Slingsby.
> Exercise caution in your cross-country flying; for
> the world is full of trickery, big areas of sink, nobs
> in expensive plastic, and large metal objects travelling
> at warp speed.
> But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
> many persons strive for high ideals, long distances
> and enormous heights; and everywhere life is full of
> should be anyone except yourself.
> Especially, do not feign affection or try and bull****
> those, like me, who know more than you do.
> Neither be cynical about love, or people who
> Take kindly to the counsel of the years, gracefully
> surrendering the things of youth, like beat ups, knowing
> everything there is to know about gliding,
> misfortune, like landing out miles from a pub or finding
> that your logger packed in after 5 minutes of competition
> flying.
> But do not distress yourself with imaginings, like
> thinking Minden is the centre of the known gliding
> universe, or that being top of the ratings makes you
> good.
> Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness, especially
> if you are an obnoxious git.
> Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself,
> all Brits.)
> And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the
> I have hidden behind it.
> Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive
> Him to be, and whatever your labours and aspirations,
> in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace with your
> soul and the CFI (Same thing really).
> With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is
> everlasting fog.
> Be cheerful, especially when reading this. Then hack it and
> repost.
> Strive to be happy, even when 20 miles from home with
> Know thyself, if in doubt ask the FBI.
>
> With apologies to Max Ehrmann
(Poet from Indiana, copyright 1927, renewed after his death by his
widow, still held by the family.)
Eric Greenwell
>
> Because I use half spoiler on downwind, if I feel like I'm getting
> low during the approach at that glide ratio, I can take out some
> spoiler and get better glide and make it back safely.
>
> If I used no spoilers on my downwind, then base, and then noticed I
> was getting low, I couldn't take any spoilers out and extend
> my glide.
So, what do you use for pattern entry altitude? Is your turn onto base
about 2/3 of the entry altitude? Is your turn onto final about 1/3 of
pattern entry?
> Really just a matter of perception than reality. If I practiced
> all of my approaches with no spoilers, the allowing myself
> to get too far downwind would have been a bigger problem.
What do you mean by "no spoilers"? Do you mean just the downwind and
base leg with no spoilers, but going to 1/2 spoiler on final? The
standard approach is with 1/2 spoiler, so the glide angle required is
the same as you are already are using, and should look the same,
except you'd be higher when you started on final.
> I also think that trying to judge glide ratios and the correct
> times to turn base/final from downwind is harder with better
> glide ratios. With some spoiler in a nice stabilized
> descent/glide, I find it easier to judge patterns so I
> don't undershoot or overshoot.
What shape pattern do you fly: square, semi-circular (continuous
smooth descending turn once you start your base turn), or ...?
What glider(s) do you use this technique with?
Is this the way you were taught, or a technique you developed on your
own?
Bruce Greeff
Bergfalke II/55 I have to say the Cirrus is easier to fly in the
circuit. Not easier to land mind, just easier to judge a circuit in.
No offence meant, but anyone who misjudges a standard circuit so badly
as to have difficulty making the field with a aircraft with this kind of
glide ratio and penetration should be reconsidering whether he / she
should be solo...
Conversely, the apalling penetration (a wet tissue does better) and high
descent rate of the Bergie can make life interesting. I would imagine
that flying a downwind with half brakes merely reduces your time to
assess the landing area and options for positioning. Unless conditions
are so poor that you are having difficulty controlling the aircraft I
can't see why you would want to do that. Especially on an outlanding I
would imagine it would be most advantageous to fly as "normal" a circuit
as possible. The steep approach into the field is only effective on the
final approach, where you want to clear obstacles and / or land as short
as possible. For that requirement the technique I have been taught in a
K13 or other relatively draggy airplane is to approach high and slow,
dive against the airbrakes and round out normally. This is very
effective in tube and fabric ships that do not accellerate like my
Cirrus... Try that trick with a glass ship and you might impale the
threshold.
So I guess the summary is to do what is effective for you and your
glider, but I still fail to see the merit in plummeting earthward just
because you are landing in an unfamiliar place. I would expect that to
be the place where you wanted most time to assess and observe.
I'd be interested to have advice on how best to approach short field
landings with the Cirrus though. So far my performance on our long tar
runway makes the thought of getting this one down and stopped in a small
field daunting. Have to hope the ground drag is high I suppose.
Bruce Greeff
Seem to be a US thing about "my glider is better than yours".
I bought the little glass slipper - 30 years old and also had lots of
folk point out the faults of my first generation glass. We also have a
number of people who mistakenly believe their manhood is proportional to
their wingspan.
I just chose to ignore them and have fun.
Interestingly, one year on in ownership I am really starting to relax
and enjoy the plane and with only 1200 hours on her she is only 10% into
her structural life. I know that in some communities metal is easier and
cheaper to maintain, it is not here. So the glass ship is much lower
maintenance than, for instance the Blanik L13s we have in the club.
Best part about a high(ish) performance single seater is that you don't
have space for passengers, it's really peaceful up there. You can even
turn the radio off if you want to. (OK only in some airspace)
Lennie the Lurker wrote:
<snip>
Wallace Berry
Don Johnstone <REMOVE_TO...@bittering.gioserve.com> wrote:
> I know I have posted something very similar before
> but you are all getting a little tightly wrapped. I
> thought another perspective might help. It's meant
> to be humourous.
Wonderful post!
Christian Husvik
Michael wrote:
> Having flown both, I think the Ka-8 is a better glider than the 1-26
> in all respects - save one.
>
> [...] it's a pain in the ass to rig,
Nope. I have flown a lot of Ka-8 in Switzerland when I studied there,
and they were rigged and derigged every day. With some practice this
went pretty quickly with three to four persons. All parts being pretty
light, this was no pain at all.
Christian 8-)
Lennie the Lurker
> Best part about a high(ish) performance single seater is that you don't
> have space for passengers, it's really peaceful up there. You can even
> turn the radio off if you want to. (OK only in some airspace)
>
Your name isn't andeas either.
Mark James Boyd
1/2 spoilers once abeam the touchdown spot on downwind.
I fly a rectangular pattern from there, and try to
make my chosen touchdown spot without changing
spoiler settings. This is what I was taught, and it
has worked well so far.
The base and final legs make a rectangular ground track.
The biggest problem I have had is judging when to start the
base leg. On downwind, this requires looking back over
the shoulder to spot the field, and having a good
judgement of the wind effects. From flying different gliders,
and from flying airplanes of different speeds, assessing
the combination of wind and approach speed and factoring
this into the decision to turn base, along with the
difficulty of seeing the field over the shoulder past some of the
wings, makes this a bit challenging.
So a couple of times in the 1-26, I have had to make my
base less rectangular and take out some spoiler to make
the touchdown spot. In a glider with such a slow approach
speed, wind has quite an effect on how to fly the
pattern. A few times with 20mph+ winds I have been
surprised.
I think part of this is due to the faulty way patterns
are taught. Some instructors say to make the downwind to
base turn when the touchdown spot starts to rise in the
perspective. Although this works well in 0 wind, with
wind this means that in a glider, one may get too
far downwind. Take the extreme case where the wind is
the same as recommended approach speed. In this case,
a 1-26 on a 3 degree final glide on 1/2 mile final may
not even make the touchdown spot.
So I make my base earlier now when there are heavy winds
(with respect to my final approach speed). This means
I lose less than 1/3 of my TPA on downwind and base,
and more than 1/3 of my TPA on final leg. How much
more I lose on final depends on the strength of the
wind. I suppose if wind = best V l/d, I'd make a
very abbreviated downwind and base and pretty much
float straight down to touchdown. ;)
What would I do in an emergency, off field landing?
Probably the same things. I've had to make some judgements
about picking possible spots before in strong winds,
and try to pick spots downwind (swag the effect
of wind on glide ratio). This means I'll
probably be making a downwind, base, and final
for my off field landing.
I guess I'm much more interested in wind now than
I ever was in a power plane, and frequently see
crab angles that I had never seen before.
Mark James Boyd
say that it is a consideration, it takes 2 men 1/2 hours to do,
it scratches and damages parts, even though we are careful,
and it has the potential to really damage a glider. Our PW-2
tail was damaged when it was put in the trailer and hit the
top of the vertical stab.
Is this better than the potential wind damage of leaving it out?
I don't know. Do I feel a little sheepish expecting the tow pilot
to help me for 1/2 hour for assembly and disassembly? Yes.
Do I wonder if some kind of wing covering setup might
work better? Yes.
Anybody use wing covers instead? What has been your experience?
Jack
> I have flown a lot of Ka-8 in Switzerland when I studied there,
> and they were rigged and derigged every day. With some practice this
> went pretty quickly with three to four persons. All parts being pretty
> light, this was no pain at all.
Three to four is too many. I want a ship I can comfortably rig and derig
with one assistant, and I am not so young and strong as I was. How
likely is this to be possible with 1-26s, LET 23/33s, and PW-5s?
Jack
--
Always tell the truth. It only hurts if it ought to!
Chris Nicholas
robust. It needs simple rigging aids - one trestle and a fuselage
cradle. The same could be done for a K8. The keys are the aids, a bit
of technique, and easy-use trailer fitments.
There are some remarkably heavy gliders that are one-person rig with the
right trailer fittings and rigging aids (Kestrels, Lak 12's for
instance). One person rigging for wooden gliders like K6, K8 etc. is
difficult (I hesitate to say impossible but I've never heard of any)
because the wing trailing edges can't take any significant load except
right at the root.
Chris N.
Christian Husvik
> Three to four is too many. (for rigging)
Hmm, you must be in a very small club. If there's only you and the tow
pilot, I guess you need a glider that's easier to rig than the old wood
or metal ones.
> I want a ship I can comfortably rig and derig
> with one assistant, and I am not so young and strong as I was. How
> likely is this to be possible with 1-26s, LET 23/33s, and PW-5s?
If my experience with metal ships is relevant (Pilatus B-4, LET
L-13/L-23), this is not very likely for the two former ones. The latter
one, you can propably quite comfortably rig with the help of only one
other person, a wing stand and a good trailer. Having one person in
each wing tip is less risky though.
Christian 8-)
>
>
>
> Jack