Nimbus 2 Exp.?
apa...@globalserve.net
Am considering a Nimbus 2 as a 1st ship. I need a ship for X-country in weak
thermals in Ontario, Canada, as well as a good Ridge machine. Would prefer
something that "grooves" in thermals, even if the ship has "large span
handling". I have 250 Hrs. Landouts are expected.
Comments?
Thanks in advance,
a.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Shaber CJ
I would think that an ASW-20/ASW-19; LS-3/LS-4, etc. would be a good machine to
log your first serious x-country time in. These ships are easy to fly and land
out. I have not flown a Nimbus 2, but I have flown a Nimbus 3 and Nimbus 4,
the larger ships are harder (significantly) and more time consuming to put
together, and you can not land them in nearly as many places as a 15 meter
ship.
Cheers
David C. Rolley
respond. However, my partner in a LAK-12 owned and flew a Nimbus 2 for
a short while. His comparison of the LAK-12 and a Nimbus 2 is "The LAK
has all the performance without the handling quirks of the Nimbus 2".
The Nimbus 2 probably represents very good performance for the dollar.
On the heels of saying that, I feel compelled to remind you that the N2
was designed to compete at the world championship level in the late 60's
early 70's time frame. At that time handling sometimes took a back seat
to performance. As such, I think it would be safe to say the target
pilot population for the aircraft was the top 2 or 3 percent of all
pilots. The skill level required to fly the aircraft has not decreased
over the time since the glider was built. But the price has dropped to
the point that the aircraft is very attractive to pilots which could be
described as entry level pilots.
Of all the folks that I have discussed the handling of a Nimbus 2 with,
none have described it as "groovy" ship or an easy ship to fly. That
doesn't say they don't like it or that they didn't enjoy it.
I wouldn't recommend a large open class ship as a first ship for
anyone. The LAK-12 is as easy to fly as any ship I've flown but the
decision making skills and discipline required to safely operate a very
high performance ship means that I can't recommend it as a good first
ship either.
I think a partnership in a Discus or LS-4 would meet the needs you have
stated and would be a far better choice.
Whatever you decide, be careful in learning to fly cross country. It is
easy to let the performance of a good glider outstrip your decision
making skills and place you at unnecessary risk.
Good Soaring,
Dave Rolley
The only thing that is better than being 100 miles out from home without
an engine is making it back from there, without an engine.
Jonathan Gogan
> Dave Rolley
sig said > The only thing that is better than being 100 miles out from home
without
> an engine is making it back from there, without an engine.
or as Vin Parkin declared to Singapore ATC:-
14:32 S-XXX (not sure) We have fanstop at 3,000 feet.
14:39 S-XXX We still have fanstop, now at 4,000 feet.
(Motorglider)...
LOL.
J
jf_s...@compuserve.com
having some experience on the Nimbus II (about 300 hrs), and doing a
lot of mountain flying, I wouldn't recommend it as a first ship.
Choose a simpler one.
It's certainly very good in X country, but it has a lot of
unconventional reactions (it requires much more rudder than many
gliders), so turns require significant anticipation due to its
inertia. Turbulence can be an issue, especially in ridge flying (see
above).
Outlandings can also be an issue (especially for short fields) as
airbreaks have limited efficiency. It;s very easy to overshoot
approach speed (although this is true for all high perdormance
gliders).
You have also to train to use the tail parachute, as it could save
your ship/life (or both) the day you will need it (I know very well
what I'm saying). Good knowledge of the flight manual is important.
However, all these "problems" can be overcome with training. It's a
ship that should be flown frequently (I would say around 100hrs/year)
to be comfortable with.
It's a very pleasant glider to fly.
Jean-Francois
visit our club web site:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/aapca/
Visit our club website:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/aapca/
RHWOODY
I have owned a Nimbus 2A, 2C, 3, 4, and now
a 3DM - the 2a and 2c were short on rudder
and they certainly don't groove in a thermal.
If you need very good handling try a
Ventus C with 17.6m tips - the C model is a
lot more civilized although in high demand
and hard to find and expensive as well.
Good luck. If you buy a 2, try to avoid the
"a" series - they have an all flying tail where
as the 2b and 2c have conventional horizontal
tails and handle much better.