Anyone paid for access to the Grob web site for SB information. In
December
they introduced the charge but now have had to make it free as they are
required to make the information available to A/C owners. But guess what,
they don't want to refund those who have paid as it gives access to FM's
&
MM's even though there was no option just for SB's. Greedy or what!!

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:15:04 PM UTC-5, Alan Garside wrote:
> ... Greedy or what!!

I'm glad that they still find it worthwhile to make ADs when needed.

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 2:59:55 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:15:04 PM UTC-5, Alan Garside wrote:
> > ... Greedy or what!!
>
> I'm glad that they still find it worthwhile to make ADs when needed.

Like to see a TN and parts to change the retracts to a fixed gear.

Grob glider ADs & SBs at:

http://www.ltb-lindner.com/grob-saleplanes.html

At 22:03 17 January 2019, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 2:59:55 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber
wrote:
>> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:15:04 PM UTC-5, Alan
Garside wrote:
>> > ... Greedy or what!!
>>
>> I'm glad that they still find it worthwhile to make ADs when needed.
>
>Like to see a TN and parts to change the retracts to a fixed gear.
>

LTB Lindner has been asked that a number of times. Apparently,
they have no interest in doing so.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 01:35:12 +0000, Michael Opitz wrote:

> At 22:03 17 January 2019, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>>On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 2:59:55 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber
> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:15:04 PM UTC-5, Alan
> Garside wrote:
>>> > ... Greedy or what!!
>>>
>>> I'm glad that they still find it worthwhile to make ADs when needed.
>>
>>Like to see a TN and parts to change the retracts to a fixed gear.
>>
>>
> LTB Lindner has been asked that a number of times. Apparently,
> they have no interest in doing so.

How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c mounting
structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?

Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the early Libelle
201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

At 17:03 17 January 2019, Alan Garside wrote:
>Anyone paid for access to the Grob web site for SB information. I
>December
> they introduced the charge but now have had to make it free as they are
> required to make the information available to A/C owners. But guess
what,
> they don't want to refund those who have paid as it gives access to FM'
>&
> MM's even though there was no option just for SB's. Greedy or what!!
>
>
Are you referring to SBs for pure gliders (G102, G103, G104) or motor
gliders (G109, G115, G120)? There are two completely separate support
organisations involved! Gliders have been supported by ltb-lindner since

2010, the motor gliders by the latest manifestation of Grob now called Grob

Aircraft SE. Two companies, two attitudes towards their customers.

It's motor gliders and I agree two completely different attitudes.


At 16:22 18 January 2019, James Thomson wrote:
>At 17:03 17 January 2019, Alan Garside wrote:
>>Anyone paid for access to the Grob web site for SB information. I
>>December
>> they introduced the charge but now have had to make it free as
they are
>> required to make the information available to A/C owners. But
guess
>what,
>> they don't want to refund those who have paid as it gives access
to FM'
>>&
>> MM's even though there was no option just for SB's. Greedy or
what!!
>>
>>
>Are you referring to SBs for pure gliders (G102, G103, G104) or
motor
>gliders (G109, G115, G120)? There are two completely separate
support
>organisations involved! Gliders have been supported by ltb-
lindner sinc
>
>2010, the motor gliders by the latest manifestation of Grob now
called Gro
>
>Aircraft SE. Two companies, two attitudes towards their
customers.
>
>

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>
>
> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c mounting
> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
>
> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the early Libelle
> 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
>
>

Completely different animals. A number of owners have investigated this, and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely different as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.

Several operators I know of have pinned the gear in the down and locked position. We'd all love to reshape the rear seatpan, but it's integral to the structure and would require an engineered solution.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:20:33 -0800, Papa3 wrote:

> On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>
>>
>> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c mounting
>> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
>>
>> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the early
>> Libelle 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
>>
>>
>>
> Completely different animals. A number of owners have investigated
> this, and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely
> different as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.
>
Fair enough. I've flown both Twin Astir and Acro IIs, so it seemed
possible that replacing the folding undercarriage with a fixed one on the
same attachment points would have been an easy job, and cheapish too,
since it could reuse tested structure in an, apparently, very similar
airframe.

I should have looked at Martin Simon's book "Sailplanes 1965-200" before
opening my trap: it describes a complex lay-flat retract system which
almost certainly could not have been easily replaced with fixed gear.
(Takes foot back out of mouth).


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:14:55 PM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:20:33 -0800, Papa3 wrote:
>
> > On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c mounting
> >> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
> >>
> >> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the early
> >> Libelle 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Completely different animals. A number of owners have investigated
> > this, and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely
> > different as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.
> >
> Fair enough. I've flown both Twin Astir and Acro IIs, so it seemed
> possible that replacing the folding undercarriage with a fixed one on the
> same attachment points would have been an easy job, and cheapish too,
> since it could reuse tested structure in an, apparently, very similar
> airframe.
>
> I should have looked at Martin Simon's book "Sailplanes 1965-200" before
> opening my trap: it describes a complex lay-flat retract system which
> almost certainly could not have been easily replaced with fixed gear.
> (Takes foot back out of mouth).
>
>
> --
> Martin | martin at
> Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Actually, LTB-Lindner has very nice, dimensioned, 3 view drawings on the website. You can see for example that the width of the fuselage is slightly different, the depth is different, etc.

Very impressed by the support from LTB Lindner by the way; they have been responsive and very helpful.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 14:05:21 -0800, Papa3 wrote:

> Actually, LTB-Lindner has very nice, dimensioned, 3 view drawings on the
> website. You can see for example that the width of the fuselage is
> slightly different, the depth is different, etc.
>
Yes, Martin Symons describes that too, but you can't see it because the
only 3-view drawing is for the G.103 Twin II.

FWIW my first XC experience was in the club's G.103 in a regionals, with
Mike Young flying. He won the day and I learned a lot from that ride.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

At 20:20 18 January 2019, Papa3 wrote:
>On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie
wrote:
>>
>>
>> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c
mounting
>> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
>>
>> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the
early Libelle
>
>> 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
>>
>>
>
>Completely different animals. A number of owners have
investigated this,
>and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely
different
>as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.
>
>Several operators I know of have pinned the gear in the down and
locked
>position. We'd all love to reshape the rear seatpan, but it's
integral
>to the structure and would require an engineered solution.
>
We have 2 Twin Astir 1 Trainers with factory sprung fixed gear with
a disc brake. The rear seat stays the same. I think the wheel
location is a couple of inches forward of the one in the RG Twin 1's
because the tail is heavier to lift. I don't think that even if Lindner
has the spare Trainer gear parts, that they want to provide a retrofit
kit to convert a regular Twin into a Trainer.

RO

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:15:16 PM UTC-8, Michael Opitz wrote:
> At 20:20 18 January 2019, Papa3 wrote:
> >On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin Gregorie
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed u/c
> mounting
> >> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
> >>
> >> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the
> early Libelle
> >
> >> 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Completely different animals. A number of owners have
> investigated this,
> >and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely
> different
> >as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.
> >
> >Several operators I know of have pinned the gear in the down and
> locked
> >position. We'd all love to reshape the rear seatpan, but it's
> integral
> >to the structure and would require an engineered solution.
> >
> We have 2 Twin Astir 1 Trainers with factory sprung fixed gear with
> a disc brake. The rear seat stays the same. I think the wheel
> location is a couple of inches forward of the one in the RG Twin 1's
> because the tail is heavier to lift. I don't think that even if Lindner
> has the spare Trainer gear parts, that they want to provide a retrofit
> kit to convert a regular Twin into a Trainer.
>
> RO

There is a Twin Astir here that is modified so the gear does not retract. The gear handle only operates the gear warning. I may see the owner on Monday.
Jim

At 08:22 19 January 2019, JS wrote:
>On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:15:16 PM UTC-8, Michael Opitz
wrote:
>> At 20:20 18 January 2019, Papa3 wrote:
>> >On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 6:02:45 AM UTC-5, Martin
Gregorie
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> How much, if anything is there in common between the fixed
u/c
>> mounting
>> >> structure in a Twin Astir and an Acro II?
>> >>
>> >> Just a thought inspired by the apparent ease with which the
>> early Libelle
>> >
>> >> 201s could be converted from fixed to retractable u/c.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >Completely different animals. A number of owners have
>> investigated this,
>> >and it's not a simple issue at all. The structure is completely
>> different
>> >as well as the mechanicals of the wheel, mounts, etc.
>> >
>> >Several operators I know of have pinned the gear in the down
and
>> locked
>> >position. We'd all love to reshape the rear seatpan, but it's
>> integral
>> >to the structure and would require an engineered solution.
>> >
>> We have 2 Twin Astir 1 Trainers with factory sprung fixed gear
with
>> a disc brake. The rear seat stays the same. I think the wheel
>> location is a couple of inches forward of the one in the RG Twin
1's
>> because the tail is heavier to lift. I don't think that even if
Lindner
>> has the spare Trainer gear parts, that they want to provide a
retrofit
>> kit to convert a regular Twin into a Trainer.
>>
>> RO
>
>There is a Twin Astir here that is modified so the gear does not
retract.
>The gear handle only operates the gear warning. I may see the
owner on
>Monday.
>Jim
>

I know there are regular retractable gear Twin 1's that have been
modified so the gear can't retract, but for USA purposes, those
modifications are not approved within the TCDS, so can one make
a mod like that with just a 337 form and still keep a USA Standard
Airworthiness? Lindner has no interest in approving such a mod. If
there are broken or bent parts in the mechanism, they will sell you
the replacement parts so that it can be brought back to original
specs.

RO