View Single Post
  #22  
Old August 27th 04, 11:23 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Eric Greenwell wrote:

They do the job they were designed for admirably IMHO.


I agree, but the job requirements have changed in the 40 years since
they were designed. It is not a criticism of the Schwiezers to say their
40 year old design is no longer the best choice!


I'm pretty happy with the setup at our club. The 'el cheapo
2-33s get students to solo fast. Then the 1-26 adds some variety.
Then the L-13 Blanik shows them spins and some complexity
(since we can train gear and some flap procedures).

At that point they are ready for a checkride, and additionally,
they are ready for no-flap, retract, no ballast glass.
The Blanik gave them spins and tailwheel landings
and procedures, and the 1-26 gave them light controls and PIO,
and the 2-33s got them through the basics.

The benefit of 7 seats for same capital investment and maint
cost as a Grob 103 cannot be overlooked. The extra 5 seats
come in handy on those boomer days when everyone is there
and rides are going.

The flipside is the need for yet another glider, a post-license
glass solo with better L/D than the Blanik, a trailer, and
simple disassembly.

So we had a PW-5 for a while. This was a great transition
ship, and really bridged a gap between 1-26/L-13 and
Something like a PIK or HP.

Some other folks bought Russias, 1-34, etc. and seem to think
the L-13/1-26/2-33 combo was good prep.

In any case, I really like the low cost, high value variety
I have found in the myriad of lower performing gliders.
I've really enjoyed having the 2-33 to get students to solo
very fast, but yes, I agree it is an incomplete transition
ship. But at the low price, it is easy to have a variety of
other tools, and so this hasn't been a limitation for me.
--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA