Personally, the type of glider I trained in didn't matter so much. The
Super Blanik was fine, in fact I liked the fact that it seemed so
substantial. IMHO, pre-solo instruction involves so much altitude
losing maneuvers (stalls and slips, plus poorly coordinated turns) that
any ship you fly will be an underperformer. The only other ship I've
flown in is a G103, and it wasn't really that "pretty" either. I would
think that most glider operations will not put their new, shiny ships
out there to be kicked around by some ham-handed student (like me)
doing everything possible to make their aircraft fall out of the sky.

As far as the folks, the operators and instructors at my place have
been super. Very supportive and accomodating. A lot of the folks that
hang around are friendly too, some more than others but you could say
that about any group of people.

As an initial impression, it seems as though soaring as a recreational
activity hasn't done a very good job of selling itself. Also, at least
here locally, airspace restrictions are a big issue with getting people
interested. The people that would probably like soaring best (young,
adventurous, eco-friendly) probably mostly live in urban areas that are
not conducive to flying a glider.

On Nov 16, 4:03 pm, T o d d P a t t i s t
wrote:
"nate_fl" wrote:
I'm a newbie here, and this is my first post, so please be patient.As a self proclaimed "newbie," do you mind a few questions?

How important do you consider the performance/appearance of
the glider you train in? Is the Super Blanik a negative,
given fiberglass trainers? Would an older Blanik L-13 or
even a 2-33 have been a big negative? Would you have paid
more for better equipment?

How did the people at the glider field treat you the first
few times? Did you think they were snobbish and elitist or
inclusive and friendly?
--
T o d d P a t t i s t - "WH" Ventus C
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)