Being simplistic, a difference in handicap between
1.5 and 1.14 means that for the same handicapped distance
the 2-32 does not need to fly nearly as far as the
Grob [assuming minimum time is met]. So the chance
of making it home would seem to be higher, no ?

But again, allowing for the old wings and the maker's
optimism [factors which surely apply also to the Grob
and the SF-25], is the 2-32 handicap reasonably representative
of actual relative performance ? And are there any
other models which seem at first glance excessively
high or excessively low ?

Ian





At 00:42 29 December 2005, Btiz wrote:
I don't see how you can compute a 'handicap' into 'landout'
32L/d in the 2-32 at 65mph? and the 36L/d in the G103
at 55knt?

I would think that means the 2-32 has a higher sink
rate in fpm.. but I'd
have to go dig out some POHs to know for sure.

BT

'Ian Cant' wrote in message
...
..and a G103 is handicapped at 1.14. 'IF' it became
time to derig the larger crew might be helpful, but
with that kind of handicap in any contest, the 2-32
can fly much more conservatively and get home while
the poor Grob is picking its landout field.

Seriously, is the handicap for the 2-32 real or just
a typo somewhere ?

Ian





At 17:18 28 December 2005, wrote:
Well, the nice thing about going XC in a 2-32 is that
you could take
your crew (both of them, even!) with you. And they
would definitely be
needed when it became time to derig...

In my experience they seem about equal to a G-103,
perhaps a bit weaker
in climb but better on the run. Definitely a strong
weather ship.

Otherwise, nice flying ship, if a bit heavy. And hard
to find - as
they are in great demand at commercial operations in
the US.

Great spin trainers, by the way!