A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sikorsky To Acquire Schweizer Aircraft



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #15  
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
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NTSB: USAF included? Larry Dighera Piloting 10 September 11th 05 10:33 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 June 2nd 04 07:17 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 May 1st 04 07:29 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 April 5th 04 03:04 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 July 4th 03 04:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.