50+:1 15m sailplanes

Earlier, (Kirk Stant) wrote:

...The whole Sparrowhawk thing
scares me to death! When I'm
bashing around at 130 knots,
I want my glider to have a
certain structural authority!...

Kirk, have you ever actually handled one of those things?

Bob K.

(Bob Kuykendall) wrote in message . com...

Kirk, have you ever actually handled one of those things?

No, unfortunately I havn't, so my opinion is worth precisely what you
paid for it! I am obviously making an assumption, and I hope I'm
proven wrong, by the way, as the Sparrowhawk looks like a nice little
glider, but my real concern is triggered by the emphasis on the
"ultralight" aspect, which obviously drives the 155lb (!) weight of
the glider - I can't help but wonder where the weight has been saved.
By the VNE and G limits, it seems to have faily strong wings, so I'm
guessing the fuselage is a real eggshell...

And I truly hope that an "ultralight" Sparrowhawk (i.e. no N number)
never shows up in the hands of an untrained, unlicenced non-pilot,
because I think that is a sure way to kill or injure someone, real
quick!

Has anyone out there actually touched and/or flown a Sparrowhawk? How
about an eyewitness report - I havn't eaten any crow in a while...

Kirk

Kirk Stant wrote:
(Bob Kuykendall) wrote in message
. com...


Kirk, have you ever actually handled one of those things?


No, unfortunately I havn't, so my opinion is worth precisely what you
paid for it! I am obviously making an assumption, and I hope I'm
proven wrong, by the way, as the Sparrowhawk looks like a nice little
glider, but my real concern is triggered by the emphasis on the
"ultralight" aspect, which obviously drives the 155lb (!) weight of
the glider - I can't help but wonder where the weight has been saved.
By the VNE and G limits, it seems to have faily strong wings, so I'm
guessing the fuselage is a real eggshell...

It's light but strong, and the wing spars are fabricated before
installation. The weight isn't saved so much as _avoided_ by using an 11
meter span, a lower Vne (123 knots) than higher wing loading gliders,
fixed gear, no flaps, and pre-preg carbon fiber construction instead of
wet lay-up. There is some weight savings from using a few custom items
like the towhook.


And I truly hope that an "ultralight" Sparrowhawk (i.e. no N number)
never shows up in the hands of an untrained, unlicenced non-pilot,
because I think that is a sure way to kill or injure someone, real
quick!

Has anyone out there actually touched and/or flown a Sparrowhawk?
How about an eyewitness report - I havn't eaten any crow in a
while...

I wrote two articles for Soaring, one on the design and construction
(Jan 2001 - also available on their website), and one on flying it (July
2002). Number 10 is due to be delivered this month, so there are a
number flying, and you are probably aware of Gary Osoba's World records
set with the glider.


--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Kirk,

Where do you fly from? I am trying to make some plans for travelling
with my SparrowHawk over the next few months. I am hoping to show the
SparrowHawk to as many people as want to see it, and hopefully convert
a few "non-believers". I would be very happy to have the opportunity
to show it to you and other people that would be interested in seeing
it. For a few qualified individuals there might even be the
opportunity to fly it.

Until you see it and feel it, I can understand how hard it is for
people to grasp just what kind of accomplishment this glider is. 155
pounds!? Ridiculous! That is if you are not familiar with the
materials. The carbon pre-preg and the adhesives used to bond the
plane together are totally different and more than twice as strong as
what is typically used to build sailplanes. We joke about how we
could take our rudder and use it to chop up every other glider on the
field. This really isn't far from truth. One used as a display
sample by the manufacturer of the pre-preg has been through the
airlines baggage handling system without the benefit of a box. If
anything can survive that....!

Is it possible to break it? Of course. One SparrowHawk did suffer
some damage to its landing gear while landing out last summer, however
the pilot reported that it is one heck of a strong airplane and the
tailboom would likely have broken on any of his other sailplanes.
Mine has been landed out a couple of times and it has flown off of
some fairly rough strips as well as suffering some of my landings.
All it has to show for this are some paint scratches. No dents or
cracks. Structural testing has been done to the wings, vertical tail,
horzontal tail, seat, fuselage and tow hook, as well as the control
system.

As far as performance goes, like one SparrowHawk owner said, on an
average day, flown by average pilots in an average way, it doesn't
really give up anything. Some trade-offs were made to make it a very
easy glider to fly for less experienced pilots (every CFIG who has
flown it has said it would be a good first single seater). Stalls
including fully cross controlled with the stick held full aft through
a number of cycles are a non-event. Control response and harmony is
excellent down to very low speeds making take-off and landing very
easy. So what is the trade-off? Up to about 60 knots, there isn't
really any. Above that, most of the newer 15M gliders do have a
performance advantage. That doesn't mean that the SparrowHawk falls
out of the sky though. At 80 knots it is still getting around 20:1
L. It has flown a 300 km triangle with a 25 knot wind blowing and
averaged 52 mph.

I realise that this is all talk until you actually see it, that is why
I would like to have the opportunity to show the plane to as many
people as possible over the next few months. Anyone who would like to
see it, please let me know.

Best regards,

Doug Taylor

ps. I am not an employee of Windward Performance, although I did help
out on the construction of tooling and the first few SparrowHawks. I
am just trying to help spread the word because I believe this is one
fantastic machine!


(Kirk Stant) wrote in message

No, unfortunately I havn't, so my opinion is worth precisely what you
paid for it! I am obviously making an assumption, and I hope I'm
proven wrong, by the way, as the Sparrowhawk looks like a nice little
glider, but my real concern is triggered by the emphasis on the
"ultralight" aspect, which obviously drives the 155lb (!) weight of
the glider - I can't help but wonder where the weight has been saved.
By the VNE and G limits, it seems to have faily strong wings, so I'm
guessing the fuselage is a real eggshell...

And I truly hope that an "ultralight" Sparrowhawk (i.e. no N number)
never shows up in the hands of an untrained, unlicenced non-pilot,
because I think that is a sure way to kill or injure someone, real
quick!

Has anyone out there actually touched and/or flown a Sparrowhawk? How
about an eyewitness report - I havn't eaten any crow in a while...

Kirk

(Doug Taylor) wrote in message om...
Kirk,

Where do you fly from? I am trying to make some plans for travelling
with my SparrowHawk over the next few months. I am hoping to show the
SparrowHawk to as many people as want to see it, and hopefully convert
a few "non-believers". I would be very happy to have the opportunity
to show it to you and other people that would be interested in seeing
it. For a few qualified individuals there might even be the
opportunity to fly it.

Doug, thanks for the excellent response. I fly out of Turf Soaring,
near Phoenix Arizona - and would love the opportunity to see the
Sparrowhawk in action. I'll admit I'm a bit of a sceptic, but from
the reasoned responses from several of you out there it sounds like it
is a nice little glider.

I just wish the whole "ultralight" aspect would go away - that still
scares me. It may be a pretty moot point - I doubt anyone could show
up in an unregistered glider and get a tow at any glider operation I
know of!

One question: how do you buy a factory-built Sparrowhawk and register
it if it isn't certified yet? Or did I miss something. Just curious.

So come on out to Turf and show your stuff - on any weekend there will
be plenty of glass to keep you company on some XC or racing, and a
nice airconditioned clubhouse with cold beer and chicks waiting after
the flight (see Pez, he got it just about right, if you stay you will
have to race!).

Kirk

Kirk Stant wrote:

I just wish the whole "ultralight" aspect would go away - that still
scares me. It may be a pretty moot point - I doubt anyone could show
up in an unregistered glider and get a tow at any glider operation I
know of!

Don't they tow ultralights at Turf? You know, on the "other" side of the
airport? It doesn't take a 230 hp Pawnee to tow a 400 pound glider,
though it tows behind one just fine.


One question: how do you buy a factory-built Sparrowhawk and register
it if it isn't certified yet? Or did I miss something. Just curious.

It was registered in the Experimetal class, just like your LS-6.


--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Eric Greenwell wrote in message ...
yet? Or did I miss something. Just curious.

It was registered in the Experimetal class, just like your LS-6.

Curious; my LS6 is registered Experimental - Racing, but it is a
certified glider in Europe (JAR?) so I have to comply with all the
normal certified aircraft procedures. For example, I can't do annuals
on it myself.

As I understand it, the Sparrowhawk is not certified anywhere, just
registered Experimental - as in homebuilt experimental, where you can
do all the work yourself on it. I didn't know you could build and
sell aircraft that way - I thought they had to be kit built.

So it really isn't "just like my LS6", as I see it.

Or do I have all this certification stuff wrong? I havn't really read
up on it much.

Again, just curious; if the thing is safe to fly then it's all just
legal bull**** anyway...

I probably cant make it down to Estrella soon, hope it makes it to
Turf soon.

Kirk

Kirk Stant wrote:

Eric Greenwell wrote in message ...

It was registered in the Experimetal class, just like your LS-6.


Curious; my LS6 is registered Experimental - Racing, but it is a
certified glider in Europe (JAR?) so I have to comply with all the
normal certified aircraft procedures.

Actually, you don't: "Experimental" gives you some leeway than
"certified" doesn't.

For example, I can't do annuals
on it myself.

Your glider doesn't get an "annual", but a "condition inspection" since
it is experimental. You and I don't get to do the condition inspections
(my glider is "experimental" also) because we didn't build the aircraft,
like one in the experimental-amatuer built category.


As I understand it, the Sparrowhawk is not certified anywhere, just
registered Experimental - as in homebuilt experimental, where you can
do all the work yourself on it. I didn't know you could build and
sell aircraft that way - I thought they had to be kit built.

So it really isn't "just like my LS6", as I see it.

The Russia AC-4 and AC-5M (for example) aren't certified, either, and
are licensed in the US in the "Experimental" category (racing and
exhibition, I assume). My ASH 26 E wasn't certified anywhere (not US,
not Germany) when I licensed it, either. A year or so later, it did
receive it's US certification, and I can convert to that category if I
wish to do so.


Or do I have all this certification stuff wrong? I havn't really read
up on it much.

It's confusing, all right.

--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Whether an aircraft is certified outside the United States makes no
difference. It doesn't even make any difference if it is certified in
the United States. Anything can be registered as Experimental -
Racing. What one has to comply with are the operating limitations
(usually stapled to the pink special airworthiness certificate or
stuffed in the pocket with it - if you don't have this, you can't fly)
and an annual condition inspection. Since anything with a special
airworthiness certificate is not really airworthy ;o), only an A&P is
required for the condition inspection, not an IA, and my understanding
is that anyone can do other maintenance as long as whatever they do
would not be considered a major alteration. None of the manufacturers
service bulletins, etc. need to be complied with technically (although
it would be a good idea). I suppose the DAR or FAA inspector could
put a paragraph in the limitations requiring that the manufacturers
recommendations must be complied with, but I haven't seen anything
like that.

(Kirk Stant) wrote in message

Curious; my LS6 is registered Experimental - Racing, but it is a
certified glider in Europe (JAR?) so I have to comply with all the
normal certified aircraft procedures. For example, I can't do annuals
on it myself.

As I understand it, the Sparrowhawk is not certified anywhere, just
registered Experimental - as in homebuilt experimental, where you can
do all the work yourself on it. I didn't know you could build and
sell aircraft that way - I thought they had to be kit built.

So it really isn't "just like my LS6", as I see it.

Or do I have all this certification stuff wrong? I havn't really read
up on it much.

Again, just curious; if the thing is safe to fly then it's all just
legal bull**** anyway...

I probably cant make it down to Estrella soon, hope it makes it to
Turf soon.

Kirk

Earlier, (Kirk Stant) wrote:

One question: how do you buy a factory-
built Sparrowhawk and register it if it
isn't certified yet?

As Experimental, Racing or Experimental, Exhibition, just like an ASW-20.

Bob K.