ASH 26E VS DG 808C

"Gary Evans" wrote in message
...


A couple of DG800 advantages that bumper overlooked.

1) An engine that doesn't cost $17000 to replace.
2) An engine that can be worked on with out having
to remove it from the fuselage. While this may not
seem like something you will ever have to do you'll
want to keep a couple of big friends around for spark
plugs changes. I believe there were at least three
engines pulled for one problem or another at this years
ASA Parowan camp. They also had their own cart to haul
the engines around for repairs but I'm not sure if
thats a standard 26 option.
3) A superior engine management system (DEI) with manual
back up.

IMO the engine related issues sum up the big difference
between these two ships as performance both in glide
and under power are way similar. The 26 has a smoother
engine and the 800 has one, which is easier and cheaper
to maintain. They are both state of the art ships and
you won't be sorry for buying either.
DG has done a pretty fair comparison between the 26/800/Ventus
2cM that can be viewed here -
http://tinyurl.com/yz4shs



Gary,



I agree that performance wise they're essentially equal. On your other
points:



1) The 17K figure may seem a lot, however, the need to completely replace
one of these engines is quite rare. Replacing the Wankel's major engine
parts costs around $8K Euro. Those few cases were this was necessary were
most likely due to oil starvation and a Chernobyl type melt down. You do
need to keep oil in the tank and pay attention to engine temperatures.



Otherwise the Wankel, besides having small size which allows a narrow
fuselage, has excellent power density and vibration free smoothness. The
Wankel is also remarkably reliable and trouble free. The lack of vibration
means that stuff doesn't crack, break or fall off the motor and things
nearby - - a major positive attribute as compared to most 2-strokes.





I heard that two of the 26E engines pulled at Parowan where to replace
broken drive belts. This is an unusual occurrence, as the Wankel, with it's
multiple smaller power pulses per revolution, is gentle to the drive train
as compared to a 2-stroke. There was talk of a change in formulation used in
manufacturing the Gates Poly-Chain drive belts. AFAIK, the reason for this
breakage hasn't been 100% resolved/confirmed. I do know that some owners
have 150 hours and more with no drive belt issues. For the whole 26E fleet,
I'm aware of only the Parowan failures and one prior failure caused by a
bearing failure in one of the guide pulleys. Belt failures have occurred on
the 2-stroke powered ships as well, a backfire on start up will do the deed.



2) Yup, on my 26E the engine must be pulled to change plugs. There is a
factory mod that provides an access hole to allow plug service without
pulling the engine. It's retrofitable to my ship, but since I've never had
to service the plugs, I don't plan on adding this mod. Besides, the engine
package is easy enough to remove and can be done solo in about an hour
(maybe half that with good help). Remove 3 bolts, 3 wiring cable plugs, a
couple of Bowden cable connections (throttle and prop stop) and a fuel line.
A "cherry picker" engine hoist is needed if removing the engine solo. I've
only done this once in the 4 years and 23 engine hours I've had the ship,
but plan on doing it for the next annual just to look at things.



3) When shopping, I considered DG's DEI engine control a plus, but after
using the simple ILEC engine control, as used on the 26E and many other
self-launch gliders, I'm not so sure. To put away the prop on the 26E:



a- turn off ignition

b- when prop stops, engage manual prop-stop lever (this swings a rubber
stopper into the prop arc) and nose over slightly to windmill prop into stop
as viewed in rear view mirror.

c- push pylon switch down until prop just disappears from view in mirror
(this is the cool down position), at thermalling speeds, the additional drag
caused by the partially extended prop/radiator is minimal and still allows
reasonable climb performance.

d- In my ship, the cool down period takes 3 - 4 minutes. After observing a 2
C drop in engine coolant temp, push switch to retract prop fully.



Simple, reliable, almost no maintenance required . . . even a cave man
could do it. A DEI? Kind of like the automatic parking option on the new
Lexus - - why bother? (g)



I agree the most prominent mechanical difference between these two ships is
the power train. I do not agree that the DG's 2-stroke engine is easier and
cheaper to maintain. Given, replacing a 2-stroke engine is much less
expensive than replacing the Wankel. However, this needs to be tempered by
the fact that the Wankel will hardly need replacement if operated with
reasonable care and its on-going maintenance is usually less expensive.



After talking to Tom and Billy Stowers (High Country Soaring, and who have
worked on all manner of these ships), my impression is that the 2-stroke
maintenance issues they experience is an order of magnitude greater with
2-strokes than on the Wankel powered ships. This is also borne out by a
check of the relevant AD's. The ASH26E has but two airworthiness directives
(rotor cooling fan and muffler), both early-on teething problems that were
resolved years ago.



The many more subtle differences between the two ships are perhaps more
subjective. I talked with Larry Mansberger about the "beneath the skin"
differences between DG and Schleicher as I was not in a position to take a
chain saw and see for myself. Keeping in mind that this was several years
ago and the wing sections I saw were made prior to current DG factory
ownership, the innards of the Schleicher wing looked to be assembled with
the same care and attention to detail as the outer parts the customer
normally sees - - not so inside the DG wing.



Many of the DG's at Minden have gel-coat surface cracks on the wings,
commonly around the spoiler boxes. I haven't seen this on Schleichers,
though some earlier 26E's did show the wing spar profile after several
years - - later versions, my 2002 model included, have not done this - so
far. Subjectively, the 26E cockpit finish is nicer and ergonomics, even for
taller pilots, is excellent. The DG's pigeon-toed rudder pedals, when I was
trying it on, gave me foot cramps.



I've asked several DG800 series owners, on the Minden ramp, why they chose
the DG-800 series over the ASH26E. At the time, purchase cost was
essentially the same for either ship and probably is still close. By a large
margin the answer was availability, the delivery wait for the 26E then being
two years, more than double that for the DG at the time. For one DG owner,
the 800's two piece wing was a deciding factor (the 26E's one piece wing
means the trailer must be longer, at about 35").



All that said, owners of both these ships seem happy with their decisions,
and that's what really counts. My strong bias in favor of the ASH26E may
well be indicative of a underlying personality flaw (g), I have little
tolerance for things mechanical that could have, or should have, been done
better.





bumper

In the Antares 20E, to extend and start the motor:

Push the power control forward.
10 seconds later you're under power.
THATS ALL.

To retract the motor:

Pop up the little mirror
Pull the power control back.
For your entertainment, watch the prop step to vertical and
disappear.
Put away the little mirror.
15 seconds later you're clean.

No cool-down cycle.
No prop-stop fiddling.
No multiple controls to operate.
No priming fiddling or "automatic" primer flooding.
No fussing with throttle setting to start.
No fuel valve.
No ignition switch to forget (laugh, but many times per year this
happens).
No starter button.
No engine master switch.
No extension/retraction controls.
No backfires.
No belt to break or adjust.
No manual pnuematic input switching.
No fun at all, eh ?

See ya, Dave
http://www.nadler.com

PS: You can leave the little mirror out if that's still too complicated
!

PPS: OK, its true, you do have to turn it on before you go flying.

wrote:
In the Antares 20E, to extend and start the motor:

Push the power control forward.
10 seconds later you're under power.
THATS ALL.

To retract the motor:

Pop up the little mirror
Pull the power control back.
For your entertainment, watch the prop step to vertical and
disappear.
Put away the little mirror.
15 seconds later you're clean.

No cool-down cycle.
No prop-stop fiddling.
No multiple controls to operate.
No priming fiddling or "automatic" primer flooding.
No fussing with throttle setting to start.
No fuel valve.
No ignition switch to forget (laugh, but many times per year this
happens).
No starter button.
No engine master switch.
No extension/retraction controls.
No backfires.
No belt to break or adjust.
No manual pnuematic input switching.
No fun at all, eh ?

See ya, Dave
http://www.nadler.com

PS: You can leave the little mirror out if that's still too complicated
!

PPS: OK, its true, you do have to turn it on before you go flying.

PS: It was pointed out that I forgot:

NO GASOLINE AND NO GASOLINE FUMES !

See ya, Dave

Bumper wrote :

Simple, reliable, almost no maintenance required . . . even a cave man
could do it. A DEI? Kind of like the automatic parking option on the
new
Lexus - - why bother? (g)

I was going to put down a list of what the DEI manges but it is easier
to post this link :-) http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/dei-nt-e.html

Its not even worth comparing it to the Ilec. A one switch on and go.
Its software can also be upgraded when updates are available.

Paul

P.S Just arrived back with a brand new DG 808 cc for a customer.
Nice!!!!!

One of my original questions was since both these designs are over 12
years old (normal life span for a design) what changes would you like
to see in future designs? And when do you expect a new self launch
motor glider design to come on the market?


On Oct 28, 11:11 am, "bumper" wrote:
"Gary Evans" wrote in ...



A couple of DG800 advantages that bumper overlooked.

1) An engine that doesn't cost $17000 to replace.
2) An engine that can be worked on with out having
to remove it from the fuselage. While this may not
seem like something you will ever have to do you'll
want to keep a couple of big friends around for spark
plugs changes. I believe there were at least three
engines pulled for one problem or another at this years
ASA Parowan camp. They also had their own cart to haul
the engines around for repairs but I'm not sure if
thats a standard 26 option.
3) A superior engine management system (DEI) with manual
back up.

IMO the engine related issues sum up the big difference
between these two ships as performance both in glide
and under power are way similar. The 26 has a smoother
engine and the 800 has one, which is easier and cheaper
to maintain. They are both state of the art ships and
you won't be sorry for buying either.
DG has done a pretty fair comparison between the 26/800/Ventus
2cM that can be viewed here -
http://tinyurl.com/yz4shsGary,

I agree that performance wise they're essentially equal. On your other
points:

1) The 17K figure may seem a lot, however, the need to completely replace
one of these engines is quite rare. Replacing the Wankel's major engine
parts costs around $8K Euro. Those few cases were this was necessary were
most likely due to oil starvation and a Chernobyl type melt down. You do
need to keep oil in the tank and pay attention to engine temperatures.

Otherwise the Wankel, besides having small size which allows a narrow
fuselage, has excellent power density and vibration free smoothness. The
Wankel is also remarkably reliable and trouble free. The lack of vibration
means that stuff doesn't crack, break or fall off the motor and things
nearby - - a major positive attribute as compared to most 2-strokes.

I heard that two of the 26E engines pulled at Parowan where to replace
broken drive belts. This is an unusual occurrence, as the Wankel, with it's
multiple smaller power pulses per revolution, is gentle to the drive train
as compared to a 2-stroke. There was talk of a change in formulation used in
manufacturing the Gates Poly-Chain drive belts. AFAIK, the reason for this
breakage hasn't been 100% resolved/confirmed. I do know that some owners
have 150 hours and more with no drive belt issues. For the whole 26E fleet,
I'm aware of only the Parowan failures and one prior failure caused by a
bearing failure in one of the guide pulleys. Belt failures have occurred on
the 2-stroke powered ships as well, a backfire on start up will do the deed.

2) Yup, on my 26E the engine must be pulled to change plugs. There is a
factory mod that provides an access hole to allow plug service without
pulling the engine. It's retrofitable to my ship, but since I've never had
to service the plugs, I don't plan on adding this mod. Besides, the engine
package is easy enough to remove and can be done solo in about an hour
(maybe half that with good help). Remove 3 bolts, 3 wiring cable plugs, a
couple of Bowden cable connections (throttle and prop stop) and a fuel line.
A "cherry picker" engine hoist is needed if removing the engine solo. I've
only done this once in the 4 years and 23 engine hours I've had the ship,
but plan on doing it for the next annual just to look at things.

3) When shopping, I considered DG's DEI engine control a plus, but after
using the simple ILEC engine control, as used on the 26E and many other
self-launch gliders, I'm not so sure. To put away the prop on the 26E:

a- turn off ignition

b- when prop stops, engage manual prop-stop lever (this swings a rubber
stopper into the prop arc) and nose over slightly to windmill prop into stop
as viewed in rear view mirror.

c- push pylon switch down until prop just disappears from view in mirror
(this is the cool down position), at thermalling speeds, the additional drag
caused by the partially extended prop/radiator is minimal and still allows
reasonable climb performance.

d- In my ship, the cool down period takes 3 - 4 minutes. After observing a 2
C drop in engine coolant temp, push switch to retract prop fully.

Simple, reliable, almost no maintenance required . . . even a cave man
could do it. A DEI? Kind of like the automatic parking option on the new
Lexus - - why bother? (g)

I agree the most prominent mechanical difference between these two ships is
the power train. I do not agree that the DG's 2-stroke engine is easier and
cheaper to maintain. Given, replacing a 2-stroke engine is much less
expensive than replacing the Wankel. However, this needs to be tempered by
the fact that the Wankel will hardly need replacement if operated with
reasonable care and its on-going maintenance is usually less expensive.

After talking to Tom and Billy Stowers (High Country Soaring, and who have
worked on all manner of these ships), my impression is that the 2-stroke
maintenance issues they experience is an order of magnitude greater with
2-strokes than on the Wankel powered ships. This is also borne out by a
check of the relevant AD's. The ASH26E has but two airworthiness directives
(rotor cooling fan and muffler), both early-on teething problems that were
resolved years ago.

The many more subtle differences between the two ships are perhaps more
subjective. I talked with Larry Mansberger about the "beneath the skin"
differences between DG and Schleicher as I was not in a position to take a
chain saw and see for myself. Keeping in mind that this was several years
ago and the wing sections I saw were made prior to current DG factory
ownership, the innards of the Schleicher wing looked to be assembled with
the same care and attention to detail as the outer parts the customer
normally sees - - not so inside the DG wing.

Many of the DG's at Minden have gel-coat surface cracks on the wings,
commonly around the spoiler boxes. I haven't seen this on Schleichers,
though some earlier 26E's did show the wing spar profile after several
years - - later versions, my 2002 model included, have not done this - so
far. Subjectively, the 26E cockpit finish is nicer and ergonomics, even for
taller pilots, is excellent. The DG's pigeon-toed rudder pedals, when I was
trying it on, gave me foot cramps.

I've asked several DG800 series owners, on the Minden ramp, why they chose
the DG-800 series over the ASH26E. At the time, purchase cost was
essentially the same for either ship and probably is still close. By a large
margin the answer was availability, the delivery wait for the 26E then being
two years, more than double that for the DG at the time. For one DG owner,
the 800's two piece wing was a deciding factor (the 26E's one piece wing
means the trailer must be longer, at about 35").

All that said, owners of both these ships seem happy with their decisions,
and that's what really counts. My strong bias in favor of the ASH26E may
well be indicative of a underlying personality flaw (g), I have little
tolerance for things mechanical that could have, or should have, been done
better.

bumper

wrote:
One of my original questions was since both these designs are over 12
years old (normal life span for a design) what changes would you like
to see in future designs? And when do you expect a new self launch
motor glider design to come on the market?

Since the manufacturers haven't seen fit to include me in their plans, I
can speak with the confidence brought by a near total lack of knowledge
of future products. We already have good choices for IC (internal
combustion) engine powered gliders, and fairly good choices for electric
motor powered gliders. The only change in the slow evolution of
motorgliders that I see is the use of a jet engine. So, call up each
dealer/factory in turn, and ask "when can I buy a jet powered
self-launcher"? They might tell you, or at least hint a bit.

If you want to extend your range of choices in IC powered gliders, call
up Windward Performance and ask them when their self-launching
SparrowHawk will be available. They delivered one to Mississippi
University for the UAV program, and now plan to build another, with a
purpose unknown to me.

Until we have a powerplant with a much better (power+duration)/weight
ratio, I just don't think we'll see much difference in what we have now.
It's what limits the wing loading range at both ends: the high end by
the need to carry so much weight in the fuselage; the low end by the
need to carry so much weight.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/ash-dg-ventus-e.html

Subject: ASH 26E VS DG 808C
Author: Gary Evans mailto:Gary Evans
=20
Date/Time: 13:50 23 October 2006
http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/ash-dg-ventus-e.htmlDG has done a pretty
fair comparison between the 26/800/Ventus
2cM that can be viewed here -=20
http://tinyurl.com/yz4shs

At 19:12 28 October 2006, Bumper wrote:
'Gary Evans' wrote in message
...


A couple of DG800 advantages that bumper overlooked.

1) An engine that doesn't cost $17000 to replace.
2) An engine that can be worked on with out having
to remove it from the fuselage. While this may not
seem like something you will ever have to do you'll
want to keep a couple of big friends around for spark
plugs changes. I believe there were at least three
engines pulled for one problem or another at this
years
ASA Parowan camp. They also had their own cart to
haul
the engines around for repairs but I'm not sure if
thats a standard 26 option.
3) A superior engine management system (DEI) with
manual
back up.

IMO the engine related issues sum up the big difference
between these two ships as performance both in glide
and under power are way similar. The 26 has a smoother
engine and the 800 has one, which is easier and cheaper
to maintain. They are both state of the art ships
and
you won't be sorry for buying either.
DG has done a pretty fair comparison between the 26/800/Ventus
2cM that can be viewed here -
http://tinyurl.com/yz4shs



Gary,



I agree that performance wise they're essentially equal.
On your other
points:



1) The 17K figure may seem a lot, however, the need
to completely replace
one of these engines is quite rare. Replacing the Wankel's
major engine
parts costs around $8K Euro. Those few cases were
this was necessary were
most likely due to oil starvation and a Chernobyl type
melt down. You do
need to keep oil in the tank and pay attention to engine
temperatures.



Otherwise the Wankel, besides having small size which
allows a narrow
fuselage, has excellent power density and vibration
free smoothness. The
Wankel is also remarkably reliable and trouble free.
The lack of vibration
means that stuff doesn't crack, break or fall off the
motor and things
nearby - - a major positive attribute as compared to
most 2-strokes.





I heard that two of the 26E engines pulled at Parowan
where to replace
broken drive belts. This is an unusual occurrence,
as the Wankel, with it's
multiple smaller power pulses per revolution, is gentle
to the drive train
as compared to a 2-stroke. There was talk of a change
in formulation used in
manufacturing the Gates Poly-Chain drive belts. AFAIK,
the reason for this
breakage hasn't been 100% resolved/confirmed. I do
know that some owners
have 150 hours and more with no drive belt issues.
For the whole 26E fleet,
I'm aware of only the Parowan failures and one prior
failure caused by a
bearing failure in one of the guide pulleys. Belt failures
have occurred on
the 2-stroke powered ships as well, a backfire on start
up will do the deed.



2) Yup, on my 26E the engine must be pulled to change
plugs. There is a
factory mod that provides an access hole to allow plug
service without
pulling the engine. It's retrofitable to my ship, but
since I've never had
to service the plugs, I don't plan on adding this mod.
Besides, the engine
package is easy enough to remove and can be done solo
in about an hour
(maybe half that with good help). Remove 3 bolts, 3
wiring cable plugs, a
couple of Bowden cable connections (throttle and prop
stop) and a fuel line.
A 'cherry picker' engine hoist is needed if removing
the engine solo. I've
only done this once in the 4 years and 23 engine hours
I've had the ship,
but plan on doing it for the next annual just to look
at things.



3) When shopping, I considered DG's DEI engine control
a plus, but after
using the simple ILEC engine control, as used on the
26E and many other
self-launch gliders, I'm not so sure. To put away the
prop on the 26E:



a- turn off ignition

b- when prop stops, engage manual prop-stop lever (this
swings a rubber
stopper into the prop arc) and nose over slightly to
windmill prop into stop
as viewed in rear view mirror.

c- push pylon switch down until prop just disappears
from view in mirror
(this is the cool down position), at thermalling speeds,
the additional drag
caused by the partially extended prop/radiator is minimal
and still allows
reasonable climb performance.

d- In my ship, the cool down period takes 3 - 4 minutes.
After observing a 2
C drop in engine coolant temp, push switch to retract
prop fully.



Simple, reliable, almost no maintenance required .
. . even a cave man
could do it. A DEI? Kind of like the automatic parking
option on the new
Lexus - - why bother? (g)



I agree the most prominent mechanical difference between
these two ships is
the power train. I do not agree that the DG's 2-stroke
engine is easier and
cheaper to maintain. Given, replacing a 2-stroke engine
is much less
expensive than replacing the Wankel. However, this
needs to be tempered by
the fact that the Wankel will hardly need replacement
if operated with
reasonable care and its on-going maintenance is usually
less expensive.



After talking to Tom and Billy Stowers (High Country
Soaring, and who have
worked on all manner of these ships), my impression
is that the 2-stroke
maintenance issues they experience is an order of magnitude
greater with
2-strokes than on the Wankel powered ships. This is
also borne out by a
check of the relevant AD's. The ASH26E has but two
airworthiness directives
(rotor cooling fan and muffler), both early-on teething
problems that were
resolved years ago.



The many more subtle differences between the two ships
are perhaps more
subjective. I talked with Larry Mansberger about the
'beneath the skin'
differences between DG and Schleicher as I was not
in a position to take a
chain saw and see for myself. Keeping in mind that
this was several years
ago and the wing sections I saw were made prior to
current DG factory
ownership, the innards of the Schleicher wing looked
to be assembled with
the same care and attention to detail as the outer
parts the customer
normally sees - - not so inside the DG wing.



Many of the DG's at Minden have gel-coat surface cracks
on the wings,
commonly around the spoiler boxes. I haven't seen this
on Schleichers,
though some earlier 26E's did show the wing spar profile
after several
years - - later versions, my 2002 model included, have
not done this - so
far. Subjectively, the 26E cockpit finish is nicer
and ergonomics, even for
taller pilots, is excellent. The DG's pigeon-toed
rudder pedals, when I was
trying it on, gave me foot cramps.



I've asked several DG800 series owners, on the Minden
ramp, why they chose
the DG-800 series over the ASH26E. At the time, purchase
cost was
essentially the same for either ship and probably is
still close. By a large
margin the answer was availability, the delivery wait
for the 26E then being
two years, more than double that for the DG at the
time. For one DG owner,
the 800's two piece wing was a deciding factor (the
26E's one piece wing
means the trailer must be longer, at about 35').



All that said, owners of both these ships seem happy
with their decisions,
and that's what really counts. My strong bias in favor
of the ASH26E may
well be indicative of a underlying personality flaw
(g), I have little
tolerance for things mechanical that could have, or
should have, been done
better.





bumper




While the major 26 engine parts may cost $8k Euro a
replacement engine can cost $17k US as one unhappy
owner found out the hard way. I sure hope it isn't
a common problem, because that would bankrupt a lot
of people. I understand that a belt break which stops
the water pump results in almost instant over heating
which can fry the engine resulting in one of those
big bills but as long as you constantly watch the temp
gauge and keep one hand on the off switch that shouldn't
be a big issue. When two belts break at the same meet
however I would no longer call it an unusual occurrence.

Interesting that DG's engine management system which
automated the process beyond the 26 would be viewed
as unnecessary like the parking option on the new
Lexus. I guess that means that all development should
have just stopped with the 26. Hmmm!

Quote bumper ' My strong bias in favor of the ASH26E
may well be indicative of a underlying personality
flaw (g), I have little tolerance for things mechanical
that could have, or should have, been done better.'

I know for a fact that you have this flaw so it must
have been especially painful when you realized there
were so many areas for improvement in your 26. I'm
sure Kemp was exaggerating when he said you've made
1000 changes but exactly how many changes have you
made?


Ps. As I said before IMO both of these ships are good
choices but both have advantages and disadvantages.
Were that not the case one of these two manufactures
would have been out of business by now. You can measure
how well DG is doing by the sales volume and innovations.
I assume Schleicher is doing as well. You pay your
money and take your choice. I do suggest interested
buyers research beyond owners opinions as they (we)
tend to be a tad biased as you may have noticed.

Gary Evans wrote:

[discussing the cost of a total engine replacement]
While the major 26 engine parts may cost $8k Euro a
replacement engine can cost $17k US as one unhappy
owner found out the hard way. I sure hope it isn't
a common problem, because that would bankrupt a lot
of people.

A replacement Solo engine costs about $8K, according to the DG dealer.
If I were looking at buying one of these gliders and wanted to factor in
the potential for a total engine replacement, I'd add $1K to $2K to
price of the ASH 26 E, and use that number in my considerations. I
wouldn't add the whole $9K difference because I think it's unlikely I'd
need to replace engine, but a prospective owner should choose whatever
amount he can be comfortable with.

I understand that a belt break which stops
the water pump results in almost instant over heating
which can fry the engine resulting in one of those
big bills but as long as you constantly watch the temp
gauge and keep one hand on the off switch that shouldn't
be a big issue. When two belts break at the same meet
however I would no longer call it an unusual occurrence.

The belts that broke at the Parowan camp were the propeller drive belts,
not the fan belt (the water pump is driven directly by the engine - no
belt). The drive belts on the 26 E fleet did not break for many years
(for example, mine is 12 years old and has 114 hours on it), but a few
of newest gliders have had this happen. We've been told that Gates, the
belt manufacturer, changed the construction of the belts about three
years ago, and the consequences of that change are now surfacing.

Schleicher tells us they will correct this situation. In the meantime,
pilots are cautioned to use the handbook procedure for starting the
engine, and avoid "pumping" the throttle or the primer when the engine
is running slowly. So far, there haven't been any belts break during an
in-flight restart.

As not all may know, some of the Solo engine systems have also suffered
from propeller drive belts breaking, and Ventus/Nimbus self-launchers
had (perhaps still have) a 20 hour life limit on the belt. I don't know
the exact situation for DG, but they had similar problems. It's my
understanding there are also changes in their starting procedure that
reduce the problem, and some mechanical changes that may/will eliminate
the problem. Gary can inform us on this.

Fortunately, the Solo belt breakage was also always on the ground and
not in the air (to my knowledge).

Interesting that DG's engine management system which
automated the process beyond the 26 would be viewed
as unnecessary like the parking option on the new
Lexus. I guess that means that all development should
have just stopped with the 26. Hmmm!

As a former electrical engineer that used to help automate processes,
I'm all in favor of automation; however, the 26 E system is so simple
and reliable, I've not wanted Schleicher to change it.

Ps. As I said before IMO both of these ships are good
choices but both have advantages and disadvantages.
Were that not the case one of these two manufactures
would have been out of business by now. You can measure
how well DG is doing by the sales volume and innovations.
I assume Schleicher is doing as well. You pay your
money and take your choice. I do suggest interested
buyers research beyond owners opinions as they (we)
tend to be a tad biased as you may have noticed.

A big problem is it's rare for a pilot to have significant time in BOTH
gliders, so he can offer an informed comparison. I urge any prospective
owner that is interested in a particular glider but concerned (or
particularly interested) about some aspect of it to discuss it with the
dealer, and ultimately with factory if the dealer's response isn't
enough. These are low volume manufacturers providing expensive, complex
machines, so you are more like a partner in the operation than just a
customer walking out of Wal-Mart with a toaster under your arm.

I've had these conversations with Schleicher over 20 years of owning
first an ASW 20 and now the ASH 26 E, so I've got a lot of confidence in
the ability and will of the people at Schleicher to provide a good
glider, and to make things right if they go wrong. That's the bias on my
part, because I'm not nearly so familiar with the crew at DG. DG pilots
likely have the opposite experience.

So, talk to the owners, the dealer, the factory, maybe the folks that
repair them, look carefully at the glider (and be sure to sit in it),
and consider that you'll probably be happy with your choice because you
won't know what you missed!

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On Oct 28, 2:12 pm, Gary Evans
wrote:
While the major 26 engine parts may cost $8k Euro a
replacement engine can cost $17k US as one unhappy
owner found out the hard way. I sure hope it isn't
a common problem, because that would bankrupt a lot
of people.

Proper maintenance and adherance to operationg procedures are likely
all that is needed to prevent an engine replacement. Consider the cost
of an annual inspection of a typical airplane with a 150 or so HP
Lycoming or Continental engine. I choose to pull the engine on my '26E
at each annual so we can inspect and clean it with some cleanser and
rags. I also clean out the engine bay. This adds about 4 hours to the
inspection, but it still takes less than a day.

When two belts break at the same meet
however I would no longer call it an unusual occurrence.

Both these ships had less than 10 hours on the belt/engine. As Bumper
said, it appears that Gates "improved" the belt for its typicall
application, but this change somehow made it more "brittle" in the
Schleicher installation. The problem is under investigation, but I
don't know the current state.

Interesting that DG's engine management system which
automated the process beyond the 26 would be viewed
as unnecessary like the parking option on the new
Lexus. I guess that means that all development should
have just stopped with the 26. Hmmm!

I doubt it... My wife and I have manual transmissions on our crew
truck as well as our daily cars, and IMP, the DEI provides about as
much perceived improvement as an automatic transmission would. I also
think that Schleicher would rather not spend time and MONEY making
minor changes that require regulatory approvals. There are a fw simple
things that could be dont to the ILEC controller, but I understand that
even a firmware update to add a new feature is an expensive
proposition.

I know for a fact that you have this flaw so it must
have been especially painful when you realized there
were so many areas for improvement in your 26. I'm
sure Kemp was exaggerating when he said you've made
1000 changes but exactly how many changes have you
made?

From what I've gleaned in various email posts he's made to our owners
mailing list, most of the changes are very minor - which include the
quiet vent, super yawstring, something similar to the Piggott hook,
revolution counter to better keep track of oil consumption, and
improved springs for the steerable tailwheel. He's also rigged a neat
pneumatic switch, and built a special dolly for towing the ship
sideways from his hangar to the runway.

Ps. As I said before IMO both of these ships are good
choices but both have advantages and disadvantages.
Were that not the case one of these two manufactures
would have been out of business by now. You can measure
how well DG is doing by the sales volume and innovations.
I assume Schleicher is doing as well. You pay your
money and take your choice. I do suggest interested
buyers research beyond owners opinions as they (we)
tend to be a tad biased as you may have noticed.

Absolutely!

-Tom