Future Club Training Gliders

Surfer! wrote:

Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the
record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer.


"JS" wrote in message
...
The one redeeming quality of the 2-33 "Dragmaster" is that it laughs
at anything roughly resembling a landing.

However I suspect there could be a substantial amount of retraining
required to fly other more slippery ships...


And hence my main problem with the 2-33. The 2-33 will tolerate
sloppiness and abuse that no other glider will let you get away with.
I prefer to instruct in a glider that handles more like the ship that
the student will transition into. It may take a bit longer, but that's
OK. Retraining takes a long time and the learning "law of primacy"
dictates that when the stuff hits the fan, pilots will revert to what
they learned first.

What else is wrong with the 2-33? An incomplete list would include
- not enough leg room in either seat. I hate turning with
the stick *under* my knee.
- lethargic roll rate.
- Poor visibility from the rear seat - teaching someone to
soar in a gaggle is scary.
- ineffective trim - unless the front seater is heavy, you're
still applying significant forward stick pressure on tow even
with full forward trim.
- ineffective spoilers (but it does slip GREAT!).
- generally poor ergonomics.
- doesn't spin well.

What's good about the 2-33:
- it's cheap
- anybody can repair it
- it's built like a tank. If a student is going to crash, I want
him to be in a 2-33.
- doesn't spin well (yeah, I know).

Sex does sell..... the sport, I mean. :-) Sure many of us would have
started soaring a manhole cover, if that were possible. But for others,
who have an inkling and come to the field to see what it's like, the
2-33 is not a good sales tool.

That said, some people simply prefer the 2-33 and I'm OK with that. For
2 seaters, my club has 3 L23s, 1 Puchacz, and 1 2-33. If a student wants
to fly the 2-33, I'll be in the back seat.

Tony V. "6N"

Tony V wrote:

What else is wrong with the 2-33? An incomplete list would include
- not enough leg room in either seat. *I hate turning with
* *the stick *under* my knee.
- lethargic roll rate.
- Poor visibility from the rear seat - teaching someone to
* *soar in a gaggle is scary.
- ineffective trim - unless the front seater is heavy, you're
* *still applying significant forward stick pressure on tow even
* *with full forward trim.
- ineffective spoilers (but it does slip GREAT!).
- generally poor ergonomics.
- doesn't spin well.

I would add that instructors with big feet (me) have nowhere to put
them except on the rudder pedals. I know students must hate that.

Have you noticed how students seem to drag the right wing far more
than the left on landing? It's because they can't get any left
aileron with the spoilers open whether they lift their leg or not -
the spoiler handle is in the way.


What's good about the 2-33:
- it's cheap
- anybody can repair it
- it's built like a tank. If a student is going to crash, I want
* *him to be in a 2-33.
- doesn't spin well (yeah, I know).

I wonder if you've priced aircraft welding, sheet metal repair or
fabric work lately. Any significant damage to a 2-33 will cost far
more to repair that the glider will be worth afterward. Old geezers
like me who know how to weld 4130 thinwall tubes and own a pair of
pinking shears are getting really hard to find. If those streamlined
aluminum wing struts suffers damage, you're probably out of luck.
Nobody makes them anymore.

I'm not confident the "tank" reputation holds either. It's not hard
to imagine a broken tube penetrating the cockpit - and the pilot
within. If that tube cuts a leg artery the student is in serious
trouble. I know of one such fatality when the skid kicked up a stick
which penetrated the fabric and the students leg.

Given the increasing girth of pilots these days it doesn't happen
often but if you load a 2-33 to the rear CG limit, it will spin - with
alarming suddenness.

Please be more careful in future with how you do the posting. It looks like
I wrote 'here we go again', and I most certainly didn't.

"Tony V" wrote in message
...
Surfer! wrote:

Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the
record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer.

For your information: A reply from Scheibe Aircraft, not that many
seem interested in modernizing the fleet.
Jim

Yes, that is right that we want to produce the SF 34! At the moment we
adjust the forms and fixtures and we want to start the production in
about 4 weeks. The price will be about EUR 65.900,00 (without
instruments and trailer) + tax and the delivery-time is about 5-6
months. So if you want to fly a SF 34 next season you should order
soon.

If you need more information please tell me.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen kindly regards
Katja Sammet

SCHEIBE-AIRCRAFT-GMBH
Am Flugplatz 5
D-73540 Heubach

Tel. 0049 7173 184286
Fax 0049 7173 185587
www.scheibe-aircraft.de

Surfer! wrote:
Please be more careful in future with how you do the posting. It looks
like I wrote 'here we go again', and I most certainly didn't.


Yup, my bad. So sorry.

T



"Tony V" wrote in message
...
Surfer! wrote:

Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the
record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer.