Future Club Training Gliders

On Nov 8, 3:00*pm, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 15:40 08 November 2010, sisu1a wrote:



And what of it if today's youth want 'instant gratification'? Should
that not then be the goal for soaring operations to provide? If that
is our reality, than we either need to adapt to it or fade into
irrelevance.

Isn't that a fair working definition of a dilettante? * Are those really
the people that we want to attract into our sport? *On the other hand, it
is most certainly the folks that the commercial ride operations want to
attract.

I notice that when a 2-32 is available as a ride ship, it gets a lot of
use. *And it's always sort of entertaining to see how they can pack two
folks into the back seat.

Jim Beckman


As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't
"dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who
decided to give gliding a try. Judging them to be dilettantes is just
one of many examples of how we chase people away. Treating them
warmly is how we convert them - and we DO want to convert them.

A percentage of ride passengers do come back to learn to fly gliders -
a significantly larger percentage come back if their first ride was in
a decent glider and they were offered training in something better
than a 2-33. Many more say they would love to learn to fly gliders if
their personal and financial situation permitted and I believe them.

At 23:29 08 November 2010, bildan wrote:

As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't
"dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who
decided to give gliding a try. Judging them to be dilettantes is just
one of many examples of how we chase people away.

I was referring specifically to potential rides who walk away from the
opportunity when they see that the vehicle is going to be something less
than what Thomas Crown (latest version) flew. Those folks, if not
dilettante, are something even denser.

Jim Beckman

On Nov 9, 5:16*am, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 23:29 08 November 2010, bildan wrote:



As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't
"dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who
decided to give gliding a try. *Judging them to be dilettantes is just
one of many examples of how we chase people away. *

I was referring specifically to potential rides who walk away from the
opportunity when they see that the vehicle is going to be something less
than what Thomas Crown (latest version) flew. *Those folks, if not
dilettante, are something even denser.

Jim Beckman

I would say 100% could tell the 2-32's were old and the Grob Twin III
was a much sexier glider. Grob rides were far more likely to generate
further interest. I would call them discriminating which is a
complement.

In article ,
Jim Beckman wrote:

At 23:29 08 November 2010, bildan wrote:

As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't
"dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who
decided to give gliding a try. Judging them to be dilettantes is just
one of many examples of how we chase people away.

I was referring specifically to potential rides who walk away from the
opportunity when they see that the vehicle is going to be something less
than what Thomas Crown (latest version) flew. Those folks, if not
dilettante, are something even denser.

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Appearances matter to almost everybody, to different degrees. This is
simply a fact of life that we have to deal with. If you don't want those
people, that's a perfectly valid desire, but it does mean greatly
limiting your pool. Having something shiny and modern to show off isn't
a fault, and the people it attracts can still be valuable members to
have.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:04:56 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Well, I'm one of those who got hooked by an ASK-21. I fly one of the
prettier glass toys and its gratifyingly shiny, but it is 41 years old
and has Libelle written on it. So, where does that put me on your scale?


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

In article ,
Martin Gregorie wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:04:56 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Well, I'm one of those who got hooked by an ASK-21. I fly one of the
prettier glass toys and its gratifyingly shiny, but it is 41 years old
and has Libelle written on it. So, where does that put me on your scale?

Seems pretty sane to me. I welcome glider pilots in any equipment that
makes them happy. I just think that people who claim that looks don't
matter ought to put their money where their mouth is....

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On 2010/11/09 11:36 PM, Mike Ash wrote:
In ,
Martin wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:04:56 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Well, I'm one of those who got hooked by an ASK-21. I fly one of the
prettier glass toys and its gratifyingly shiny, but it is 41 years old
and has Libelle written on it. So, where does that put me on your scale?

Seems pretty sane to me. I welcome glider pilots in any equipment that
makes them happy. I just think that people who claim that looks don't
matter ought to put their money where their mouth is....


Some folk are strange and actually WANT to fly the vintage trainers.

Now - the opportunity to take the Bergie for a late afternoon lazy amble
over the river as the sun sets is not to be missed. Classic vintage wood
and fabric - gentle lift and peaceful slow flight has many attractions.
But it does not compare to pushing it in a 1:40+ glass single, or even a
composite two seater.
Personally my back is broken after less than an hour the back seat of in
most of the oldies. They are just plain horrible for instruction. My
personal maximum has been 11 flights and around 4 hours in the air in a
G103. Quite a long day if you include all the fetching and pushing
gliders, but no problem. Conversely - 8 launches on one day in a
Bergfalke II-55 cured me of wanting to instruct in vintage gliders... My
back took days to recover.

So depends who you are - I was actually attracted to the club I
initially learned at by the vintage trainers.

Having moved on - I still value some of the lessons they facilitated.
There is something to be said for learning to fly something that fights
back when you abuse it. The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about
the completeness of skills it would provide if it were the only trainer
used.

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:29:17 +0200, BruceGreeff wrote:

Having moved on - I still value some of the lessons they facilitated.
There is something to be said for learning to fly something that fights
back when you abuse it. The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about
the completeness of skills it would provide if it were the only trainer
used.

Which is why we counterbalance ours with a G.103, which is better for
teaching speed control, and a Puchacz, which enthusiastically does all
the stuff an ASK-21 doesn't want to do, and is marvellous to fly solo.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Nov 10, 1:29*pm, BruceGreeff wrote:
On 2010/11/09 11:36 PM, Mike Ash wrote:

Some folk are strange and actually WANT to fly the vintage trainers.

No problem with that. I like old wooden gliders too. I just have a
problem with coercing others to fly them if they want something
better. (A 2-33 isn't 'vintage', it's just old.)

Snip---------

The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about the completeness of
skills it would provide if it were the only trainer used.

Snip---------

As others have pointed out, the K-21 will spin just fine with the CG
aft and weight kits are available just for that purpose. I find even
with the CG well forward, the ASK-21 clearly exhibits all the pre-
stall/stall behaviors a student needs to learn. Just asking them to
compare how the K-21 handles at 36Kts vs 42Kts convinces them it flies
a lot better at 42. It barks, but doesn't bite.

One youngster said in delight, "Hey, it gets wobbley when it's slow
just like a bicycle". Yup!

On Nov 10, 1:29*pm, BruceGreeff wrote:
On 2010/11/09 11:36 PM, Mike Ash wrote:





In ,
* Martin *wrote:

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:04:56 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

I assume everyone posting to this thread with this attitude is flying a
1-26, a PW-5, or something similarly economical, right? I'm sure none of
you would be so shallow as to have spent a bunch of extra money on a
shiny glass slipper....

Well, I'm one of those who got hooked by an ASK-21. I fly one of the
prettier glass toys and its gratifyingly shiny, but it is 41 years old
and has Libelle written on it. So, where does that put me on your scale?

Seems pretty sane to me. I welcome glider pilots in any equipment that
makes them happy. I just think that people who claim that looks don't
matter ought to put their money where their mouth is....

Some folk are strange and actually WANT to fly the vintage trainers.

Now - the opportunity to take the Bergie for a late afternoon lazy amble
over the river as the sun sets is not to be missed. Classic vintage wood
and fabric - gentle lift and peaceful slow flight has many attractions.
But it does not compare to pushing it in a 1:40+ glass single, or even a
composite two seater.
Personally my back is broken after less than an hour the back seat of in
most of the oldies. They are just plain horrible for instruction. My
personal maximum has been 11 flights and around 4 hours in the air in a
G103. Quite a long day if you include all the fetching and pushing
gliders, but no problem. Conversely - 8 launches on one day in a
Bergfalke II-55 cured me of wanting to instruct in vintage gliders... My
back took days to recover.

So depends who you are - I was actually attracted to the club I
initially learned at by the vintage trainers.

Having moved on - I still value some of the lessons they facilitated.
There is something to be said for learning to fly something that fights
back when you abuse it. The K21 is a honey to fly, but I wonder about
the completeness of skills it would provide if it were the only trainer
used.

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I trained in 2-33's years ago, left gliding, and retrained upon my
return in Blanik L-13's, graduating to an L-33 and Jantar standard.
Now my club also owns a K-21.
My perspective, however, is from doing a stint as maintenance
director.
Regardless of it's flying qualities, the Blanik was designed in 1956
when repair labor was cheap, and
now that repair labor and parts have become very much more expensive,
they are increasingly more pricey to fix properly.
From what I've seen, this trend is going to make any procedure to
recertify them very difficult to make economical.
Moreover, their minium 30 year age is going to make metal fatigue an
increasingly difficult problem to deal with even if they are re-
certified.
The high up front cost of K-21's is a signficant hurdle for all, but
the 18,000 hour life and limited number of metal parts.
is a major ongoing advantage if that hurdle can be crossed.
So even if the current crisis passes, it will only provide breathing
room to find the answer we really need:
a low cost fiberglass trainer with the right handling characteristics
from a company with reliable parts supply.
That will be a very tough bill to fill unless we get a prolonged
period of a 95 cent Euro, which doesn't seem likely.