ASH 26E VS DG 808C

JS wrote:
Have not flown the DG800, just 300/500/600/1000. All those flew
nicely. One thing I found out about the AS-W26 is that it's a BEAUTIFUL
flying glider... Like an oversized 27, with perhaps an even more
comfortable cockpit. Coordination seems perfect (it has a big enough
rudder).
Mine has the heavier wings (they'll chase your friends away unless
you have a one-man rigger) but higher MGW and therefore higher maximum
wing loading. The lower serial numbers are also certified Experimental
in the USA, handy unless you're sending it overseas.
The LONG trailer is going to get my "lift kit" mod, a 2" square steel
tube between the axle and the trailer chassis. This helps with ground
clearance and is hardly noticeable for rigging.

I suggest you tow it around for a couple thousand miles before making
any changes, as you might discover it's not so bad! I've towed my Cobra
trailer behind our 23 foot motorhome (which has a moderate overhang) for
100,00+ miles all over the country. The hitch height is set so the
trailer is slightly higher in the back(about 1"). The back end drags
occasionally going in and out of parking lots and gas stations, but it
doesn't harm the trailer because it's designed to accept that abuse. A
vehicle with a shorter overhang, like a car, mini-van, or SUV, wouldn't
drag it as often.

I did finally wear out those little aluminum skids on the rear end this
year, but replacements are on the way.


--
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

Eric Greenwell wrote:

I suggest you tow it around for a couple thousand miles before making
any changes, as you might discover it's not so bad! I've towed my Cobra
trailer behind our 23 foot motorhome (which has a moderate overhang) for
100,00+ miles all over the country. The hitch height is set so the
trailer is slightly higher in the back(about 1"). The back end drags
occasionally going in and out of parking lots and gas stations, but it
doesn't harm the trailer because it's designed to accept that abuse. A
vehicle with a shorter overhang, like a car, mini-van, or SUV, wouldn't
drag it as often.

I did finally wear out those little aluminum skids on the rear end this
year, but replacements are on the way.

I've towed mine for a little over 1000km and I've dragged the skids
somewhere each trip regardless of how careful I am about going over
stuff diagonally. Even if it does it nowhere else, it does it on the
drain at the entrance to the Club's field.

I'm stuck with a fixed tow ball height so I think JS's suggestion is a
good idea.

GC

"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.

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.

At 20:00 28 October 2006, 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.



Thats way too easy like parking the new Lexus. The
more things you have to fiddle with the better.

One question from someone who will eventually have a self launcher
The Antares quote range in vertical metres it can climb,
The ASH26 and DG808C have extra tanks that can increase range,
What would be the climb height expected from say a normal tank of 15
litres
for the ASH or DG .
gary
Andor Holtsmark wrote:
At 04:30 22 October 2006, Roger wrote:
So which one would you choose today? The Antares is
much more
expensive so that limits the market.

I'd like to object to this comment.
Before you decide on an aircraft (or make comments
about their pricing), please get up to date offers
for all brands you would concider, make sure that the
offers include ALL the itimes you will need to operate
the aircraft, then look at the BOTTOM line.
The bottom line Antares pricing is competitive with
similar infernal combustion based products.

It must also be said that ALL sailplane manufacturers
offer an amazing amount of product for the money they
charge. There is a lot of idealism in the business.


Anyway, if you are seriously interrested in an antares,
then you are also more than welcome to make an appointment
for a visit to Lange Flugzeugbau, including a test
flight. Then you will know where the money goes. Contact
information can be found at www.Lange-Flugzeugbau.com

Cheers, Andor

(yep, I work there)

wrote:
One question from someone who will eventually have a self launcher
The Antares quote range in vertical metres it can climb,
The ASH26 and DG808C have extra tanks that can increase range,
What would be the climb height expected from say a normal tank of 15
litres
for the ASH or DG .
gary
Andor Holtsmark wrote:
At 04:30 22 October 2006, Roger wrote:
So which one would you choose today? The Antares is
much more
expensive so that limits the market.

I'd like to object to this comment.
Before you decide on an aircraft (or make comments
about their pricing), please get up to date offers
for all brands you would concider, make sure that the
offers include ALL the itimes you will need to operate
the aircraft, then look at the BOTTOM line.
The bottom line Antares pricing is competitive with
similar infernal combustion based products.

It must also be said that ALL sailplane manufacturers
offer an amazing amount of product for the money they
charge. There is a lot of idealism in the business.

Anyway, if you are seriously interrested in an antares,
then you are also more than welcome to make an appointment
for a visit to Lange Flugzeugbau, including a test
flight. Then you will know where the money goes. Contact
information can be found at www.Lange-Flugzeugbau.com

Cheers, Andor

(yep, I work there)

Hi Gary - Unfortunately its a bit of apples and oranges.

The Antares has no noticeable density-altitude penalty,
so it can climb unaffected until around 16k where the
prop speed-limits and the climb-rate slows (and you
can't climb under power this high from sea-level). But,
it has less range than a gas powered machine.

A gas-powered machine may prove "interesting" at
Ely or Telluride (without turbocharger), but has more
range, especially with long-range tanks. Just don't
expect to climb over some of the peaks out west
when its hot. Its OK if you don't mind tooling
around Ely after launch not real high until you find
a thermal; certainly this is doable and plenty
including me have done so.

You have to pick which parameter is more important
for your flying (and don't forget to include stress level
as an independent and important parameter)...

Hope this helps !
Best Regards, Dave

PS: To emphasize Andor's point regarding cost, the
all-up delivered and equipped cost of an Antares 20E
is *not* substantially more than the other machines
discussed here, make sure to compare the real total
cost to your driveway...

I may have missed it on this thread...but is the cost
of these things a secret? I can go to Ebay and price
Ferraris and Maseratis.....

Can we safely guess somewhere between $150k-$200k?
Or put another way...
a new selflauncher=towplane, 10 year old glider and
hangar?

On Oct 28, 7:21 pm, wrote:
A gas-powered machine may prove "interesting" at
Ely or Telluride (without turbocharger), but has more
range, especially with long-range tanks. Just don't
expect to climb over some of the peaks out west
when its hot. Its OK if you don't mind tooling
around Ely after launch not real high until you find
a thermal; certainly this is doable and plenty
including me have done so.

I operate my ASH-26E from an airport S of Denver that is at 7,000' MSL.
During the summer, density altitude is 10K or so at the time I launch.
The climb profile compared to a tow bekind a 250 HP Pawnee is quite
similar. I'm climbing at about 50 knots and behind the Pawnee it would
be 70 knots. So I'm actually higher about 1500' down the runway, but
about the same at the end of the runway (about 200' AGL on this 3800'
long runway) and typically 800' or so passsing abeam the departure
point on downwind. Actual climb rate is about 300 fpm. Check my OLC
flight logs for some comparisons as I sometimes take a tow in order to
have a full fuel load for the end of the day.

During the winter, I've still had a positive rate of climb at 16,500
while exploring for wave. In summer, I've made a few self retrieves
from the other side of 13-14K' ridges in the Colorado Rockies. With
the higher density altitude, I stop climbing at about 15K. I only have
the fuselage tank (16 litres), so endurance is about 90 minutes.

So the bottom line is that at high altitudes, either physically, or due
to density, one must use whatever thermals there are, and try to avoid
areas of sink. But so far, in the 5 years I've been flying the ship
there has never been a situation where I wished for more power.

-Tom
ASH-26E 5Z
Black Forest Soaring Society - for OLC logs