DG Differences...

Hi All,

This is a bit of a loaded question (I think both sellers are
contributors to RAS) - but I'd like to get as much feedback as
possible from as wide of an audience as possible...

I've been agonizing (here and elsewhere) between the niceties of a
DG-300 and the flapped flexibilities of an ASW-20.

Someone just reminded me of the DG-202/17 on W&W (which I'd earlier
looked at and passed up), and they thought it might be worth
considering again as a potential "meet in the middle" option between
the DG-300 and the ASW-20.

On the one hand, the DG-202/17 isn't automatic hookups like the
DG-300; but it does seem to have the nicer canopy and much of the
prized ergonomics of the DG-300.

With flaps, it should have a flatter polar than the DG-300 (maybe not
100% ASW-20 performance, but possibly not degrade as much in the 65 -
80 knot range where the DG-300 and most other Std-Class ships really
start to lose out to flapped ships).

Again, I'm going to be flying in 2 - 5 knot lift with 4,000'
cloudbases a lot of the time; so raw speed isn't important to me in
terms of strong conditions... I just want to make enough speed to take
advantage of moderate day lengths and still go cross-country (as well
as fly in the desert a couple of times a year, and maybe compete in a
Regional each year in the Sports Class).

The 17m tips of the DG-202/17 are also intriguing. Coming from a
Russia AC-4 its would be quite a change if I go that route! But at
the same time, I often watch a local Open Cirrus just cruise (lumber)
along with its 17m wings on such a flat glide - I must admit I am
envious! I don't know what the DG-202/17 maneuverability is like; but
if it is decent then the extra span might be nice for those scratchy
days where I still want to stretch out and fly XC.

Of course, I don't know what condition this particular DG-202/17 is
in. JJ's DG-300 is getting all-new Urethane and a nice panel; so the
value there is well-known (and he knows it, too). But the DG-202/17
is selling for less, and the question is: How much less does it have
to be in order for the DG-202/17 to become a more attractive deal?

The bottom line is that I'm trying to get the best glider for my local
flying conditions (weak to moderate with low to middling cloudbases),
and my flying style (which requires crisp & responsive handling, good
cockpit ergonomics, and hopefully easy rigging). I am trying at this
point to view both gliders next week while I'm travelling to
California for vacation.

Any thoughts or details would be very much appreciated! I can't find
a good measured polar for a DG-202 (just 200's and 400's), so anyone
with a good polar for the aircraft and/or other information on the
detailed differences between the DG-200 and the DG-202 would be great
(I know what's on the Sailplane Directory, but its pretty basic info
about the differences)!

Thanks in advance,

--Noel

On Apr 15, 7:27*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Hi All,

This is a bit of a loaded question (I think both sellers are
contributors to RAS) - but I'd like to get as much feedback as
possible from as wide of an audience as possible...

I've been agonizing (here and elsewhere) between the niceties of a
DG-300 and the flapped flexibilities of an ASW-20.

Someone just reminded me of the DG-202/17 on W&W (which I'd earlier
looked at and passed up), and they thought it might be worth
considering again as a potential "meet in the middle" option between
the DG-300 and the ASW-20.

On the one hand, the DG-202/17 isn't automatic hookups like the
DG-300; but it does seem to have the nicer canopy and much of the
prized ergonomics of the DG-300.

With flaps, it should have a flatter polar than the DG-300 (maybe not
100% ASW-20 performance, but possibly not degrade as much in the 65 -
80 knot range where the DG-300 and most other Std-Class ships really
start to lose out to flapped ships).

Again, I'm going to be flying in 2 - 5 knot lift with 4,000'
cloudbases a lot of the time; so raw speed isn't important to me in
terms of strong conditions... I just want to make enough speed to take
advantage of moderate day lengths and still go cross-country (as well
as fly in the desert a couple of times a year, and maybe compete in a
Regional each year in the Sports Class).

The 17m tips of the DG-202/17 are also intriguing. *Coming from a
Russia AC-4 its would be quite a change if I go that route! *But at
the same time, I often watch a local Open Cirrus just cruise (lumber)
along with its 17m wings on such a flat glide - I must admit I am
envious! *I don't know what the DG-202/17 maneuverability is like; but
if it is decent then the extra span might be nice for those scratchy
days where I still want to stretch out and fly XC.

Of course, I don't know what condition this particular DG-202/17 is
in. *JJ's DG-300 is getting all-new Urethane and a nice panel; so the
value there is well-known (and he knows it, too). *But the DG-202/17
is selling for less, and the question is: *How much less does it have
to be in order for the DG-202/17 to become a more attractive deal?

The bottom line is that I'm trying to get the best glider for my local
flying conditions (weak to moderate with low to middling cloudbases),
and my flying style (which requires crisp & responsive handling, good
cockpit ergonomics, and hopefully easy rigging). *I am trying at this
point to view both gliders next week while I'm travelling to
California for vacation.

Any thoughts or details would be very much appreciated! *I can't find
a good measured polar for a DG-202 (just 200's and 400's), so anyone
with a good polar for the aircraft and/or other information on the
detailed differences between the DG-200 and the DG-202 would be great
(I know what's on the Sailplane Directory, but its pretty basic info
about the differences)!

Thanks in advance,

--Noel

I had a DG-600 that I loved very much, the seating was comfortable
even for 10 hour flights.

The ASW-20 is a great glider, I've enjoyed flying them as they have
great handling, and great performance. I've owned a ASW-17 and now a
ASH-26E, my only complaint about AS gliders is that my size 11 1/2
feet don't fit in the pointy nose very well. I'm 5' 11" and have to
have the rudder pedals fairly far forward and my toes rub on the nose
even with the smallest shoes that I could find after shopping at
numerous stores. Flew the 17 somewhat pigeon toed and found it to be
painful a few hours into the flight. I love my 26 and am looking
forward to flying her when I get back from my work trip.

The performance for most modern gliders is good. Have loved all the
gliders that I've owned, especially the LS-6. I'm on the conservative
side and have not needed the full glide performance of my ship,
although it seemed like I did as the glides are so flat. In spite of
that have had many really fun flights. I believe that Walt Rogers did
his first 1000 km flight in his DG-300.

Jim D
Boulder City, Nevada

On Apr 15, 11:58*pm, Jim wrote:
On Apr 15, 7:27*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:





Hi All,

This is a bit of a loaded question (I think both sellers are
contributors to RAS) - but I'd like to get as much feedback as
possible from as wide of an audience as possible...

I've been agonizing (here and elsewhere) between the niceties of a
DG-300 and the flapped flexibilities of an ASW-20.

Someone just reminded me of the DG-202/17 on W&W (which I'd earlier
looked at and passed up), and they thought it might be worth
considering again as a potential "meet in the middle" option between
the DG-300 and the ASW-20.

On the one hand, the DG-202/17 isn't automatic hookups like the
DG-300; but it does seem to have the nicer canopy and much of the
prized ergonomics of the DG-300.

With flaps, it should have a flatter polar than the DG-300 (maybe not
100% ASW-20 performance, but possibly not degrade as much in the 65 -
80 knot range where the DG-300 and most other Std-Class ships really
start to lose out to flapped ships).

Again, I'm going to be flying in 2 - 5 knot lift with 4,000'
cloudbases a lot of the time; so raw speed isn't important to me in
terms of strong conditions... I just want to make enough speed to take
advantage of moderate day lengths and still go cross-country (as well
as fly in the desert a couple of times a year, and maybe compete in a
Regional each year in the Sports Class).

The 17m tips of the DG-202/17 are also intriguing. *Coming from a
Russia AC-4 its would be quite a change if I go that route! *But at
the same time, I often watch a local Open Cirrus just cruise (lumber)
along with its 17m wings on such a flat glide - I must admit I am
envious! *I don't know what the DG-202/17 maneuverability is like; but
if it is decent then the extra span might be nice for those scratchy
days where I still want to stretch out and fly XC.

Of course, I don't know what condition this particular DG-202/17 is
in. *JJ's DG-300 is getting all-new Urethane and a nice panel; so the
value there is well-known (and he knows it, too). *But the DG-202/17
is selling for less, and the question is: *How much less does it have
to be in order for the DG-202/17 to become a more attractive deal?

The bottom line is that I'm trying to get the best glider for my local
flying conditions (weak to moderate with low to middling cloudbases),
and my flying style (which requires crisp & responsive handling, good
cockpit ergonomics, and hopefully easy rigging). *I am trying at this
point to view both gliders next week while I'm travelling to
California for vacation.

Any thoughts or details would be very much appreciated! *I can't find
a good measured polar for a DG-202 (just 200's and 400's), so anyone
with a good polar for the aircraft and/or other information on the
detailed differences between the DG-200 and the DG-202 would be great
(I know what's on the Sailplane Directory, but its pretty basic info
about the differences)!

Thanks in advance,

--Noel

I had a DG-600 that I loved very much, the seating was comfortable
even for 10 hour flights.

The ASW-20 is a great glider, I've enjoyed flying them as they have
great handling, and great performance. I've owned a ASW-17 and now a
ASH-26E, my only complaint about AS gliders is that my size 11 1/2
feet don't fit in the pointy nose very well. I'm 5' 11" and have to
have the rudder pedals fairly far forward and my toes rub on the nose
even with the smallest shoes that I could find after shopping at
numerous stores. Flew the 17 somewhat pigeon toed and found it to be
painful a few hours into the flight. I love my 26 and am looking
forward to flying her when I get back from my work trip.

The performance for most modern gliders is good. Have loved all the
gliders that I've owned, especially the LS-6. I'm on the conservative
side and have not needed the full glide performance of my ship,
although it seemed like I did as the glides are so flat. In spite of
that have had many really fun flights. I believe that Walt Rogers did
his first 1000 km flight in his DG-300.

Jim D
Boulder City, Nevada- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I owned a 202 15/17 for about 5 years. I absolutely loved it but
traded up to a DG 400 for the self launch so I guess I'm still flying
one in a way. . Handling was great, and glide was plenty good too.
Built like a tank. Big tough main gear. Good gelcoat. I had several
"old timers" since deceased come up to me on the ramp unsolicited and
tell me that they had flown everything and the 202 was the best
handling glider they had flown. (Their words not mine so if you
disagree take it up with God, they're dead.) Loved the flaps for
landing and speed, I did well in our regionals sports class with it.
I actually preferred the 15m, it seemed to handle better for me. The
17m might give you 5% better glide. Long fuselage compared to other
gliders, I liked it . If I was in the market for that vintage glider
I would defintely buy one again in a heartbeat if it was in good
shape. Word is the airfoil isn't so good in the rain, never tested it

I believe that Walt Rogers did
his first 1000 km flight in his DG-300.


Confirmed. I was his crew, but flew a 500 O/R in my LS-6 (later
owned by Jim D, Boulder City, NV) first. We are an inbred bunch.
Noel, I'm surprised you didn't snap up AS-W20 "SW" or the 20C that
recently sold.
Jim

As with any of these "which glider should I buy" questions, my first comment
would be: Do not underestimate the value of a good trailer!
At the end of the day, the state of your trailer will probably have had a
much larger impact on your experience than a few percent of performance
difference between gliders. Having a good, well functioning trailer that
makes assembly/disassembly easy and scratch-safe really adds to the joy of
soaring.

DG has always used better gelcoat than most competitors, including
Schleicher and the LS folks. Many DG gliders will have excellent original
gelcoat, even as they age considerably.

The '202 uses a traditional Wortmann wing profile that is known to be quite
sensitive to rain and bugs. -Something to consider if you live in the rain
forest ;-)

The ASW-20 is a classic and an absolute joy to fly.

Oh, and if God had meant for us to fly unflapped gliders, he would have had
given us only one arm ;-)

Happy Soaring with whatever you choose,
Lars Peder
DG-600/18, Denmark


"noel.wade" wrote in message
...
Hi All,

This is a bit of a loaded question (I think both sellers are
contributors to RAS) - but I'd like to get as much feedback as
possible from as wide of an audience as possible...

I've been agonizing (here and elsewhere) between the niceties of a
DG-300 and the flapped flexibilities of an ASW-20.

Someone just reminded me of the DG-202/17 on W&W (which I'd earlier
looked at and passed up), and they thought it might be worth
considering again as a potential "meet in the middle" option between
the DG-300 and the ASW-20.

On the one hand, the DG-202/17 isn't automatic hookups like the
DG-300; but it does seem to have the nicer canopy and much of the
prized ergonomics of the DG-300.

With flaps, it should have a flatter polar than the DG-300 (maybe not
100% ASW-20 performance, but possibly not degrade as much in the 65 -
80 knot range where the DG-300 and most other Std-Class ships really
start to lose out to flapped ships).

Again, I'm going to be flying in 2 - 5 knot lift with 4,000'
cloudbases a lot of the time; so raw speed isn't important to me in
terms of strong conditions... I just want to make enough speed to take
advantage of moderate day lengths and still go cross-country (as well
as fly in the desert a couple of times a year, and maybe compete in a
Regional each year in the Sports Class).

The 17m tips of the DG-202/17 are also intriguing. Coming from a
Russia AC-4 its would be quite a change if I go that route! But at
the same time, I often watch a local Open Cirrus just cruise (lumber)
along with its 17m wings on such a flat glide - I must admit I am
envious! I don't know what the DG-202/17 maneuverability is like; but
if it is decent then the extra span might be nice for those scratchy
days where I still want to stretch out and fly XC.

Of course, I don't know what condition this particular DG-202/17 is
in. JJ's DG-300 is getting all-new Urethane and a nice panel; so the
value there is well-known (and he knows it, too). But the DG-202/17
is selling for less, and the question is: How much less does it have
to be in order for the DG-202/17 to become a more attractive deal?

The bottom line is that I'm trying to get the best glider for my local
flying conditions (weak to moderate with low to middling cloudbases),
and my flying style (which requires crisp & responsive handling, good
cockpit ergonomics, and hopefully easy rigging). I am trying at this
point to view both gliders next week while I'm travelling to
California for vacation.

Any thoughts or details would be very much appreciated! I can't find
a good measured polar for a DG-202 (just 200's and 400's), so anyone
with a good polar for the aircraft and/or other information on the
detailed differences between the DG-200 and the DG-202 would be great
(I know what's on the Sailplane Directory, but its pretty basic info
about the differences)!

Thanks in advance,

--Noel

On Apr 16, 8:45*am, JS wrote:
*I believe that Walt Rogers did

his first 1000 km flight in his DG-300.

* Confirmed. I was his crew, but flew a 500 O/R in my LS-6 (later
owned by Jim D, Boulder City, NV) first. We are an inbred bunch.
Noel, I'm surprised you didn't snap up AS-W20 "SW" or the 20C that
recently sold.
Jim

Jim -

My raise at work has been held up, so I don't quite yet have the cash
on hand to make an instant-deal. I've got a commitment from my
Banker / Loan-Officer (who's a pilot and whom I have a good
relationship with), and the only open question really is what to do
about the $10k I still owe on my Russia AC-4. :-/

But in the next 1 - 2 weeks I should be ready to pounce! ;-)

--Noel

On Apr 16, 4:23*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:45*am, JS wrote:

*I believe that Walt Rogers did

his first 1000 km flight in his DG-300.

* Confirmed. I was his crew, but flew a 500 O/R in my LS-6 (later
owned by Jim D, Boulder City, NV) first. We are an inbred bunch.
Noel, I'm surprised you didn't snap up AS-W20 "SW" or the 20C that
recently sold.
Jim

Jim -

My raise at work has been held up, so I don't quite yet have the cash
on hand to make an instant-deal. *I've got a commitment from my
Banker / Loan-Officer (who's a pilot and whom I have a good
relationship with), and the only open question really is what to do
about the $10k I still owe on my Russia AC-4. :-/

But in the next 1 - 2 weeks I should be ready to pounce! ;-)

--Noel

I am not familar with the 202, but as someone who flew standard class
for almost 10 years (LS4) and now flying a flapped ship (ASW27) I can
tell you that I love the flaps and that flaps indeed have advantage
for serious XC flying or competitions in moderate to strong
conditions, however it should not be your main decision point, and if
you are going to fly consrvative XC in only moderate conditions or
compete in spots class, the flaps will do very little to your bottom
line, while they will certainly add to your work load, especially
during take off and landings. Landing flaps are nice, but in 10 years
of many outlandings I never had a situation which I wished I had
landing flaps. So boottom line, take everything into account and go
for the glider you like best, in better condition, has better trailer,
better resale value, easier to rig an maintain and to get service, has
better reputation, more popular etc etc. and keep the flap somehwre
lower in your evaluation list. And last, you should completly ignore
facts such as how many kms or which contest or record someone won in
one ship or another, it is 99% combination of pilot,weather, location
and timing. Flaps and L/D are only a small factor.

Ramy

Thanks All,

On the flaps vs. no-flaps argument, I guess it would be best to use a
hypothetical situation:

Imagine you have cloudbases that are 3000' to 4000' AGL.
Terrain is somewhat mountainous, but the cloudbases rise with the
terrain (20 miles east of the airport you might have 7000' - 8000' MSL
bases over a 5000' MSL mountain).
The lift is maxing out between 4 knots and 6 knots, with a lot of 2 to
3 knotters mixed in.
The Cu are 4 - 6 miles apart.
Winds are 5 - 10 knots, with the best soaring areas downwind from your
home field (so you face a mild upwind glide home).
Your total "window" for soaring is a 5 hour period during the day when
conditions are going to be generating lift.
The lift is workable from 1000' AGL to cloudbase, but staying within
1500' of cloubase seems much more comfortable.

This is a pretty typical "decent" soaring day in Western Washington.

So the question for you flapped pilots is: Would you be pushing your
speed up enough in this situation to actually be using your flaps?

....Assume you're trying to do good cross-country flying - not super-
agressive contest-like flying, but also not just puttering around
within 15 miles of the airport either.

Thanks!

--Noel

On Apr 16, 5:50*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Thanks All,

On the flaps vs. no-flaps argument, I guess it would be best to use a
hypothetical situation:

Imagine you have cloudbases that are 3000' to 4000' AGL.
Terrain is somewhat mountainous, but the cloudbases rise with the
terrain (20 miles east of the airport you might have 7000' - 8000' MSL
bases over a 5000' MSL mountain).
The lift is maxing out between 4 knots and 6 knots, with a lot of 2 to
3 knotters mixed in.
The Cu are 4 - 6 miles apart.
Winds are 5 - 10 knots, with the best soaring areas downwind from your
home field (so you face a mild upwind glide home).
Your total "window" for soaring is a 5 hour period during the day when
conditions are going to be generating lift.
The lift is workable from 1000' AGL to cloudbase, but staying within
1500' of cloubase seems much more comfortable.

This is a pretty typical "decent" soaring day in Western Washington.

So the question for you flapped pilots is: *Would you be pushing your
speed up enough in this situation to actually be using your flaps?

...Assume you're trying to do good cross-country flying - not super-
agressive contest-like flying, but also not just puttering around
within 15 miles of the airport either.

Thanks!

--Noel

This is the typical soaring conditions at my home area. We always use
the flaps, no matter how strong or weak the soaring conditions are,
since you need to change from thermaling to cruising flap. In a flap
ship you must change flaps, otherwise your performance will probably
be worse then a standard ship. If you want to know how the glider
performance will impact your results, just look at the handicap
difference between the gliders you consider and can assume that your
speed and/or distance will roughly differ by this handicap, typically
in the 5% range.

Ramy

I think you are over-analyzing this issue. The difference between flaps
and no flaps is so small that you won't notice it. What difference does
it make if a recreational flight is 300 km (no flaps) rather than 315 km
(flaps)?

In contrast, you will notice if your glider is hard to rig, has a poor
trailer, or isn't comfortable or fun to fly. Those are the things that
you should be focusing on.



noel.wade wrote:
Thanks All,

On the flaps vs. no-flaps argument, I guess it would be best to use a
hypothetical situation:

Imagine you have cloudbases that are 3000' to 4000' AGL.
Terrain is somewhat mountainous, but the cloudbases rise with the
terrain (20 miles east of the airport you might have 7000' - 8000' MSL
bases over a 5000' MSL mountain).
The lift is maxing out between 4 knots and 6 knots, with a lot of 2 to
3 knotters mixed in.
The Cu are 4 - 6 miles apart.
Winds are 5 - 10 knots, with the best soaring areas downwind from your
home field (so you face a mild upwind glide home).
Your total "window" for soaring is a 5 hour period during the day when
conditions are going to be generating lift.
The lift is workable from 1000' AGL to cloudbase, but staying within
1500' of cloubase seems much more comfortable.

This is a pretty typical "decent" soaring day in Western Washington.

So the question for you flapped pilots is: Would you be pushing your
speed up enough in this situation to actually be using your flaps?

...Assume you're trying to do good cross-country flying - not super-
agressive contest-like flying, but also not just puttering around
within 15 miles of the airport either.

Thanks!

--Noel