Anyone flown a SHK-1?

What was the cockpit like? Roomy or constrained compared to k6e? How does it handle turbulence? What are your general opinions? Thanks for your time and thoughts!

-Nick

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 9:13:25 PM UTC-5, wrote:
What was the cockpit like? Roomy or constrained compared to k6e? How does it handle turbulence? What are your general opinions? Thanks for your time and thoughts!

-Nick

I restored and flew #49 over a period from 2007-2015,
First there are two different cockpit sizes, earlier ones are almost three inches shorter than the later ones, which makes a big difference if you are tall. I'm 6'2" and was comfortable with a strong 303 and a ventus style seat back. My SHK had the longer cockpit. the original "sling" seat back was uncomfortable without a lumbar pillow. I was a low time pilot with less than 15 flights in a 1-26 as my only single seater time.
I have since been flying a std cirrus. for comparison, The SHK is able to climb in the weakest conditions and thermals very well, the controls I thought were responsive and the roll rate was good, but it is a 17 meter wingspan. control layout was good and I could reach the panel while belted in.
The airbrakes work well, but full airbrakes do not yield 2-33 sink rates.
The ship slips well and adds to sink rate. I never tried to use the drogue parachute.
In retrospect, had I not allowed my personal mass to exceed the allowable, I would have been happy to continue flying the SHK.
In turbulence I think the SHK seemed similar in 'ride quality' to a std Cirrus.
Control authority was always good.
Sorry, Never sat in a K6E.
Cheers,
Scott W.

I'm currently looking to purchase and restore a 1966 model. What kind of technical documentation did you use for your restoration/airworthiness validation? The current owner doesn't own much for technical pubs or manuals. He was fluent on the original Austria and just transferred said proficiency over to SHK regarding rigging, limitations, maintenance and inspections. Do you know of any good resources for this particular aircraft?

I now own the SHK that Scott Williams restored. I have also owned and flown an SH -1 and a K 6E. The longer cockpits of the Later serial number SH-1 and SHK are very comfortable for tall pilots. The K6E is cramped by comparison. The SHK will climb very well and handles well. The K6E is one of the nicest handling gliders ever built and performs well for its vintage. Compare sports class handicap numbers for the SHK and K6E. Scott Williams built a custom trailer for the SHK and his restoration is probably the nicest SHK in the U.S. He made a Utube video"Winch Launching thw SHK" worth viewing. I do have his documentation, factory drawings, spare parts, etc

What specifically are you wanting?

Do you have a flight and maintenance manual? Do you have anything detailing the proper rigging? I'm trying to get some concrete data to better assure that it is airworthy per the designers intentions all the way back when they designed it. I'm trying to avoid rigging and maintaining it by the process of best guess. Do you fly yours often? I've seen that YouTube video...amazing looking aircraft! It's a shame more aren't around. I'm 5, 10" by the way. Do you think I'd fit comfortably?

On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 7:00:09 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Do you have a flight and maintenance manual? Do you have anything detailing the proper rigging?

I own a Standard Austria S, was relieved of my documents by a break and enter thief. Schempp-Hirth provided a replacement Flight and Service Manual for a fee of 50 euros. That manual does have some key rigging data; a good start at least.

I'm 5, 10" by the way. Do you think I'd fit comfortably?

I am 5' 11", with long legs and short back. I gather I have the 'short' cockpit, and fit fine. I am glad my back is not longer, but legroom is not an issue. Numerous 8 hour flights, comfortably.

My Scarlet Lady has flown a lot - and will again this year if the field dries out! Yes, let's keep the Austrias in the air where they belong. I can't count the number of times other pilots have announced their adjacency by saying "looking pretty up there".

Bruce

The Cirrus that was 'basically an fiberglas SHK' was the open cirrus. Not the standard. Same name Whole 'nother Bird.

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 7:43:05 PM UTC-6, Scott Williams wrote:
The Cirrus that was 'basically an fiberglas SHK' was the open cirrus. Not the standard. Same name Whole 'nother Bird.

Not really though. The(Open)Cirrus was a very different sailplane, with only the V tail on the prototype being similar. The Open Cirrus had a Wortman airfoil, not an Eppler that was used on the SHK. Also, different wing, very different fus shape, along with the more modern composite construction using glass and foam.

Mike

Yes, was in a syndicated SHK for a couple of years eons ago in the
UK. Nice glider with no especial vices despite what everyone said
about the V tail.
Good performance for a wooden ship, climbed well too, reasonably
comfortable (the "seat" is a pretty minimalist design; check you
are comfortable in it), good brakes.
Followed a 15m ASW19 round a couple of 300K's and had no
difficulty staying with the leader..
Heavy to rig, but not in Kestrel 19 league, it has a very non-
standard main pin mechanism (captive main pin moves vertically).
The large tailplanes can make for a tricky one man rig if it's windy.
Pretty robust construction, coped with one of our less switched on
syndicate members ground looping it a few times. No one in our 8
man syndicate did it any lasting harm.
Usual wood/glue/age issues; it's an old A/C now!
What did you actually want to know?
Dave Walsh

I’m getting ready to start the restoration process on mine here shortly. What is everyone doing about trailers? How do you have yours configured? Do you like it or not, suggestions or room for improvements? Please let me know. Thanks! Nathan