A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

$75,000 2-33



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old March 10th 18, 05:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
son_of_flubber
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,550
Default $75,000 2-33

On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 12:57:30 AM UTC-5, Frank Whiteley wrote:

Switching from 2-33 to BlanĂ*k
A positive experience for instructors and students


Four years of club experience from 1993-97 is DATA, and those insights are still true 20 years later.

Grounding the L-13s sure hurt soaring in the USA. We all agree on that.


On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 7:54:22 AM UTC-5, Tom wrote:

there are things that the 2-33 teaches uniquely/efficiently and it can be a lot more economical to learn in.


I'm sure that Tom knows what he is talking about, but let's look at the complete pictu 'His' training fleet (Sugarbush's training fleet) includes ONE fully restored 2-33, ONE ASK-21, TWO practically new PW-6, ONE fully restored 1-26, and ONE Grob G102. Sure, the 2-33 is the best and most economical tool for parts of the training task, and interleaving 2-33 flights with PW-6 and ASK-21 flight stretches your flying muscles. (One young guy at Sugarbush, who was training for CPL, choose to fly five different glider types in one afternoon.)

Students benefit from switching back and forth between the 2-33, the 1-26 and the glass trainers, and they eventually progress to the G102. That is completely different from what happens at gliding clubs that have one lonely 2-33.


Tom wrote:

the completely gone through and restored 2-33 was in the high $40s and a B model, not yet certified, was around $58k.


there are little or no good 2-33s on the market or the condition of the fleet is so poor there needs to be a heavy investment into reconditioning.


Patching up the old 2-33 for one more year is not much of a path forward. I sincerely hope that no 2-33 tow hooks spontaneously detach from their airframes this year.

I applaud the clubs that are flying well maintained 2-33s, and those who're investing in a complete restoration of their 2-33 are doing it right.
  #42  
Old March 11th 18, 03:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
WB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default $75,000 2-33

On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 9:23:21 PM UTC-6, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:07:38 AM UTC-6, wrote:
Just when you thought you've seen it all. Wings and Wheels has listed a beautifully restored 2-33 for a mere $75K http://wingsandwheels.com/classifieds


When its 100 degrees in Texas and you take a auto in a 2-33 and catch a 6 knot thermal to cloud base at 7500, there is really nothing in soaring quite as sweet being in the back seat with the window open to that 65 degree air on your left arm resting on the edge of the open window. If you have not made a big climb in the back seat of a 2-33, you might not really know what soaring is all about.

Bill Snead


Or when it's a 45 degree April Sunday in Ohio and you take a tow in a 2-33 to catch a 3 knot thermal to cloudbase at 5500 and run out to Middletown and back under a dark cloud street there's nothing as cold as being in the back seat with your coat pulled up around your ears and your hands jammed down in your pockets and sleet howling in all around the canopy. If you have not frozen your a** off in the back seat of a 2-33, you might not really know what soaring is all about.

WB (and Crew Chief Mary Jo who was doing the driving).
  #43  
Old March 11th 18, 04:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default $75,000 2-33

N9727S - that number looked familiar, so I checked my logbook. Half my training and first solo on Nov 11, 1973 was in that ship.
Tucson Soaring Club at Ryan Field.
After getting my private a year later shortly after my 16th birthday it looks like I gave quite few rides in it. Had a total of 125 hours and 51 hours in just this 2-33. Had another 126 flights and 69 hours in N17963 the club's other 2-33. All this before getting my CFIG in 1980.

5Z
  #44  
Old March 11th 18, 05:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default $75,000 2-33

On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 7:32:28 PM UTC-8, wrote:
N9727S - that number looked familiar, so I checked my logbook. Half my training and first solo on Nov 11, 1973 was in that ship.
Tucson Soaring Club at Ryan Field.
After getting my private a year later shortly after my 16th birthday it looks like I gave quite few rides in it. Had a total of 125 hours and 51 hours in just this 2-33. Had another 126 flights and 69 hours in N17963 the club's other 2-33. All this before getting my CFIG in 1980.

5Z


And now it has more avionics than your ASW27... :-)
  #45  
Old March 11th 18, 07:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Frank Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,099
Default $75,000 2-33

On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 9:40:53 AM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 12:57:30 AM UTC-5, Frank Whiteley wrote:

Switching from 2-33 to BlanĂ*k
A positive experience for instructors and students


Four years of club experience from 1993-97 is DATA, and those insights are still true 20 years later.

Grounding the L-13s sure hurt soaring in the USA. We all agree on that.


On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 7:54:22 AM UTC-5, Tom wrote:

there are things that the 2-33 teaches uniquely/efficiently and it can be a lot more economical to learn in.


I'm sure that Tom knows what he is talking about, but let's look at the complete pictu 'His' training fleet (Sugarbush's training fleet) includes ONE fully restored 2-33, ONE ASK-21, TWO practically new PW-6, ONE fully restored 1-26, and ONE Grob G102. Sure, the 2-33 is the best and most economical tool for parts of the training task, and interleaving 2-33 flights with PW-6 and ASK-21 flight stretches your flying muscles. (One young guy at Sugarbush, who was training for CPL, choose to fly five different glider types in one afternoon.)

Students benefit from switching back and forth between the 2-33, the 1-26 and the glass trainers, and they eventually progress to the G102. That is completely different from what happens at gliding clubs that have one lonely 2-33.


Tom wrote:

the completely gone through and restored 2-33 was in the high $40s and a B model, not yet certified, was around $58k.


there are little or no good 2-33s on the market or the condition of the fleet is so poor there needs to be a heavy investment into reconditioning.


Patching up the old 2-33 for one more year is not much of a path forward. I sincerely hope that no 2-33 tow hooks spontaneously detach from their airframes this year.

I applaud the clubs that are flying well maintained 2-33s, and those who're investing in a complete restoration of their 2-33 are doing it right.


Speaking of DATA. At the 1997 SSA Convention, Roy Edwards from NZ gave a presentation on the churn of national soaring organization memberships. He presented that member churn was almost universally 20 percent, except for the US, where it was 30 percent. Some of us surmised that a factor was the predominance of the 2-33 in US fleets.

Frank Whiteley
  #46  
Old March 11th 18, 05:38 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kirk.stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default $75,000 2-33

On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 6:54:22 AM UTC-6, Tom wrote:

Son of Flubber has a point about the extra time as the few extra minutes per flight or the ability to soar in minimal lift is a difference maker. But - there are things that the 2-33 teaches uniquely/efficiently and it can be a lot more economical to learn in.

What other 2 seater can serve the purpose as a really cheap and durable trainer?

Tom, exactly what are the "things that the 2-33 teaches uniquely/efficiently"?

And is "cheap" really a valid criteria for a trainer? I don't think so - unless your standard of instruction is so low that you expect to break them frequently...

I won't even go into the "durable" myth - I've seen more broken 2-33s than any other training glider.

2-33s are kinda like Ford Pintos, if it's all you have you will make do with it, but underneath all it's still a crappy glider and a really lazy piece of engineering.

What other glider actually causes people to say "I'm not flying in that thing!"

Kirk
66
  #47  
Old March 11th 18, 07:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom[_21_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default $75,000 2-33

Hi Kirk -

I am onboard with most of your points.

I do find that the 2-33 provokes either nostalgic reminiscences of those halcyon days or pure hatred.

I did a Flight Review with one of the most accomplished instructors/pilots I know - of all his choices picked the 2-33 as it was "the worst thing I fly" on a gnarly windy bumpy day. He hates the 2-33 and yet in addition to being able to fly the heck out of it, mumbling the whole time unprintable things (I'm ex-navy so I'm ok, no therapy needed) he did begrudgingly admit that it does well teaching rudder coordination, weak lift exploitation and "putting the aircraft where you want it/tough conditions" skills.

I've seen a student really master weak wave in tight spots at 1-2 kts of lift, balancing on the head of a pin, dealing with Sugarbush rotor and small margins in a 2-33. I've seen students mastering the slip, no-spoiler landings and other "stick and rudder" skills very quickly in 2-33s.

I saw the airframe of one where the pilot ran into a bollard - saw it in the shop at K&L before it was fixed. As an ex-accident investigator I'm pretty sure if that student pilot had run into that bollard with a glass ship the outcome would have been much worse - I understand she was basically ok. There are other examples of the cage/tube frame protecting the occupants.

Can other gliders do this stuff - sure. Can they do other things better - absolutely.

The "cheap" thing is simply that - if a club or operation can't afford newer glass ships as trainers the 2-33 did/does fill a niche. They taught many pilots to fly.

Just like in the power world - how do you entice a prospective student who has a nice car/boat/airplane with a 2-33, worse if the condition is less than average? Could be airworthy but cosmetically is a train wreck. Absolutely valid point. Years ago I instructed at a power school, same old story, guy pulls in, nice car, I sell him an intro lesson, we go out to that ratty, mismatched paint with broken plastic panels on the interior with a panel that made Lindbergh's look modern - no surprise - no go. Probably bought a boat. The owner of said school complained constantly about revenue but wouldn't spend a dime. Another reason that GA is in the sorry state it's in.

Counter to that - pull into a flight school that is fancy and has brand new Cirrus SR22s at $350 per hour with an instructor at $110 per hour. Not going to swell our ranks of pilots with that and the data proves it.

The Blaniks (L-23) were a really nice mix of good things too and many folks I knew loved to teach in them.

We are transitioning our fleet to more modern glass ships over time. The 2-33 maybe a thing if the past very soon. Still a place for it for a while here.

Not attempting to change anyone's mind here. I solo a number of students including teens in 2-33s so I, as well as others I highly respect clearly feel ok about that. As son of flubber pointed out - our students progress nicely up the fleet and do pretty ok. I have no hesitation starting someone in a PW-6 either.

As a power/glider/Part 135/91 instructor I've given instruction in a lot of different aircraft, it's really all about the student and how they are taught. Given enough money I could teach primary in a jet or more fun and reasonably in a 2-33/J-3.

Regards, Tom

As March Madness begins I'll be focusing my efforts elsewhere for a while - see you all after the final four is done. :-)
  #48  
Old March 11th 18, 11:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default $75,000 2-33

Ever see any long winded threads with people on either side of the aisle debating the merits of an ASK21 with so many hating it with all their being? Of course not. That's because the K21 is what a standard training sailplane should be (in this century). 100k is cheap compared to the revenue lost and membership lost from US clubs and commercial operators forcing the old spam can on the unsuspecting public.
  #49  
Old March 11th 18, 11:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 351
Default $75,000 2-33

The argument regarding flying a ratty 2-33 or flying a new glass ship is a fallacious one, it depends who you want to attract. If your after moneyed folks then yes the bells n whistles of a glass ship is whats needed. But if your after the younger less wealthy populus than its an issue of finances not finish.

When I was a teenager Soaring in the club context was affordable, it is not today. Neither is GA. In fact soaring is about equal to powered flight cost wise. I could mow lawns during the week and be able to fly a 2-22 multiple times on the weekend on what I made pushing that lawn mower. There isn't a single glass based club running today that can make that happen. Kick away at the schweizers all you want, the 2-33 then transition to 1-26 is still the only affordable way to get into soaring for the average teen or working adult. When that dissapears, then say goodbye to any chance of growth within soaring except for the wealthy.
  #50  
Old March 12th 18, 12:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
son_of_flubber
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,550
Default $75,000 2-33

On Sunday, March 11, 2018 at 6:16:05 PM UTC-4, wrote:
I could mow lawns during the week and be able to fly a 2-22 multiple times on the weekend on what I made pushing that lawn mower. There isn't a single glass based club running today that can make that happen.


You're right that times have changed. Kids don't fly on their grass cutting wages anymore, but here are some soaring clubs in the USA that have youth flying in glass trainers. Some of these programs combine 'line crew service' with flight lessons. In some cases these young pilots cut grass.

http://sugarbushsoaring.com/2017-fefy-day
http://sugarbushsoaring.com/doc/FEFY-Brochure.pdf

http://harrishillsoaring.org/junior-program-details/

https://www.soartruckee.org/youth-soaring.html

http://www.tidewatersoaring.org/scholarships.html




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.