DG-100 vs Std Libelle - opinions wanted

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.
For the speed task, flown at a very low angle of attack, no differential. With electronic control mixing, a lot of options open
such as flap to elevator (cruising) and elevator to flap (Thermaling) mixing.

On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:24:09 -0700, davidlawley wrote:

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less
than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and
still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.

You were obviously involved with another part of the model world than I
was. Flew C/L when I was a kid and then moved in to single channel RC. I
gave up RC just about the time that proportional radios appeared because
I'd got involved with competitive Free Flight, mostly F1A gliders and
1/2A / F1J power.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Op woensdag 4 april 2018 23:57:57 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:24:09 -0700, davidlawley wrote:

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less
than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and
still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.

You were obviously involved with another part of the model world than I
was. Flew C/L when I was a kid and then moved in to single channel RC. I
gave up RC just about the time that proportional radios appeared because
I'd got involved with competitive Free Flight, mostly F1A gliders and
1/2A / F1J power.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

To bring this back to the original thread: before settling on the DG, look into the service contract aspect surrounding older DG/LS models. Streifeneder still provides service, advise and parts to Libelle owners without a binding service contract.
I know because I owned a H301 for 30 years....

Uli
'AS'

Op donderdag 5 april 2018 13:01:09 UTC+2 schreef AS:

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

To bring this back to the original thread: before settling on the DG, look into the service contract aspect surrounding older DG/LS models. Streifeneder still provides service, advise and parts to Libelle owners without a binding service contract.
I know because I owned a H301 for 30 years....

Uli
'AS'

I have been told to stay away from the H301 Libelle because of many reasons, is this true? As you have owned one for 30 years you could probably have the best opinion on this.

On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 02:35:30 -0700, Senna Van den Bosch wrote:

Op woensdag 4 april 2018 23:57:57 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:24:09 -0700, davidlawley wrote:

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less
than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and
still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.

You were obviously involved with another part of the model world than I
was. Flew C/L when I was a kid and then moved in to single channel RC.
I gave up RC just about the time that proportional radios appeared
because I'd got involved with competitive Free Flight, mostly F1A
gliders and 1/2A / F1J power.


--
Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

Just a slightly technical model flying discussion, mainly about the
differences in desirable control response between remotely flown models
and full-size gliders. Adverse yaw is something that is easy to deal with
in full-size if your rudder is powerful enough: by and large we just do
it without needing to concentrate on flying a coordinated turn, but when
you're flying an RC glider thats almost specked out above you, its easier
if you can thermal using just one stick instead of juggling both of them.

OTOH, my view, with my F1A freeflight hat on, is that since the model is
doing its own thing (no external control allowed or closed-loop control
systems) I must set it up to automatically centre and stay centred in the
thermal I launched it in. Fortunately, we know how to do this (CG at 55%
chord, minimal fin area, crossed controls with the rudder balanced
against wash-in on the inner wingtip in the turn, trimmer to fly at min.
sink).


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Op donderdag 5 april 2018 13:04:20 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 02:35:30 -0700, Senna Van den Bosch wrote:

Op woensdag 4 april 2018 23:57:57 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:24:09 -0700, davidlawley wrote:

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less
than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and
still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.

You were obviously involved with another part of the model world than I
was. Flew C/L when I was a kid and then moved in to single channel RC.
I gave up RC just about the time that proportional radios appeared
because I'd got involved with competitive Free Flight, mostly F1A
gliders and 1/2A / F1J power.


--
Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

Just a slightly technical model flying discussion, mainly about the
differences in desirable control response between remotely flown models
and full-size gliders. Adverse yaw is something that is easy to deal with
in full-size if your rudder is powerful enough: by and large we just do
it without needing to concentrate on flying a coordinated turn, but when
you're flying an RC glider thats almost specked out above you, its easier
if you can thermal using just one stick instead of juggling both of them.

OTOH, my view, with my F1A freeflight hat on, is that since the model is
doing its own thing (no external control allowed or closed-loop control
systems) I must set it up to automatically centre and stay centred in the
thermal I launched it in. Fortunately, we know how to do this (CG at 55%
chord, minimal fin area, crossed controls with the rudder balanced
against wash-in on the inner wingtip in the turn, trimmer to fly at min.
sink).


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Ah that explains it.

Would it be all right to buy a glider with just over 3000 hours with 3000h check done, in good condition, and still be quite sure to be able to fly it without issues? (When taking good care of it of course)

On Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 7:03:09 AM UTC-4, Senna Van den Bosch wrote:
Op donderdag 5 april 2018 13:01:09 UTC+2 schreef AS:

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

To bring this back to the original thread: before settling on the DG, look into the service contract aspect surrounding older DG/LS models. Streifeneder still provides service, advise and parts to Libelle owners without a binding service contract.
I know because I owned a H301 for 30 years....

Uli
'AS'

I have been told to stay away from the H301 Libelle because of many reasons, is this true? As you have owned one for 30 years you could probably have the best opinion on this.

Senna - that may be true for the fresh solo pilot. I would not recommend a 301 to someone who has not flown a few hours on similar 'slippery' glass ships. When I bought my 301, I had about 100 hours in LS1c, ASW-15, Cirrus and Std.Astir. The 301 assembles quickly and is a delight to fly but one has to keep some Libelle specific short-comings in mind, like the small rudder coupled with a short fuselage (I think others mentioned this before in this thread), the relatively weak spoilers despite of them being top & bottom on the 301, etc. The flaps are no issue as long as you use common sense. The wings were all built with a Balsa core but as long as you don't plan on tying her down outside for the season, that is no issue. Neither is repairability. Mine suffered leading edge damage but a qualified shop fixed it w/o any issues.
There are some weight and size limits to consider. If you are built like Arnold Schwarzenegger, the fuselage may feel a bit tight. I am 90kg/1.81m and fit nicely while still having the CG within the limits. Also, the 301 was never designed for water-ballast, despite many of them being retrofitted in the US with 'Smiley Bags' and raced that way in strong conditions.
The DGs are the next generation plastic, featuring more creature-comfort like the more reclined seating position, better visibility and probably more payload.
So, if you have some glass hours and can find a 301 in Europe (they are rare over there - only 111 were built and over 50 of them were sold into the US), I would not rule her out.
Hope that helps you in your decision making process.

Uli
'AS'

Le jeudi 5 avril 2018 13:38:02 UTC+2, Senna Van den Bosch a écritÂ*:
Op donderdag 5 april 2018 13:04:20 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 02:35:30 -0700, Senna Van den Bosch wrote:

Op woensdag 4 april 2018 23:57:57 UTC+2 schreef Martin Gregorie:
On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 05:24:09 -0700, davidlawley wrote:

If you think of differential in terms of a ratio, yours is a bit less
than 2:1, my DG202 is 2:1.
In my days of F3B model flying, I used up to 4:1 for thermalling, and
still got adverse yaw, reqiring rudder mixed in.

You were obviously involved with another part of the model world than I
was. Flew C/L when I was a kid and then moved in to single channel RC.
I gave up RC just about the time that proportional radios appeared
because I'd got involved with competitive Free Flight, mostly F1A
gliders and 1/2A / F1J power.


--
Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org

I have no clue where this is going to be honest

Just a slightly technical model flying discussion, mainly about the
differences in desirable control response between remotely flown models
and full-size gliders. Adverse yaw is something that is easy to deal with
in full-size if your rudder is powerful enough: by and large we just do
it without needing to concentrate on flying a coordinated turn, but when
you're flying an RC glider thats almost specked out above you, its easier
if you can thermal using just one stick instead of juggling both of them.

OTOH, my view, with my F1A freeflight hat on, is that since the model is
doing its own thing (no external control allowed or closed-loop control
systems) I must set it up to automatically centre and stay centred in the
thermal I launched it in. Fortunately, we know how to do this (CG at 55%
chord, minimal fin area, crossed controls with the rudder balanced
against wash-in on the inner wingtip in the turn, trimmer to fly at min..
sink).


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Ah that explains it.

Would it be all right to buy a glider with just over 3000 hours with 3000h check done, in good condition, and still be quite sure to be able to fly it without issues? (When taking good care of it of course)

Yes.

On Thu, 05 Apr 2018 04:38:00 -0700, Senna Van den Bosch wrote:

Would it be all right to buy a glider with just over 3000 hours with
3000h check done, in good condition, and still be quite sure to be able
to fly it without issues? (When taking good care of it of course)

That's pretty much my situation.

My H.201 Libelle had its 3000 hour check one year and 26 hours before I
bought it.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org