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

Handicap bargains



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 28th 05, 05:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

I notice that a Schweizer 2-32 with a published L/D
of 33 is handicapped at 1.500. This seems like a great
bargain, the same as a Falke SF-25C at 1.500 but with
only about 22 L/D. Are there other equally great deals
out there ? Or any outstandingly heavily handicapped
types ?

Ian






  #2  
Old December 28th 05, 06:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

Well, the nice thing about going XC in a 2-32 is that you could take
your crew (both of them, even!) with you. And they would definitely be
needed when it became time to derig...

In my experience they seem about equal to a G-103, perhaps a bit weaker
in climb but better on the run. Definitely a strong weather ship.

Otherwise, nice flying ship, if a bit heavy. And hard to find - as
they are in great demand at commercial operations in the US.

Great spin trainers, by the way!

  #3  
Old December 28th 05, 07:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

...and a G103 is handicapped at 1.14. 'IF' it became
time to derig the larger crew might be helpful, but
with that kind of handicap in any contest, the 2-32
can fly much more conservatively and get home while
the poor Grob is picking its landout field.

Seriously, is the handicap for the 2-32 real or just
a typo somewhere ?

Ian





At 17:18 28 December 2005, wrote:
Well, the nice thing about going XC in a 2-32 is that
you could take
your crew (both of them, even!) with you. And they
would definitely be
needed when it became time to derig...

In my experience they seem about equal to a G-103,
perhaps a bit weaker
in climb but better on the run. Definitely a strong
weather ship.

Otherwise, nice flying ship, if a bit heavy. And hard
to find - as
they are in great demand at commercial operations in
the US.

Great spin trainers, by the way!





  #4  
Old December 28th 05, 10:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

My first kweschun would be "is the published L/D of 33 accurate?"

Wonder if DJ ever did a flight test ...

~ted/2NO

  #6  
Old December 29th 05, 01:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

I don't see how you can compute a "handicap" into "landout"
32L/d in the 2-32 at 65mph? and the 36L/d in the G103 at 55knt?

I would think that means the 2-32 has a higher sink rate in fpm.. but I'd
have to go dig out some POHs to know for sure.

BT

"Ian Cant" wrote in message
...
..and a G103 is handicapped at 1.14. 'IF' it became
time to derig the larger crew might be helpful, but
with that kind of handicap in any contest, the 2-32
can fly much more conservatively and get home while
the poor Grob is picking its landout field.

Seriously, is the handicap for the 2-32 real or just
a typo somewhere ?

Ian





At 17:18 28 December 2005, wrote:
Well, the nice thing about going XC in a 2-32 is that
you could take
your crew (both of them, even!) with you. And they
would definitely be
needed when it became time to derig...

In my experience they seem about equal to a G-103,
perhaps a bit weaker
in climb but better on the run. Definitely a strong
weather ship.

Otherwise, nice flying ship, if a bit heavy. And hard
to find - as
they are in great demand at commercial operations in
the US.

Great spin trainers, by the way!







  #7  
Old December 29th 05, 02:21 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

Being simplistic, a difference in handicap between
1.5 and 1.14 means that for the same handicapped distance
the 2-32 does not need to fly nearly as far as the
Grob [assuming minimum time is met]. So the chance
of making it home would seem to be higher, no ?

But again, allowing for the old wings and the maker's
optimism [factors which surely apply also to the Grob
and the SF-25], is the 2-32 handicap reasonably representative
of actual relative performance ? And are there any
other models which seem at first glance excessively
high or excessively low ?

Ian





At 00:42 29 December 2005, Btiz wrote:
I don't see how you can compute a 'handicap' into 'landout'
32L/d in the 2-32 at 65mph? and the 36L/d in the G103
at 55knt?

I would think that means the 2-32 has a higher sink
rate in fpm.. but I'd
have to go dig out some POHs to know for sure.

BT

'Ian Cant' wrote in message
...
..and a G103 is handicapped at 1.14. 'IF' it became
time to derig the larger crew might be helpful, but
with that kind of handicap in any contest, the 2-32
can fly much more conservatively and get home while
the poor Grob is picking its landout field.

Seriously, is the handicap for the 2-32 real or just
a typo somewhere ?

Ian





At 17:18 28 December 2005, wrote:
Well, the nice thing about going XC in a 2-32 is that
you could take
your crew (both of them, even!) with you. And they
would definitely be
needed when it became time to derig...

In my experience they seem about equal to a G-103,
perhaps a bit weaker
in climb but better on the run. Definitely a strong
weather ship.

Otherwise, nice flying ship, if a bit heavy. And hard
to find - as
they are in great demand at commercial operations in
the US.

Great spin trainers, by the way!











  #8  
Old December 29th 05, 03:24 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

Ian Cant wrote:
Being simplistic, a difference in handicap between
1.5 and 1.14 means that for the same handicapped distance
the 2-32 does not need to fly nearly as far as the
Grob [assuming minimum time is met]. So the chance
of making it home would seem to be higher, no ?

But again, allowing for the old wings and the maker's
optimism [factors which surely apply also to the Grob
and the SF-25], is the 2-32 handicap reasonably representative
of actual relative performance ? And are there any
other models which seem at first glance excessively
high or excessively low ?


Does the 2-32 have a highly laminar-flow airfoil? If not (which is what
I suspect, entirely unencumbered by data), it might preserve its
performance better than an old glass ship, e.g. a Grob 103, designed
with a relatively high laminar-flow wing which has been distorted and
dinged over time.


Shawn
  #9  
Old December 29th 05, 05:01 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Handicap bargains

Shawn, I think you are on the right track.

My admittedly unscientific comparison is between a well-used 2-32 (no
laminar flow on those wings any more - if ever!) and a couple of ridden
hard and put away wet, tied out in the Arizona desert for all their
working lives, G-103 Acros. I actually prefer the 2-32 over the 103,
as the control harmony is much nicer - closer to a heavy K-21. It's
like a big Cadillac cruising around with a couple of giggling
teenyboppers in the back, or a father with his wide-eyed little son
next to him...or for that matter a happy XXL size pax in the front seat
who has been told he can't fit in any other glider.

Plus the 2-32 is such a blast to spin, and it's got those awesome
terminal-velocity limiting brakes; great for getting a paying passenger
back on the ground before he/she gets "upset"! It's a shame acro is no
longer allowed by the chicken**** Schweizer lawyers - anyone who saw
Laz Horvath's acro routine (flown from the back seat with his future
ex-wife in the front) which finished with a half reverse cuban 8
straight to a landing will never forget it!

And it was a secret X plane (X-26A/B) and saw combat in Vietnam
(slighly modified as the YO-3A)!

Anyway, while it takes work to climb - fast and steep if you hope to go
up at all, much like Moffatt's description of the HP-8 (no prizes for
guessing what book Santa brought for Christmas), once you got it up to
speed, it seemes to be flatter than those (probably no longer very
laminar) workhorse 103s.

All that being said, new vs new, I would probably have to put my money
on the plebian Grobs, performance-wise (sigh).

Kirk
66
2-32 fan

 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Handicap bargains Ian Cant Soaring 0 December 28th 05 05:49 PM
Hilton Cup Handicap questions ttaylor at cc.usu.edu Soaring 5 August 3rd 05 11:22 PM
USA handicap listings 01-- Zero One Soaring 1 June 5th 05 06:53 PM
Handicap Pilot "Hand Controls" mjrhoads Aviation Marketplace 6 December 15th 04 01:52 AM
SSA HANDICAP LIST [email protected] Soaring 11 September 17th 04 02:58 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:44 PM.


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