LAK-12 Question

I have noticed over the years that this glider sells for what seems to
be a very low price given that it is a near 50:1 glider. But I notice
lately that there are also some for sale on Wings & Wheels with
relatively low total time:

320 hours $21k
260 hours $20k
200 hours $15k

Other than the obvious issues of dealing with a more cumbersome glider
to assemble, ground-handle, and store, is there some other inherent
problem with these gliders? I would expect to see a lot more hours on
gliders of this vintage, and a higher price for gliders of this
performance.

TIA

-Doug

I have a little time in a friend's Lak-12 flying XC out of Turf, AZ.

Nice glider, if a little crude compared to similar German offerings.
But everything works.

Cockpit is big and comfortable, except for a "roger hook" type thingy
at the rear of the canopy that would probably have put a dent in my
noggin on a hard landing - but then I sat way back with the backrest
removed. No real comfort issues during several 3- 4 hour flights.

Flies nice, but it is a 20 meter ship, so adverse yaw is an issue.
Real good weak weather ship. Never got to fly it ballasted, but
chasing my friends in their 15 meter/std ships, I would gain on climbs
and lose on fast long glides in typical strong AZ conditions - exactly
what you would expect for an unballasted 20 m ship. On weak days, it
would easily outclimb smaller ships, and late afternoon/evening final
glides were wonderful - felt like you could go forever!.

Landing took some care due to adverse yaw and long wings. Also, wheel
is too far aft (IMHO), so it is easy to put on nose using the
effective wheel brake (very un-german in that respect!).

Now the bad part. ONE PIECE WINGS. Real heavy to rig/derig, huge
trailer.

So solve the rigging issue (one man rig, lots of friends, hangar) and
it's really got a lot of bank for the buck!

I think it would be a great ship for the midwest (lots of runways/big
fields to land in) but I worried about landing out in small narrow
desert strips with it.

If offered, I would fly one again in a heartbeat!

Kirk
LS6-b "66"

I googled this topic and could not find previous threads
on RAS, but I suspect they exist. I would expect most
experiences are similiar to mine...helped put the huge
wings on, but no time flying the bird. It would be
my experience that if one of these landed out in a
field where self-riggers would not operate...it would
be 3-4 strong friends to get it into a trailer. Assembly/disassem
bly reminded me of a Grob 103, although on hardtop
with self rigging gear and a good trailer I suspect
things would be much easier.

"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
I googled this topic and could not find previous threads
on RAS, but I suspect they exist. I would expect most
experiences are similiar to mine...helped put the huge
wings on, but no time flying the bird. It would be
my experience that if one of these landed out in a
field where self-riggers would not operate...it would
be 3-4 strong friends to get it into a trailer. Assembly/disassem
bly reminded me of a Grob 103, although on hardtop
with self rigging gear and a good trailer I suspect
things would be much easier.

Frank Whiteley, who owns a LAK-12, and I have discussed this.

If the one-man rigging system used "gate hinge" type root dolleys on the
trailer, then the wings could be swung out ~45 degrees to the
trailer/fuselage before the Udo-type wing dolly was attached to the wing CG.
Then, the wheels of the wing dolly needn't roll more than 4-6 feet when
rigging/derigging. One could pack a sheet of plywood to lay on soft ground
for the wing dolly wheels to roll on. That way, even if you landed in a
soft plowed field, rigging aids would still work.

Bill Daniels

Kirk is right on with his description. It appears very similar in
most respects to the Jantar-1 (19m), which I did own and fly.

When I drove my trailer on to the field, all rigging volunteers
instantly disappeared! When I got a hangar, it proved an enjoyable
ship to own and fly. I suspect the same is true of the LAK-12.

I wouldn't consider it if you're going to rig every day before flying.

Mike

Bill Daniels wrote:

If the one-man rigging system used "gate hinge" type root dolleys on the
trailer, then the wings could be swung out ~45 degrees to the
trailer/fuselage before the Udo-type wing dolly was attached to the wing CG.
Then, the wheels of the wing dolly needn't roll more than 4-6 feet when
rigging/derigging. One could pack a sheet of plywood to lay on soft ground
for the wing dolly wheels to roll on. That way, even if you landed in a
soft plowed field, rigging aids would still work.

If it's a soft plowed field, would you be able to get a heavy 40 foot
long trailer to the glider? And get it out when it's even heavier with
the glider in it? It wouldn't work around here in eastern Washington
state as the vehicles would get stuck, and many farmers would not like
the car and trailer on their plowed field.

I've never helped carry a Lak 12 out of a field, though it might be fun
to be the guy taking the pictures of the retrieve! Maybe Doug should
call all the people selling the Lak 12 and ask them why they are selling it.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
newsk6%h.426$dj2.277@trndny02...
Bill Daniels wrote:

If the one-man rigging system used "gate hinge" type root dolleys on the
trailer, then the wings could be swung out ~45 degrees to the
trailer/fuselage before the Udo-type wing dolly was attached to the wing
CG. Then, the wheels of the wing dolly needn't roll more than 4-6 feet
when rigging/derigging. One could pack a sheet of plywood to lay on soft
ground for the wing dolly wheels to roll on. That way, even if you
landed in a soft plowed field, rigging aids would still work.

If it's a soft plowed field, would you be able to get a heavy 40 foot long
trailer to the glider? And get it out when it's even heavier with the
glider in it? It wouldn't work around here in eastern Washington state as
the vehicles would get stuck, and many farmers would not like the car and
trailer on their plowed field.

Is there any real difference between a 30 foot trailer and a 40 foot in this
situation? It's also worth pointing out that with the LAK's performance, it
shouldn't arise often.

Obviously, driving into a soft field is a bad idea that should be avoided if
possible but it's been done successfully. The LAK is heavier than, say, a
3-piece wing BG-12 or a Skylark 4, but I've helped get those out of plowed
fields. I recall some pilots carrying a 1000' spool of rope and a pulley
block to gently pull gliders to a gate where they could be derigged without
putting the trailer on the field.

The LAK WILL be more of a problem in retrieves but if you think about it you
can deal with it. The LAK is not as bad as my old Lark IS28b2 and I could
rig it solo..

Bill Daniels

Thanks for all of the feedback, guys. The weak lift performance is
certainly a plus here in Michigan. The downside issues are food for
thought. Paying for a hangar so it could be left rigged is out of the
question for me. Although I currently use an Udo dolly on my 15-meter
ship and that dolly is marvelous. It may make the LAK-12 assembly/
disassembly task acceptable.

Regards,

-Doug

Bill Daniels wrote:

If it's a soft plowed field, would you be able to get a heavy 40 foot long
trailer to the glider? And get it out when it's even heavier with the
glider in it? It wouldn't work around here in eastern Washington state as
the vehicles would get stuck, and many farmers would not like the car and
trailer on their plowed field.

Is there any real difference between a 30 foot trailer and a 40 foot in this
situation?

I would expect a much larger and heavier trailer to be a much bigger
problem. The tow car has got to pull a lot harder, with a greater risk
digging into the soft dirt, You can't manhandle it as easily if it gets
stuck.

It's also worth pointing out that with the LAK's performance, it
shouldn't arise often.

That depends on the pilot ^ - nobody needs to land in a field if it's
important not to, and at 20 meters, many airports and private strips are
unusable. The fear of a difficult retrieve or damage when landing on a
small airport makes the pilot fly more conservatively, which reduces his
soaring pleasure, and I suspect that factor is about half of the reason
these gliders are so cheap. The other half is the irritation of dealing
with them on the ground, or paying for a hangar.


The LAK WILL be more of a problem in retrieves but if you think about it you
can deal with it.

Agreed! A prospective owner should consider the hassles and if there are
acceptable solutions to them, and not be let the "bang for the buck"
figure crowd out consideration of these issues.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On May 5, 4:54 am, Doug Hoffman wrote:
I have noticed over the years that this glider sells for what seems to
be a very low price given that it is a near 50:1 glider. But I notice
lately that there are also some for sale on Wings & Wheels with
relatively low total time:

320 hours $21k
260 hours $20k
200 hours $15k

Other than the obvious issues of dealing with a more cumbersome glider
to assemble, ground-handle, and store, is there some other inherent
problem with these gliders? I would expect to see a lot more hours on
gliders of this vintage, and a higher price for gliders of this
performance.

TIA

-Doug

Tried to reply twice earlier but neither have showed up yet. Seems to
happen on the weekends.

For those interested in buying, join the Yahoo group LAK12 and review
some of the items there.

The LAK-12 flies fine. I haven't flown mine with water yet, but a
couple of owners report that ballast makes it a different, and even
better, glider. There are a couple of size considerations if you
have a long torso or big feet. Both can be accommodated to some
extent. It is pretty heavy, flapped, and I suspect some low-time in
glider owners haven't been comfortable in it and didn't get much
practice. The rigging effort required due to the poor trailer setup
probably limited the amount of hours they were able to get and
resulted in some intimidation regarding XC flying for others. The
LAK12 is a niche glider, comparable to the Nimbus 2, ASW-17, and
Kestrel 19, so attractive only to a smaller part of the market.

Rigging and the trailer are real issues, owing in part to the 230lb
wing panels and the poor trailer setup. Anyone considering buying one
should budget for some trailer modifications. Doing so will relieve
much of the problem. Domestic trailer replacement would cost about
$8000 plus rigging. I understand some of the trailers have structural
problems, and from what I've heard I suspect from excessive snow
loads. The rigging issues are largely part of the trailer design and
the wing root dollies. I've modified my door and rails with scissors
jacks and have replaced the aft trailer supports with longer sections
to reduce the fore and aft slope of the trailer dramatically and to
keep the fuselage dolly on the tracks to avoid the tail lift to get
the wheel down. Apart from that, the trailer tows well behind my F150
and the surge brakes work fine. The suspension is trailing torsion
arm with shock. The sprung section is steel, not rubber. It smooths
out the bumps. I think one owner had a suspension member fail.

I use an Udo dolly, which is not quite right for this glider. The
next stage will involve modifying the axle and inner wheel wells then
adding another stabilizing track and modified root dollies and a new
wing dolly. After that, I expect the glider with become one person
rig with no heavy lifting. I can rig now with one other person,
mostly for stabilizing the wings while moving them in and out of the
trailer. The scissors jacks help with the spigot and spar pin
alignments which are critical for assembly and finally with raising
and lower the gear. Taking a couple of extra minutes with alignment
before pulling the wings together makes it pretty easy. The real hard
part is lifting the wings in and out of the trailer saddles atop the
wheel wells and at the tip. It's the trailer design that's kept
people from flying them much XC or frequently enough to be really
comfortable with it.

I suspect several of the owners may have been low time glider drivers
and possibly first time private owners. This is my seventh glider and
I had rigged one a few times before and knew what the pitfalls were.
I've already solved some of the rigging issues and hope to finish the
rest before long. I've rigged and derigged a lot of glider types over
the years. The handbook for the LAK-12 says it can be rigged by 3-4
in 10 minutes. True, if it's the same crew each time, but where will
you find that these days? But that also means a lot of lifting. So
far I haven't heard about too many where the owners have taken time to
fix the short comings of the trailer and rigging issues. It's
doable. Have a peek in the lak12 yahoo group.

Plus side
Good forward and all around visibility.
Excellent performance. Thermals dry down around 41-42kts.
Tall undercarriage. Same oleo strut as Blaniks. Positive lock in up
and down position. Medium effort to raise and lower. Good wheel
brake with stick handle.
Two 12AH battery boxes for all those gadgets.
Good access to all controls and fittings.
Ballast system appears both well designed and functions fine from what
I'm told.
Ventilation.

So-so side
In board sections are flaps only. Out board sections are flaperons.
Tail emits a tone when thermaling on several, like blowing over the
top of a beer bottle.
Canopy is not strut supported, but held in open position by over-
center lock.
Original canopies are screwed, not glued, to frame.

Down side
Trailer design
Wing root dollies

Frank Whiteley