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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Frank, the Puchatek AKA "Puke Attack" is a decent trainer. Pretty
rugged, roomy, good visibility and comfort. Looks/feels a bit utilitarian. You can instruct speed to fly, spins and low energy touchdown. It winches nicely. There's even an instrument panel in the back seat and a usable baggage compartment. The wheel brake is a separate pull handle. They've had a few ADs, think the latest was airbrake actuators. The lack of a continued airworthiness (was it actually 5000 hours?) inspection program will be the end of them. Barry Aviation (Peregrine) haven't updated their website in many years. Jim On Sep 15, 1:32*pm, Frank Whiteley wrote: How do you like the Puchatek? *OBTW, that's the Krosno KR-03a AKA Peregrine I mentioned previously. Frank |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Tom Mara and Bob Whelan;
THANK YOU for being the 'VOICES OF REASON" on this thread! (With apologies to BK and TC) As for the rest of you, how about post on the FAA Blanik AD comment page to inform them of the effect the AD will have on 1/5 of the training fleet, as most of the students I know can't afford north of $60 just to get thier rating in Modern glass, and will cease their training as a result. Your comments here outnumber those on the FAA page by three to one! If not able to do so, I imagine the combined hot air on this thread could be directed vertically with measurable effect! aerodine |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 15, 10:27*pm, wrote:
Tom Mara and Bob Whelan; THANK YOU for being the 'VOICES OF REASON" on this thread! (With apologies to BK and TC) As for the rest of you, how about post on the FAA Blanik AD comment page to inform them of the effect the AD will have on 1/5 of the training fleet, as most of the students I know can't afford north of $60 just to get thier rating in Modern glass, and will cease their training as a result. *Your comments here outnumber those on the FAA page by three to one! If not able to do so, I imagine the combined hot air on this thread could be directed vertically with measurable effect! aerodine I'm missing the point of just telling the FAA what the effect of the AD will be on grounding L13 fleet -- I kinda suspect people directly involved at the FAA know. The FAA seems pretty set that a testing procedure needs to be developed. They seem to have invested a fair amount of time and effort lookign at this already and went out of their way in the recent letter to the SSA to present a nice report. What is it you actually want people to ask the FAA to do? That the FAA engineer a test procedure on their own? That they provide more help (what exactly?) to develop that in collaboration? That they try to pressure the LAK to do something? That they just accept the past visual inspection AD? Thanks Darryl |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 15, 9:42*pm, JS wrote:
* Frank, the Puchatek AKA "Puke Attack" is a decent trainer. Pretty rugged, roomy, good visibility and comfort. Looks/feels a bit utilitarian. You can instruct speed to fly, spins and low energy touchdown. It winches nicely. There's even an instrument panel in the back seat and a usable baggage compartment. The wheel brake is a separate pull handle. * They've had a few ADs, think the latest was airbrake actuators. The lack of a continued airworthiness (was it actually 5000 hours?) inspection program will be the end of them. Barry Aviation (Peregrine) haven't updated their website in many years. Jim Thanks for the comments. True, but they are still hoping to build them and service the existing fleet. Frank |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 15, 8:28*pm, Westbender wrote:
On Sep 15, 6:49*pm, "noel.wade" wrote: On Sep 15, 4:40*pm, wrote: My club has 25 junior members that must be blind according to your criteria. They didn't know they weren't supposed to have fun and enjoy learning to fly in th 2-33. UH - 1) Note that I didn't participate in any comments about the '21 or the other expensive glass ships in this thread. 2) I'm guessing your club has other things that are making it attractive to younger members! *Either you have great instruction, or a clear stepping-stone approach to flying better ships in the future, or super-cheap rates, or they were recruited by existing club members or some club outreach program that excited them, or something along those lines. *They did not drop in to the club from nowhere, see the 2-33, and decide it was a good idea. I'd love to know how your club is attracting so many students; and I'd also love to know how many of them go on to complete their license and continue to fly with the club. --Noel Is it really that hard to believe the 2-33 didn't scare everyone away? Come one, why don't we stop this silly nonsense about how the 2-33 is the reason why soaring isn't growing. For goodness sakes. Then there's the "have to be retrained" boloney after learning to fly in a 2-33. It serves the purpose it was designed to do very well. Basic training. I don't recall a single prospective member of our club that came calling because they saw a "cool looking ship" at the field, or backed away after seeing the 2-33. All of our students are always clamoring for instruction time in our trainers. They could care less about the glass ships that are rigging/derigging/departing/arriving when training flights are operating. They're not stupid. They all know the 2-33 is not the end of the line. It's only the beginning. If you'd take the time to talk to new students or even prospective ones, they'll tell you what their expectations and their intentions are. I garantee you they understand the concept of basic training and progression. By the way, our club has a "stepping-stone" approach to better performing ships, but we can only afford so much. 2 2-33s, 1 2-22, 2 1-26s, 1 1-34, 1 L23. Not all of our ships are on the flightline due to instructor shortages (that's another discussion). Our students are always eyeing the single-place ships and a couple of them already purchased their own ships. Although they're keeping them in the barn until they're ready to fly them. That's because they're intelligent people and not lured around by a carrot dangling on a stick. If we have to resort to "eye-candy" to lure people to soaring, then it's not necessarily about flying is it? Maybe it's just a niche and nothing more. I wonder how many students are more likely to follow through and become a licensed pilot or even an owner? One attracted by something shiny? Or one that is driven by the desire to fly? I was fortunate that my first glider flight in the early 1970's was 1) a soaring flight and not a sled ride and 2) in an L-13 and not a 2-33. Had either 1 or 2 been different, e.g. sled ride or 2-22/2-33, I may not have become interested and gone hang gliding instead. Before I took such a flight, I studied the topic in my local library which held the 1967 NG issue of Striedeck's flight, copies of Soaring Magazine, and several soaring books, include "Old Dog" Wolters "Once Upon a Thermal". During my university years, somehow I missed Star Trek and "The Boy Who Flew with Condors". You see, I liked fast boats and faster motorcycles. I know several instructors that will not get in the back of a 2-33. Are you sure it's not the same problem? Did you watch the video at the link I posted about bringing your club into the 21st Century? Are you sure they are stepping stones and not hurdles? See the above referenced presentation. In effect what they achieved was the same utilization with fewer gliders. Costs of said gliders were not significantly different. Insurance costs probably went down. The FSDO reported a higher standard of pilot check rides. The chapter had a waiting list for memberships. Not so much about eye-candy, but more about delivering on the promise of soaring. I have flown 23/1, 30/1, 40/1 and 50/1. The promise is not at 23/1. Jean Richard from Canada used to post on RAS for years. An observation he contributed years ago was that 28/1 soars twice a much as 23/1 in a ground launch training environment. A New Zealand study presented at an SSA convention showed member churn in soaring to be 20%/year everywhere but in the US, where it was 30%. The reason for the difference was never very clear, but some of us surmised at the time that 2-33's might be part of the reason, because many places lacked even your club's stepping stones. Am I saying crush them all? No. Just plan for the future and roll over the tin ships to a club lower on the food chain. You are welcomed to donate your under-utilized, serviceable gliders to the Collegiate Soaring Assocation, a 501c(3) charitable soaring organization. Synthetic ropes make winching 2-22's and 2-33's much more reasonable since they don't have to lift 200 or more pounds of wire rope. Several flights for the cost of an aero tow. One of our club members had 250 hours off the winch by age 16, then they put him in a Messerschmitt so he could self launch;^) Students are not necessarily youth. Some of the comments were about what 'youth' expect. At the moment, youth are in short supply at your chapter, although in abundance at another chapter with some similar equipment. Youth like to hang out in groups. It's easy to attract one or two for a while. If ten or twelve are hanging out at the club, it's easy to get five or six to bring a friend. Some may stick, then more show up. I think once you get 10-12, it might be a lot easier to suddenly have many more, unless some grumps chase them away. Just some ramblings, Frank Whiteley |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Please be more careful in future with how you do the posting. It looks like
I wrote 'here we go again', and I most certainly didn't. "Tony V" wrote in message ... Surfer! wrote: Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
For your information: A reply from Scheibe Aircraft, not that many
seem interested in modernizing the fleet. Jim Yes, that is right that we want to produce the SF 34! At the moment we adjust the forms and fixtures and we want to start the production in about 4 weeks. The price will be about EUR 65.900,00 (without instruments and trailer) + tax and the delivery-time is about 5-6 months. So if you want to fly a SF 34 next season you should order soon. If you need more information please tell me. Mit freundlichen Grüßen kindly regards Katja Sammet SCHEIBE-AIRCRAFT-GMBH Am Flugplatz 5 D-73540 Heubach Tel. 0049 7173 184286 Fax 0049 7173 185587 www.scheibe-aircraft.de |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Let me try to make my point by using an analogy:
You're walking around downtown at lunch. You're hungry. There are many restaurants around that will serve you food. Tucked into the corner of a building you see a dodgy-looking sandwich shop that appears to be old, small, rusty, and with fading/peeling paint on it. How likely are you to walk in and sample the food? How likely are you to walk in and tell the owner that he'd get more business if he just spruced the place up and put out better signage? Aren't you FAR more likely to just keep walking down the road and eat somewhere else? Anyone looked at the hang-gliding & paragliding community lately? Huh - seems like its got a lot of youth involved in it and I keep hearing about how their numbers are doing OK. Anyone hear a hang-glider instructor talk fondly about about using a 30-year-old Rogallo wing to instruct with? How about a Paragliding instructor wishing he was still using an early-model 'chute (you know, the ones that were more prone to collapses)? I'm not laying all of soaring's troubles at the feet of the 2-33 and I'm not saying that the ship is worthless. But I AM saying that I think clubs should consider multiple angles when selecting their training/club aircraft. Looking at it purely from the standpoint of "dollars to acquire" or "dollars for routine maintenance" is myopic and ignores a lot of other things. There's a reason businesses look at "total cost of ownership" and "opportunity cost" when deciding to buy big-ticket items. --Noel |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 15 Sep, 16:13, Kevin Christner wrote:
I have spent enough time instructing to see two types of students, Schweizer trained and everyone else. *Place these two types in an ASK-21. *Schweizer trained students often lack refined control coordination and almost always have little ability to control pitch and speed properly. *The other students seem to do much better. *The Schweizer simply does not require the refined control of more modern gliders to be flown in a way that seems coordinated. *Being trained in a Schweizer typically means you will need to be totally retrained to fly anything else, and the bad habits first learned will often creep back. Find me one world team member that thinks primary training in a Schweizer is a good idea. *I doubt you'll have any glowing advocates. KJC On Sep 15, 7:34*am, Tony wrote: The 2-33 is suffering the same metal fatigue problems in it's wings as the L-13. Is this statement based on actual issues with 2-33 wings or just the fact that "it is metal, it will fatigue eventually"? I see no mention in any of the Schweizer Service Bulletins about issues with 2-22 or 2-33 wing structure and have never heard of any problems either. I notice that 3 or 4 of the USA World Team members trained in Schweizers.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - At Booker we use both K21s and K13s. K21s are great for air experience and early handling as they are safe and easy to fly. Added bonus is they look modern and don't turn off the punter. The K13s are slightly harder to fly and spin. As such they are better for training pilots to solo level. We also own a Duo which is a delight to fly and excellent for XC and competition training. It is not as robust as the 21, much slippier with weaker brakes so harder to land, and the view from the back is not as good. If we were buying another trainer it would probably be a K21. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Surfer! wrote:
Please be more careful in future with how you do the posting. It looks like I wrote 'here we go again', and I most certainly didn't. Yup, my bad. So sorry. T "Tony V" wrote in message ... Surfer! wrote: Here we go again, the recurring 2-33 "religious" argument. :-) For the record, I learned in a 2-33 and it's not my favorite trainer. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club Class Gliders | Sam Giltner[_1_] | Soaring | 4 | December 3rd 08 03:28 AM |
Basic Training Gliders | Derek Copeland | Soaring | 35 | December 26th 05 02:19 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Soaring club close to NYC, with high-performance gliders | City Dweller | Soaring | 9 | September 29th 05 11:55 AM |