larger pilot

At 14:04 10 February 2020, Michael Opitz wrote:
At 07:45 10 February 2020, wrote:
Hi, I'm 6'6" and 240 pounds and new to soaring. I've been looking
at the possibilities open to me after I finish training and all single
seaters have a cockpit rated to 110 kg, i.e. a 10 kilo allowance for a
chute and a pilot around 100 kilo's max. As I am well over the limit
with a chute is there any way out of this other than to start dieting?
Regards Mark



It is my understanding that this limit is due to the strength of the
harness attachment points (including those in 2-seaters as well).
IIRC, there are a few newer gliders that may have the option of a
BRS (Ballistic Recovery System - a chute that recovers the whole
glider), which would allow you to use the seat without actually
wearing a chute. This will probably be an expensive solution
though, depending on your available budget.

RO


I'm thinking that a Genesis would do the trick if you can find one.
Very large cockpit with a BRS too.

RO

It's not an issue for me as I'm 1.75m, but last time I was at Aero Expo the
Schempp rep said the modern non "A" types are good for a 2m pilot.

I.e D2 / V2 b/c

Don't know about the "larger" V3 fuselage

At 01:26 11 February 2020, Michael Opitz wrote:
At 14:04 10 February 2020, Michael Opitz wrote:
At 07:45 10 February 2020, wrote:
Hi, I'm 6'6" and 240 pounds and new to soaring. I've been looking
at the possibilities open to me after I finish training and all single
seaters have a cockpit rated to 110 kg, i.e. a 10 kilo allowance for a
chute and a pilot around 100 kilo's max. As I am well over the limit
with a chute is there any way out of this other than to start dieting?
Regards Mark



It is my understanding that this limit is due to the strength of the
harness attachment points (including those in 2-seaters as well).
IIRC, there are a few newer gliders that may have the option of a
BRS (Ballistic Recovery System - a chute that recovers the whole
glider), which would allow you to use the seat without actually
wearing a chute. This will probably be an expensive solution
though, depending on your available budget.

RO


I'm thinking that a Genesis would do the trick if you can find one.
Very large cockpit with a BRS too.

RO

To answer about the V3 larger but oddly named "performance" cockpit. The V3M cockpit has a great deal of length and average depth but is slightly on the narrow side for broad pilots. Overall it is not as roomy as the JS1 or ASH26 cockpit. Two very tall and proportionately broad friends found it two tight for them across the hips or shoulders. One of those has a Discus 2cT which he is fine in in spite of it only being 2cm wider across the inside of the upper cockpit rim - mostly accounted for by a thicker cockpit rim structure as it looks as if the external dimension is the same.

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 1:45:24 AM UTC-6, wrote:
Hi, I'm 6'6" and 240 pounds and new to soaring. I've been looking at the possibilities open to me after I finish training and all single seaters have a cockpit rated to 110 kg, i.e. a 10 kilo allowance for a chute and a pilot around 100 kilo's max. As I am well over the limit with a chute is there any way out of this other than to start dieting? Regards Mark

Hi Mark,

You should be able to shed 20 lbs rather easily through Keto or some other low carb diet and keep it off if you're active and with intermittent fasting. I'm 6'7" and went from over 280 lbs down to 225 doing just that.

As for which gliders you'll fit in, I've also been doing my own research as I just finished my rating and looking to purchase my own glider. Here's what I found so far. I fit in the following gliders:

DG-300, 505 (very comfortable)
LS-3 and LS-4 (very comfortable)
Standard Jantar 2 (lots of legroom)
Standard Cirrus (adjusting the headrest, good room)
ASW-27 (need to adjust the panel for legroom - knees)
Mosquito (just barely)
Arcus M and T (two-ship, very comfortable, but $$$$$$)
L-33 Solo (very comfortable)
PW-5 (very comfortable as well with lots of headroom)


I'll be trying on a Kestrel, Open Cirrus, Nimbus and a Libelle.

Strangely, I did not fit in:

Grob 102 (legroom was fine, headroom - not even close)
PIK-20 (legroom was fine, headroom - not even close)
Russia (just no, but I understand some versions might work)

All in all, as tall guys, our choices get limited but doable.

Good luck!

My DG-303 Acro is great for heavier pilots. I have a brass tail wheel which really helps with the weight and balance. The Acro gives me a little more piece of mind.

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 1:00:42 PM UTC-8, Martin Gregorie wrote:

If the OP fits an ASW-20, he'll also fit an ASW-19 or a Centraire Pegase.

The 19 and 20 used the same fuselage moulds....

As a caution, there's a lot more to cockpit ergonomics than the fuselage shape. The detail design of the cockpit, including the location of the wing and undercarriage anchors and control stick mechanism, can have a substantial effect on the effective anthropometric range. I know that the Centrair products started off as licensed copies of the AS gliders, but their design remained relatively static while Schleicher was continually incorporating minor changes.

As a general rule, the later versions of any particular type are often better than the earlier ones, as they tend to accumulate minor improvements that make more cockpit volume available.

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 13:59:39 -0800, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 1:00:42 PM UTC-8, Martin Gregorie wrote:

If the OP fits an ASW-20, he'll also fit an ASW-19 or a Centraire
Pegase.

The 19 and 20 used the same fuselage moulds....

As a caution, there's a lot more to cockpit ergonomics than the fuselage
shape. The detail design of the cockpit, including the location of the
wing and undercarriage anchors and control stick mechanism, can have a
substantial effect on the effective anthropometric range. I know that
the Centrair products started off as licensed copies of the AS gliders,
but their design remained relatively static while Schleicher was
continually incorporating minor changes.

As a general rule, the later versions of any particular type are often
better than the earlier ones, as they tend to accumulate minor
improvements that make more cockpit volume available.


Sure, but I've enough time on a Peg 90 and ASW-20 to know that those two
cockpits are very similar. The ventilation difference is easily missed
unless you know about it. The only really noticeable change is that none
of the original 20s, i.e. not the B and C models) had a lifting panel,
while every Pegase I've seen had it fitted as standard. So did many
(most?) of the so-called 'F' model ASW-20s, which were license-built by
Centraire before they fitted a nice unflapped wing to the same fuselage
and called the result a Pegase 101. Incremental changes: the Peg 101s
originally had Hotelliers inside a tiny access hatch same as the 19 and
20 while the Peg 90 is entirely self-connecting.

If you look at the Pegase fuselage sides at about mid-chord under the
wings, and preferably at a shallow angle so you can see reflections
highlighting surface waviness, its quite easy to see where the ASW 19/20
NACA-style ventilation inlets used to be. I was told they'd modified the
moulds to do that: sounds reasonable since that would save finishing work
on each fuselage.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org