SGS 2-33 thoughts.

I know this is a touchy subject for some, and a boring and over-posted subject for others, but I just wanted to share an experience. Saturday I took a buddy up for a glider ride for his 30th birthday. I was planning on renting a Grob 103 acro, but the winds at that airport were 25 knots downwind-cross, and the Grob was grounded for rentals. So I met my buddy at my club airport, which is a lot closer but we only have 2-33's for two-seaters.

So into the 2-33 we go. Now my friend's dad is a pilot and owns a Dakota, and my friend has flown power a fair amount, but had never seen the likes of a 2-33 before. He seemed happy enough, however, just suprised- the same way I was when I went to the gliderport for the first time- to see tube and fabric planes when even the R/C models we fly are all molded carbon fiber or glass.

But the reason I'm writing is to relay his impressions from flying the 2-33. We had very turbulent conditions on tow, more than I have felt even in wave rotor at Cal City, at least so far. I found myself somewhat annoyed that essentially full aileron deflection and full rudder was required to maintain station on tow. I hadn't flown a 2-33 for about four months and had forgotten what it was like to move a control stick so far just to fly straight. My friend was more like shocked. After we got off tow and took a boomer up to about 10,000 msl I gave him the plane, and he did alright- except when we hit more nasty turbulence, and he couldn't believe the physical force needed and the stick deflection needed to man-handle the plane. He asked me 'don't you get tired?' 'What if a girl wanted to fly' (sorry ladies-but that's what he said!)

Anyrate, it WAS tiring to fly it, especially on tow, and while my friend had a good time, and got to experince a 6-8kt climb of nearly 8,000ft in a matter of minutes, his ideas of 'effortless silent flight' have been somewhat shattered by a noisy butter-churning sky-flogging in the venerable 2-33. I truthfully told him that the conditions were unusual, and that normally things are smoother and control inputs more reasonable. But I also told him next time we will definitely go glass...

JR.

A year ago I also took a friend up for some glider rides. Our first flight was in a 2-33. We really wanted to take a ride in one of our Grob 103s, but they were already reserved. After 45 minutes we landed. When I asked him if he wanted to take another ride (in the 2-33) he politely suggested maybe we should go get an early dinner or something. Shortly afterward, one of the G103s became available, and I managed to convince my friend to take another ride in this glider. After a 1-1/2 hour flight we landed. What a difference! His smile was frome ear to ear. The whole time we were flying the 103, he kept saying 'now this is what what I'm talking about buddy!'. Later, he told me that he was so underwhelmed by the 2-33 ride, that he really didn't want to go back up in it (and why he suggested going somewhere else, like out to dinner).

Why bother write up a post like this? The 2-33 has been bashed more than enough, and yes, it flies like a pig, but it has also trained the majority of USA soaring pilots in the last twenty years. If you want to take your buddy up and wow him with technology, then glass is the way to go. However, if you know someone who really is interested in getting their license and doesn't have a million bucks, the 2-33 is a great option. For me, I had just gotten out of college and was repaying off my debts. I had no business flying gliders or anything else for that matter, but I came up with the initiation fee and joined the local club. I didn't think twice about the 2-33. It flew, it was cheap, and I was learning to soar. Also, glass doesn't take hard landings as well as the 2-33. Those aircraft have been beat on for their whole lives and they are still truckin'. So, in summary, climb off the subject. My bet is that unless you are from Europe, you probably trained in one too. We all move on at some point, and believe me, I love glass now, but remember the benefits of that tub of bolts. I also still love the 1-26, the Blanik, and am considering purchasing a K-6.

Regards,

Devin

At 13:48 14 April 2002, Devin Martin wrote: snip>I love glass now, but remember the benefits of

I love glass now <snip> and am considering purchasing

Homer Simpson takes up gliding Doh!!!

YOur first screw up, I have flown the RTF that you mention, and can state from personal experience that a built up, balsa and Stitts model, finished with dope, will fly on less than half the engine that a glass and foamie will. It will also outperform the glass and foam lead sled in any other criteria you think you can mention. The difference is, the built up model requires skill to make and to make fly the way it's supposed to, the glass and foam is for idiots that wouldn't know a good flying plane if they needed a procto to remove it. But it's always amusing to hear from someone that has themselves thoroughly convinced that their plane doesn't fly like a dog, even though it flys like a pig.

I think 'your' impressions, not his. I have my suspicion that all he heard during the tow was negative comments from you, and probably being a 'thoroughly modern millie' picked up of what you wanted to hear. The thing that comes to my mind is 'another newbie with brain poisoning by a glasshole'.

Have a nice day, amateur, maybe someday you'll learn not to stick both feet in your mouth at the same time, but I doubt it.

[snip]

I have flown a variety of R/C *sailplanes* over the past 8 years including built-up and composite. I believe that you have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. Go to a national level R/C saoring contest and see who's flying what and what is clearly winning in 2-meter and open class.

-Doug Hoffman

Even though I am tempted to congratulate him on finally realizing what the 2-33 really is, I know that this is only an anonymous troll claiming to be Lennie the Lurker. It can not be the real Lennie the Lurker because he told us he would not visit us again. He was signing off for good.

And so, being the honorable man that he is I am sure the real Lennie is long gone, after all he is an honorable man isn't he?

Robert Mudd

Actually, you haven't. I was refering to R/C gliders, which except for 'nostalgia' classes of competition have all been molded or vacuum bagged for years. 'Built up' planes are no longer competitive at the higher levels of competition that I am mostly familiar with. (F3B F3F F3J F3K)

A lot of people, including myself, fly and build both types. I have enjoyed scratch-building and (built-up) kit building several very nice flying planes. I also built a foam-cutting machine and put together a vacuum bagging system as well so as to enjoy the benefits of building my own composite models. The best model planes for soaring are molded, and that is a bit beyond most home-builders. All planes require a degree of skill and care to set up to fly well, of course.

Reasonable enough suspicion I suppose. Actually however I posted more or less what happened. My comments were mostly to reassure him that usually the air was not as turbulent and that one didn't always need to work so hard to fly the 2-33. And also that the 2-33 was about the least likely plane to come apart in the air that there is.

I'm not sure what to say to this. I've read some of your other posts so I guess it's part of your 'thing' to write 'stuff' like this. For what it's worth I actually am a relative newcomer to full-scale soaring. I have flown R/C gliders in competition around the country and the world, and represented the USA in the World Championships as one of the three Team USA pilots. We won the Gold. You are a bit out of your league telling me how to fly or build models.

I posted my original article simply as a 'FWIW' in light of the interest and concern that many people on RAS seem to have about how the general public perceives soaring. R/C model pilots are a great group to expose, many well-known full scale pilots started in R/C. Power pilots are another good group. My friend has done both, so his impressions are perhaps good to hear.

JR.

I have flown R/C gliders in competition around the country

No doubt.

And a sincere congratulations on your achievements in RC soaring. All soaring, flying really, fascinates me. Big or small, with the soaring kind being shear poetry.

Perhaps not such a good idea to butt heads with L the L though. Someone once said, 'Never argue with a fool, for he will drag you down to his level, then beat you with experience'.

Apparently the first mistake was yours. This is a *soaring* newsgroup and John Roe was speaking of R/C gliders. He didn't say which but the implication was obvious.

If you don't fly sailplanes, not even R/C, then what on earth are you doing in this newsgroup?

-Doug Hoffman

I have learned over the years that slavishly following what the competition dictates will lead to an unhappy modeler with planes that he doesn't like. COntinue to do so if you wish to continue to be a lemming.

Yes, and as anyone that has flown the simple 'no radio' HLG can tell you, sticking a radio in a plank can force it to fly, but not well. What flys well is a matter of opinion also. You would probably not enjoy my planes, as the CG is so far aft that they are right on the verge of instability, they spin and snap roll much better that way. However, planes that are docile and forgiving are boring.

The names I listen to are Konefes, Simmers, Noonan. Get your name up to their class and maybe you can get a word in sideways. And Yes, I know Wally was killed in an accident, and Jim had a stroke, but I still fly HLG with Joe. Your league has a long way to go to reach their level. You can build on the foundation, that these people built. But, the competition means nothing to me, I'm not after scalps for the mantle.