Speed Astir II B

I'm a novice glider pilot thinking of a Speed Astir II B. Any thoughts on this aircraft? Thanks!

define 'novice'.. if you have any time in 'high performance' gliders.. then have fun... it's a great glider.. they did not call it 'speed' for it's looks..

any consistent flying in glass birds and you should be able to handle the Speed Astir..

BT

In my case 'novice' means about 20 training flights & a few solo flights in a Grob 103 II A. I guess I'm really just a beginner!

I would consider something else. Speed Astir II's are not only misleading with their name, it is also one of the worst looking gliders around (bar the PW-5 of course).

Since no one so far has offered much in the way of a flight report on the Speed (dis)Aster. I'll tell you what I remember from my two flights.

Thing is built like a tank. Heavy wings. Maybe heavier than LS-3 wings. Typical Grob pain-in-the-ass assembly problems. Maybe not too much of a problem once you get the hang of fitting it all together. Did I mention that the wings are heavy? I have not flown a PIK-20, but I get the impression that the PIK and the Grob are somewhat similar in handling and performance.

Cockpit is long but narrow at the hips due to the control system tunnels on each side. Sorta pinched my 195 lb butt a little. Otherwise, it was comfortable to fly.

I thought the Speed that I flew handled pretty well. Lots more stable than my 301 Libelle. Controls not heavy and not too light. Negative flaps resulted in rapid acceleration. Both my flights in the Speed were on very weak lift days, but it seemed to thermal OK for a heavy ship. Probably not a bad ship on strong days. However, I've been told that the stiff wings, and they are very stiff, hinder it's performance in rough air for some reason. Glide path control was pretty typical for a glass ship. I seem to remember that the divebrakes were not quite as effective as on the103.

Other stuff:

Grob finish usually holds up better than most.

The two piece canopy is OK except for a couple of annoyances. One is that if left open, it tends to focus sunlight on the headrest which can set the glider on fire. Two is that the fixed forward part of the canopy makes it hard to work on the instruments or work on anything up in the nose.

The tail dolly is a wheel on a post. It fits up into a hole in the bottom of the tail boom. Falls off all by itself when the tail is lifted. This is a good thing if you forget to remove the tail dolly before flight. Take if from one who knows, leaving the tail dolly on makes for an interesting start to the ground roll.

Wing skins form the hinge for the wing control surfaces. No mylar needed.

My personal choice was to go for a lighter glider that was easier to assembly and performed better in weak conditions. The Speed would be pretty far down my list of preferences. But, for the right price, it would be an OK ship.

A minor nitpick:

That is the way it looks from the outside. However, structurally, the upper wing skin does not actually support the aileron. Inside the wing there are several support linkage gadgets that transfer lift loading between the aileron and the wing. I can't remember if they're four-bar links or track-and-roller arrangements. However, these gadgets are carefully arranged so that the effective hinge axis coincides with the surface of the upper wing skin. There are other sailplanes that use this sort of system; the flaps of the Slingsby T65 Vega come to mind.

It is a compelling system, since as Wallace points out it needs no mylar and no internal curtain sealing. However, what I've seen of one or two Speed Astirs in service is that the control loads tend to be greater than in more conventional systems, especially as they age. Also, the flexible skin portion tends not to hold its surface finish well; I've seen cracking and bubbling in this area on both Vegas and Speed Astirs. It's also hard to achieve the kind of surface travels that it takes to make high-aspect ailerons do their job effectively.

Getting off-topic, there _is_ at least one Chris Heintz powered airplane that does actually support the aileron on a flexible portion of wing skin. For more information, see:
http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/ht-aileron.html

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.

I guess I'm qualified to answer this one. I own one, although it is a II not a IIB. The difference is basically a longer fuselage to accomodate longer pilots.

I have about 40hrs in mine. I'd only had a couple of short flights in a Club Libelle, a flight or three in Pilatus, and a a couple of flights in a Twin Astir before jumping in the Speed.

I should preface this with the fact that mine has winglets fitted, and I have not flown it without.

Take-off. Be awake when aero-tow launching. Set Flaps full negative and pull into +2 once you can feel some aileron control coming on. In the first part of ground roll , use rudder and if you can help it, little aileron to keep wings level. Once you mastered this , the rest is a piece of cake. Make sure the tow plane uses a long rope. Short ropes mean more turbuence from the tug, and prop wash will hit you early in the take-off roll. You don't want that....trust me.

Flying

Maybe the winglets make a big difference. i don't know. However, anyone who has flown mine lands with big smile on their face. It's a great performing glider, and I have similar climb rates to other gliders on the feild. Don't thermal too slow. About 48-52 knots is good for me. Where the name Speed disAstir came from eludes me.

Landing.

Landing is a dream. Follow the Flight manual and you won't go wrong. Full Flap at end of downwind, use brakes sparingly close to the ground as full flap, full brake will make for an early (and vertically fast) arrival

Would I buy another? If I could find a IIB in good condition, and funds were an issue I would not hesitate. You will pay about US$10000 less than an equivalent performing glider.

...............and yes, it's a bitch to rig.

Cheers

I must point out that using the words 'speed' and 'Astir' in the same sentence is misuse of the english language.

I had one for 2 years

+Flies well +clims well if no water +goes fast if loadd

-weaker climb rate with water compared to others -lack of comfort,narrow fuselage -difficult takeoff on tail/crosswind -difficult to sell -difficult to work on instruments