I personally was in America during the first flights. Then came bad weather, factory vacation, and scheduling problems. So it was seven weeks until I first saw our DG-1000.
I don’t want to write a test description. First of all, that can best be written by the experts in the flying magazines. Secondly, you would read such a report from me with a healthy suspicion. So I write, to the best of my ability, only a few impressions here.
- If there is no argument about taste, the DG-1000 is an especially beautiful glider. The way it stands on its powerful main wheel without the a nose wheel to break the lines already gives it an aesthetic look. There is no need to compare it with the competition. The DG-1000 stands on its own!
- After settling into the cockpit one immediately feels comfortably at home. It is unnecessary to use a thick cushion because the height of the edge of the cockpit is correct while sitting in the contour optimized seat. The seat stays where it is without bending away from where it was set. The glider does not drop onto its nose wheel when you get in because there isn’t any! One sits very comfortably and more upright than in a single seater.
- The glider is unbelievably quiet. I have never before flown a glider with so little background noise even at high speed.
- The control forces are clearly less than a DG-505. Small corrections can be made with two fingers. Only at full control deflections does one notice that a noticeably heavier glider is being asked to turn. Moreover, the attachable high speed trim handle is very comfortable to use. In the speed range between 45 and 90 knots, the trim can be left alone because the elevator control forces are so small anyway. After that the high speed trim can be used. One pull on the lever and the trim is set for that speed. When high speed flight is no longer feasible, then one can use the trim handle on the side wall in the conventional manner.
The undercarriage is a real success. The big torsion spring suspension gives a very comfortable ride during takeoffs and landings.- Our slow flight trials were very interesting. I could not stall it with full back stick even with full trim ballast. Then Swen Lehner showed me that the DG-1000 spins wonderfully when you want it to.
- The flying characteristics and performance? I don’t want to jump the gun on the experts. You will read about it soon enough!
The undercarriage is a real success. The big torsion spring suspension gives a very comfortable ride during takeoffs and landings.Flight Testing:
When we arrived, our test pilot had just finished preparing the glider for a hard test. All the test flying has been done by Swen Lehner. He was now ready to make more tests on the 20 meter version.
I looked at our glider for the first time and tried to lift a wing but I couldnt! What’s going on here – was it tied down? I grabbed it with both hands and could just lift it. Then Swen Lehner came a explained the test.
- There was 40 liters more water in the left wing than in the right wing
- and the trim ballast tank was filled completely.
- When he flew alone it should have been empty. If that wasn’t enough he added seven pounds of tail weight which looked like a tail dolly without a wheel.
- In this configuration he was going to spin it!!!
Are you crazy? I asked him. You can’t fly it like that!
Of course, was his answer, That’s what we have to do according to the rules. And I could investigate the limits thanks to the trim box. It will work out okay!
The test pilot risks his neck so that we fools can accidentally go over the limits without anything happening. In any case, I was happy when he was back on the ground and I didn’t have to live through more tests like that. He used maximum control deflections at 300 km/h and pulled the dive brakes open at 280 km/h.
I was glad when that was over and I will never do that myself!
E-mail from Swen Lehner a few days ago:
Dear Friedel,
A short progress report on the testing of the DG-1000S:
So far the DG-1000 has about 35 launches and 25 hours flying time. Most of the flights were done at Speyer. Andreas Nagel from FSV Speyer was appointed by Wilhelm Dirks as my personal tug pilot. I must say that the co-operation I received from him was outstanding. The tow plane from the club was set aside for our exclusive use.
Flutter:
The flutter tests in the 20 meter version showed no problems in all of the loading configurations. Nevertheless we will add some mass balance to the rudder for a few technical tests still to be made.
Spinning:
The spin tests for the glider without water ballast for the middle to rearmost C.G. range are finished. With water ballast we have spun it only in the middle C.G. point. None of the tests showed any problems. With a C.G. in the middle of its allowed range the glider entered a spin using the standard technique. It stayed in the spin for 3-4 turns and then went over into a spiral dive.
At the same time as the spin tests with wing ballast, five launches (from asphalt) and five landings (smooth grass) at maximum all up weight of 750 kg were done. The glider was no problem to steer in this configuration and the undercarriage carried the weight easily.
Well, the flight tests of the DG-1000/20m have been successfully completed.
Some comments made by our customers
In the meantime many customers had flown the DG-1000, so our sales manager analyzed all their comments. After all we are interested to know of any negative impressions of the glider.
The majority of the comments were along the lines of “positively surprised”, i. e. people expected less of the glider than they eventually experienced. There was also some criticism, though:
“The ailerons are rather heavy to move.”
We were anxious to find the reason for that, as we were rather surprised about this comment. On the ground the ailerons move very smoothly and easily in ball bearings without any noticeable friction. In addition the controls are even lighter than on the DG-505. But we found the reason for the seemingly heavy controls – and it is rather trivial: Our stick is shorter than that of the competitor’s model. Whereas in a car this would be desirable as a “sport steering” or “sport gearshift”, in a glider this has a negative effect: Shorter leverage and higher forces.
Our solution: For the serial production the stick will be longer and the mounting will be reinforced. The forces should then be proportionally smaller.
“Very tall pilots struggle to fit into the rear seat”.
This is true for people with a tall upper body and is caused by the higher seating position of the pilot compared to the front seat. We will however modify the seat pan and the head rest to solve this problem.
“The quick-trimmer stops being accurate at speeds over 170 kph (91 kts).”
This is true and is caused by the design. At speeds over 170 kph (91 kts) the trimmer is more accurately adjusted using the knob on the side of the cockpit – just like one has to do at all speeds in competing models that do not have any quick-trim function. At least the DG-1000 has a quick-trimmer, and this even has a lockout function, i. e. you can unhook it in the normal speed range, which is a very pleasant feature. The low control forces on the elevator make this possible.
Positive comments – and they far outnumbered the negative ones – are the following:
“The undercarriage is excellent!”
“The undercarriage is excellent!”The big and well-sprung main wheel of the DG-1000 provides a comfortable ground run and also acts as an effective damper for the landing impact. One other benefit of the big wheel is the fact that the glider is so much easier to push back to the launch point. One does not have to bend down that much but can push the glider along in an upright position. The comfortable cockpit position was mentioned, which makes getting in the glider very easy – you don’t fall into the seat -, plus the very stable position during the initial phase of the winch launch.
“The visibility from the rear seat is a lot better.”
This makes the instructor happy, and the reason is that he or she sits in a higher position and can look out over the shoulder of the person in the front seat. It seems that the strut of the two-piece canopy does not affect the visibility. And the visibility from the front seat is equally good due to the big and low hinged canopy.
The additional air vents in both cockpits were described as very pleasant. Radio communication is excellent due to the speaker being fitted in the frame between the two canopies.
“The glider shows a very stable behavior in thermalling turns – even at only 85 kph (46 kts).”
This is not surprising, as it must be due to the higher dihedral of the outer wing section and in particular due to the winglets. It was however mentioned by several people.
“The glider is very quiet”
– see above.
“The air brakes are very effective.”
In particular when pushing the stick forward with the air brakes open the DG-1000 does not seem to pick up speed as quickly as the competitor’s model. The airbrakes generally seem to be very effective. In addition the DG-1000 does not have a pronounced ground effect. Spot landings are therefore easy to do as the glider stops after a short float. This means the landing will be significantly easier and above all safer, particularly for inexperienced pilots.
And instructors noted that the airbrakes can be fully opened and locked shut from both seats, and that the Piggott hook prevents any inadvertent opening of the brakes.
“The trim box is a real innovation”
– not only competition and cross country pilots appreciate this new design. The trim box offers great advantages, especially for training use with frequently changing pilot weights and configurations. Even spin exercises are possible with the DG-1000, which in other two-seaters is only possible with special modifications.
“The versatility of the glider is amazing.”
With this we continue the tradition of the DG-500. In 18m mode you have a very responsive training glider for circuit training or even for aerobatics as we’ve also found out.
Further information DG-1000
– friedel weber –
Uli Schwenk, a well-known German competition pilot, received the following request:
Hi Uli, I’m not sure you remember who I am. I attended your juniors cross country training (which was great!) a few years ago. I’m the bloke from Baden who flies in Leonberg. The other day I heard that you’ve flown the DG-1000 in a competition. Now what I wanted to know is – what do you think of this glider?
You see, we are thinking about buying a Duo Discus for our club in Leonberg, but of course we are also having a look at alternatives.
I know you wouldn’t set a foot in a Duo Discus – as you mentioned once ;-), but I’m sure you can tell me something about the DG-1000’s performance and flying characteristics, and whether it’s worth trying it out.
I’m looking forward to your reply – Seeya! H.
Hi there H.
First of all – I do of course set a foot in the Duo, but it hasn’t got a big, well-sprung (!) undercarriage, and I’m not keen on ruining my back by flying a glider without this feature. However, the Duo sets the standard for all two-seaters regarding ease of handling in thermals. Until now there hasn’t been a 20m span two-seater that was as nice to fly as the Duo.
That’s why I was very keen to try the DG-1000 as it’s got the undercarriage of my dreams:
The undercarriage is very big, so field landings are safe, and it’s well-sprung to protect my spine even in heavier landings. I flew the DG-1000 at the Hahnweide competition with a young pilot from my club. The Sunday before the competition I had the chance to try it for the first time, and I filled it with water to get an overall weight of 750 kg. We flew into the mountain region, and in the Lech valley we encountered tremendous sink.
So I had to use the ridge to regain some height inch by inch, with a heavy glider full of water, from 1000 ft above ground in the valley. I was actually quite happy to have to cope with this situation as this was where I could see if the DG-1000 “feels” as good as the Duo. I was delighted!
And its performance is really good as well. Bugs don’t really make any noticeable difference. The glider still flies as well as if it were clean.
If you’re going to use it for training you might also want to know about the brilliant idea the DG people had for the ballast system. You can always fly it with the optimal C of G position: The pilots’ weight is compensated for by means of lead weights in the stabilizer, the wing water ballast by means of water in the stabilizer. What an excellent idea!
So to answer your question:
This glider certainly has to be taken into consideration.
All the best, Uli
Translation: Claudia Buengen
From Sweden we received the following e-mail:
Dear Sirs!
Our DG-1000S (10 – 5 S 5) has now logged some 340 flights and 220 hours.
It has been flown by a lot of different pilots, experienced as well as beginners.
The overall impression is fantastic!
Everyone climbs out of it with a big smile.
One of the first things that people notice is how incredibly quiet it is.
It’s the most quiet glider I ever flown.
It’s stability in the air and especially in thermals has also been praised.
I have flown some shorter cross-country tasks with it and the performance is truly impressive.
Especially when you fly with a lot of water ballast, and use the trim box to balance out the aircraft, then it really takes breath away.
Some glider become difficult to fly if you run in to a rain showers , but the DG-1000S just keeps on flying…
So don’t we have anything negative to say about it?
Well we have received some remarks from the people who have flown it.
Experienced pilots and competition pilots, such as the Chief Instructor of the Swedish Soaring Federation, members of the Swedish national team and experienced aerobatics pilots, think that the rudder could/should be more effective.
Some instructors also think that the headrest in the front seat should be smaller to improve the view from the back seat.
We haven’t flown a lot of aerobatics with it, but our four time Swedish national aerobatics champion, Stefan Frisk thought that it was a lot better than the DG 500T.
He was especially impressed with it’s performance in inverted flight, but would have liked to have a more effective rudder.
I have personally spent a lot of time in it, both in the front seat as well as an instructor in the backseat, and I’m sure that this will be the glider that sets the standards for years to come!
Thank you for a fantastic job!
Mattias Svenning
Chief of operations
Borås Soaring Club
Dear Mr. Weber
We wish you a very Merry Christmas and a happy New Year.
We have enjoyed our new DG-1000 and pleased many pilots letting them check it out. You have built a glider that impress even the most critical and demanding soaring pilot. This will be the next generation two seat glider for sure.
I’ll take the DG-1000 to the SSA Convention in January.
Dear Friedel,
I have waited a long time anxiously to see and fly your DG1000. Having made two competitions flying a Duo-Discus turbo at Bidford, I was particularly keen to fly your glider which is 10 years or more later in concept. My experience in the Duo with it’s excellent handling was enjoyable, but it had several features which I felt are unforgivable. The airbrakes are ineffective making it unsuitable for instructors to allow their students to make off-airfield landings except perhaps in Australian paddocks and airstrips. I found the front cockpit was poor in that, there was no room for carrying food or water. Worse was the fact that any items of that kind always found their way into the rear pilots rudder pedals. I also thought that both pilots should have the possibility of lowering the undercarriage.
I was really delighted with your machine and very relieved and pleased to find all these items have been put right. But I notice that both Karl Striedick and Dick Johnson make little or no comment on the airbrakes. This should be put right and I am e-mailing SOARING to point this out to them. I found them excellent which will make the aircraft easy for field landings. Full airbrake plus full side slipping is outstandingly effective.
I liked your solution for preventing items falling back into the rear cockpit and found the undercarriage and wheel brake easy to use.
I flew a number of winch launches and aero tows at Lasham, both as a short wing and long wing with tips. I was pleased to see you have a special version for a trainer with a change of main wheel configuration as I thought that the ground handling would be too difficult and hard work for everyday club use.
I thought the stalling and spinning ideal for training. I didn’t play with the tail ballasting but found it much better than most other trainers for stall / incipients and spins even with very heavy pilots. Probably extra tail ballast would be needed for heavy pilots for a spin of more than 1 to 2 turns but the essential I think is to be able to show a proper departure from a stall in a gentle turn without having to use large amounts of rudder.
What a lovely aircraft, and what performance.
With best wishes,
Derek Piggott
BTW:
I was surprised to have to explain to several pilots and even instructors at Lasham who did not understand the reason for the Piggott hook and what it does.
Hi Gang
On May 13, 04 I got to check out the BASA DG-1000 at Hollister.
I have flown previously and recently the Duo Discus which I found to be the most enjoyable 2 seat tandem sailplane I had then ever flown.
My references were the DG-505 and the big Nimbus.
The 1000 appears to be very well finished and well thought out.
Obviously DG had checked out the Duo as they designed the 1000 getting customer feedback so that they could improve on the Duo.
I believe DG accomplished what they were setting out to do; that is offer a viable alternative to the Duo.
The cabin is well thought out with individual air vents that can be moved. There is the ability to retract the undercarriage from the rear seat which you cannot do with the Duo (so when I took Jan up in a Duo in Australia we had the undercarriage down for the flight).
The controls are very well coordinated and the DG-1000 carves a 360 effortlessly although the aileron control is fairly stiff but not as stiff as on my Stemme S10. Rudder control is great and I think that contributes to safety. More on that in a moment.
The DG-1000 uses weights in the tail for heavy pilots instead of water as in the Duo – an advantage. It appears for most loads, one or 2 people, 2 large weights work well. For more extreme spin training a lighter rear ballast might be desirable and for the absolute best performance a neutral CG could be dialed in.
I found that with the 2 weights with just me in the front seat, the DG-1000 was just tail heavy and with a second person in the rear
seat we were just nose heavy based on the tummy wheel being close to the CG point. There was a slight disadvantage here. At
Hollister the taxiway entry point to runway 240 is at right angles and the wind most afternoons is around 20 knots straight down
240. With just me sitting in the 1000 it would always weather vane into the wind on the taxiway. Well I guess the old orange tin can, the BASA 1-34, also tries to do the same in the same conditions.
The checkout for BASA with an instructor is well thought out and, of course, very necessary for such an expensive machine.
I was required to show that I could handle emergency procedures including spins and stalls, and low level simulated rope tow breaks etc.
The stall characteristics of the 1000 are very benign. A pronounced buffeting occurs at about 37 knots IAS and pulling the stick even further back and walking the tail eventually the left wing drops.
This is immediately recoverable. All gliders have a small asymmetry in the wings and one wing or the other always drops first. On this machine the left wing goes first.
Spins are always fun and each type of glider is different. Some gliders are safe and predictable whereas others you want to avoid spins unless you are very experienced in this maneuver. The 1000 is a delight to spin. Just pull the stick slowly back into your tummy and kick the rudder. The wing drops and over you go with the nose pointy down. Keep the full rudder until you want to recover and then neutral stick and reverse full rudder. I have never known the rotation to stop so quickly. This is because of the very strong rudder authority, a real safety feature in my opinion.
I feel that the 1000 is as safe a glider that I have ever flown because of this very strong buffet warning at stall and the super fast recovery from a wing drop or spin.
My conclusion is that the DG1000 has raised the bar a notch above any other non flapped 2 place sailplane and should be very
successful. BASA, in replacing one of its old Grob 103s with the DG1000 has an enviable fleet. Anyone wanting to join a
sailplane club should probably consider BASA as their first choice in Central California.
Dave
PS:
I would recommend Brett, Soar Hollister’s instructor, for anyone wanting to take up gliding.
With regard to our magnificent DG-1000 VH-DGZ (10-92). We all enjoy its multi role capabilities as I predicted when first proposing this glider to our membership.
I have only flown it in 20m mode but its spin recovery training has been reliable, every time. We no longer have to waste valuable time on our ASK21 with its time wasting tail dolly weights to shift CofG, that won’t work with many of our heavier pilots anyway! The best thing about a spin ready glider, it can be used whenever one finds himself with an excess of height when its time to come down. It is always ready for every training role. That means more exposure for our timid pilots and that leads to more confidence.
It was the same with our old Puchacz.
I have reminded several pilots they should pull at least 3G on recovery from spins though to save wasting valuable height.
Simple aerobatics in 20mt mode have been satisfying. Stall turns are particularly elegant and with winter flying around the corner, I will work on a new aerobatic syllabus for our more adventurous pilots.
My first cross country was 305km, with a student, at the end of our soaring season but with some cloud streeting on the first leg, enjoyed 80km before the first thermalling turn! It goes better than my old ASW17! My second cross country student was amazed that we climbed away from 1000ft in two very week thermals in order to complete the task on a difficult day. We would normally have turned for home early.
It has taken us a while to come to terms with the L/G. We certainly appreciate this high and rugged design as it will obviously keep us out of trouble in rough paddock outlandings. It took us a month before we found the reference about the locking boss that can be used as a check for L/G down and locked in the back seat. (Service Info No. 60-06) I had read the Flight, Maintenance and Repair manuals cover several times before writing the club’s conversion requirements for the DG-1000 and there was no mention of it there. Of course, this was a much earlier modification (10-79) but it would have helped immensely in the conversion process had we been alerted to it. We must have had 20 pilots convert to it and none of them noticed this locking boss and its locking plate until I found the old Service Info No. 60-06.
There will be no problems now that we have formalized our conversion process and I see a long and happy future for VH – DGZ at Beverley Soaring Society.
Kind regards and safe flying,
Daryl Mackay
Undercarriage-challenge
Our head of production, Holger Back, tells us of an almost-accident which took place last summer at a gliding field in Austria. On that day, there were strong winds across to the runway and that particular airfield is known for awkward turbulences and rotors, leading to sheer winds during the landing phase.
A DG-1000 was coming in for landing and the pilot finished the landing in about 2,50 metres (8 ft.) suddenly the speed was gone. Probably, a rotor had instantly stopped the nose wind and caused a downslope wind. All this happened so fast that even the instructor in the second seat did not have a chance to engage. Several pilots on the ground witnessed the glider dropping like a stone, falling onto the runway with a loud cracking noise. The main wheel used the whole spring travel and the glider stopped immediately.
Certainly, the forces that acted upon this glider were higher than any of those we had to prove during the test phase. The non-spring mounted tail wheel was destroyed trough the impact forces, the plastic rim cracked loose. All this is not bad, though, if it had been stronger built, it would have been more likely to cause a damage to the fuselage.
To the amazement of everyone, the main wheel endured without a scratch and both pilots climbed out of the DG-1000 completely un-injured. Our design engineers are happy that the excellent absorption of the undercarriage probably prevented both pilots from severe back-injuries!