Видео

?

​@@patatraa411 Engine inside

In good news, new gliders sold today are much cheaper used gliders in 20 years...

EB are certainly doing very well with their ultra expensive product.

If you think Gliders are expensive, you should look at Yachts! There's a LOT of people spending £250k+ on hole in the water.... Now the question is how to convert them to a proper sport!

Well you keep voting for the same politicians over and over again. How’s that working out for you? 😂

@SeanFidler Odd observation to make on a Norwegian video of a South African product and UK / New Zealand based comments? I'm guessing non voted Democrat...

Yes, and around 2600-2700 meter total elevation gain - check out the article here nordicgliding-com.translate.goog/test-as-33-me-dreamglider/?_x_tr_sl=da&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=da

18m

Too much I would imagine, it kinda defeats the purpose of a glider if you have a huge boom with an engine on it attached the whole time.

The tow limit is specified to 850 kg and yes, the guillotine is a yellow T-handle placed just next to the throttle. It's a little difficult to see from this perspetive.

What engine are you running ?

I'd wait to see what the Diana 4ER brings to the table - potentially the cheapest, highest performing and lightest.......... depends on how easy the wing batteries will be to remove as well - that is the big drawback of the AS33ME for competitions, plus its high empty weight of 420kg plus. OK for a 'recreational' motorglider but nothing much else.

@@soaruk3697 420kg is pretty heavy indeed. The batteries are fitted where the water bags would normally go, right?

@@TheSoaringChannel I think so but it has the ability to take water I think,u p to 600kg. The JS3s seem to be about 25kg lighter with 2 batteries. The Diana 4 target weight with batteries is 355kg -but am sceptical they will meet this weight - also the batteries are wing mounted -although I did read they were supposed to be easily removeable to be put in a car - we will see. To me the AS33Me seems to lack the adaptability of the JS3RES which can also be flown as a sustainer or pure glider - but it is still awaiting EASA certification and as you say the endurance with both batteries installed seems a little limited compared with the 33............

@@soaruk3697 I agree. If you truly miss read the day ending, you get a slow section of a flight: all you're doing is flying to the landout anyways. This isn't very helpful, but is obviously better than nothing. If you're only flying 500km triangles.... I suppose it's possible to sawtooth your way home with the remaining battery power, or better yet, get towed and then sawtooth home with more range. The whole point, though, is that you are self sufficient. The 33 and JS3 really aren't quite there yet. 9000' of climb in the 33 is only 2x 4500' sawtooth climbs, or 3x 3000' sawtooth climbs. What is that, about 90km assuming you are at 1000'at the bottom of each? That's kinda sketchy, too if you think about it, and it doesn't work (start). Now you're low with it extended, all to try to get home. The jet of the JS3 is better due to the high cruise speed (run max continuous) and level and you're home before it runs out of fuel. Obviously that can't self launch. So there's that. It's all a give and take. I agree - I'll wait but I'm definitely ready to make the next move. I'd really prefer electric self launch of anything Solo ($6,000) or Austro ($35,000) powered. The electric WILL EVENTUALLY be more reliable with less vibration headaches. This video demonstrates that. Ugh. I can't wait!!!

EH 101

I am 193 cm - it's a relatively tight fit. But with thin shoes (like Converse) it is ok. With big hiking boots not so much.

Roughly 160 000 euros plus vat

Take off with 34 kW which is around 45 hp. Steady climb after that at 25 kW, so around 34 hp

Lak's self launcher cannot take water and SL so no use...... RES is a far better system for SL.

You call it "no use". I call it "a dream come true" and far better than RES, because so easy and so reliable.

@@lukasetz994 Most customers would want competitive sailplanes with SL capability and to have that you need the ability to SL at or very near max auw with water - you can't do that with FES and a 15/18meter glider, that's why Avionic, Schleicher and Jonkers did not go the FES route..... and use RES systems. If you like the low climb rate, extra drag and extra noise producing FES and the ability to self lauch at max auw doesn't bother you then sure FES might be acceptable to you - to most serious competitive and cross-country pilots though it's of 'no use'... for a SLS......... but then serious pilots don't buy LAK's........

Hi Poul - You are right. We will add a link to the presentation.

No ballast - usually the glider climbs nicely with close to 4 m/s in the initial climb. Difficult to see if the pilot selects a little higher rotation speed than usual, since it is his first takeoff on the type.

The AS34ME gets out of Schleicher's 425m strip ok... ruclips.net/video/aA99aJ0F7DA/видео.html What's the empty weight of the AS34ME in 'real life'? - hazard a geuss at 420kgs plus before the pilot gets in? The JS3RES is just shy of 400 Kg empty.......

That would be nice too!

Sorry for your discomfort, but as mentioned in the video description "the blurring in the first 3,5 minutes is due to sensitive technology at the manufacturer airfield".

The turbine uses lube oil mixed with diesel. It's not a leak, it's unburnt fuel/oil from the star procedure.

Grob still has not published any prices, so its still wild speculation. But the market is there for sure.

I freaked when he left the stick just four seconds after liftoff. Luckily the trimmer was in the right position I guess. I usually trim slightly nose down on takeoff.

really

​@@matkar228 One would only let the stick go if the aircraft is properly trimmed! The trim release is at your fingers at the stick, the green lever. It is just a quick tug on the lever before releasing the stick and the aircraft is trimmed for this speed. No big deal, really, it is not an aerotow or a winch launch.

Its a raw video, so no Oscar-production here. But a nice documentation of that chat that we had before and after the test flight.

@@jenstrabolt sometimes that's all we are looking for. As if we were there as it happened.

Hi Michael - you are right, and we are aware of that too. We first tried with a headband-mounted camera, which was aborted due to canopy clearance. Then a suction cup mounted camera. Unfortunately during the take off the microphone moved to a very unfortunate position. We decided to publish the footage anyway so people could get an impression of the take off performance anyway. Did you read the full article on nordicgliding.com/test-as-34-me-man-tager-vad-man-haver/ ?

Thanks for the comment. I agree, but this was a first attempt. Next time will be better!

@@jenstrabolt Yes, thank you for the comment! We need more content directly from the cockpit!! The best way to learn things!

@@TheMkoester Raw video. Comment is of rude quality. Please consider a kinder approach.

@@WilhelmvonFahrvergnugen I am always Kind lieber Wilhelm. Raw hat damit ja nix zu tun.

The airfield has a large hill at the end of the other end. You must land at this runway despite the tail wind.

Good lord, what arrogance.

It is still a prototype and there was a small error in the s/w. The beep indicates that the battery is running low, which it was not. It stopped when I switched off the system.

Or push the big red button

@@robertdanewid2615 But then your Antares is grounded until a specialised repair shop gets it running again.