Mark James Boyd wrote:

Graeme Cant wrote:
I'm puzzled why you wouldn't have two Blaniks. Tell students to ignore
the pink and black handles and you have a no-flap, fixed-gear trainer
(if you think that's a good idea). The rest of the world soloes
students from Blaniks about as rapidly as the US does from 2-33s

Have your students ever damaged one?

No (crossed fingers!).

Does your aerotow training
take more than ten flights for transitioning power pilots?

We winch.

Have you ever had a student fail to heed your "ignore" advice and
put in flaps instead, destroying the Blanik?

No. We don't actually say 'ignore'. We explain their use, tell them to
check they're up before launch and landing and "We'll get to use them
later". Then the instructor does what he's there for.

The USAF seems to damage more than a few.

Yes. As Wellington said about the Guards(?) "I don't know if they scare
the enemy, but by God they scare me."

They are, in fact, taildraggers

Yep. Whole lotta gliders just like that.

and if the tail isn't kept down after landing then it slams down.

Not in my experience. But why wouldn't you keep it down anyhow?

Two Blaniks (in the same club) that I know of were
destroyed by students who in haste used the flap handle as
if it were a spoiler handle.

That's a new one to me. Students confuse them occasionally but they're
not normally making the selection (between flap and brake) at a high
workload time so no big deal. Solo or dual?

But with the proper training...LOL. More words = more time.
More time = more time.

The kicker is the insurance company. The insurance costs more
for the same # of hours. And in the US, many experimentals have in the
limitations "must have a pilots license for category and class."
So as an experimental, some Blanik's simply can't be used as
trainers. And as experimentals, they can't be used "for hire"
without a specific exemption.

So certification and licensing rules (=insurance costs) are a major
reason for the Blanik not being a cheap trainer in the US?

And 0 US fatalities for 2-33 in 25 years. 6 US fatalities in
L-13 during that time, none of which would have happened in
a 2-33.

The real measure is the overall accident rate. A trainer that kills
nobody but also teaches nothing (so they have accidents in other
aircraft later) shouldn't be given credit for its 'kindness'.

2 x stall spin (the 2-33 is almost impossible to stall, even to demo it)

1 suicide on a "ride" (2-33 upright seating means CFI just puts hand over
front seater's mouth and pinches nose. Front seater releases stick,
and bingo, back to CFI control.)

1 too fast overshot landing (2-33 is never accused of being too fast).

1 hit photographer bystander (2-33 landing too slow to hurt anyone,
and too ugly to take pictures of anyway)

1 ATP without a glider rating, 200 ft rope break (hey, man, a trained
ape could land a 2-33. One 2-33 accident report has a solo pilot
who passes out in flight and wakes up with minor injuries after the crash)

You seem to be saying that people don't really learn to fly on a 2-33.
I don't believe US training standards are that bad.

Are Blaniks expensive in the US? They sell for the equivalent of about
$US8k here. How does that compare with a 2-33? Could we make a profit
exporting some to you?

I've seen them for $10k frequently here. And they are great
gliders for that, but the 2-33 is about the same price, but
less maint. Just because you don't use the flaps or gear,
the mechanic still has to inspect them here in the US. = $$$$

We inspect them too and still find them to be fine, cheap trainers.

Low mileage, one careful owner since 1965, only
winched 24,500 times?


Try high mileage, many abusive owners, aerotowed umpteen times,

Most of the Blaniks in Oz would be around the 15-20,000 hour mark. Our
(now sold) grandmother with 25k winch launches only has about 14000
hours but that's high fatigue cycles. How many aerotows equals 25k
winch launches? And why do 2-33 owners abuse their gliders?

parts easy to find in the US,

Yep. That makes sense.

crashed on every landing, but with
no injuries and no damage found on the glider. A 2-33 is a tank.

I just don't believe the standard of students and instructors varies
that much from country to country. I believe Blaniks get treated just
as badly as 2-33s and stand up to that treatment just as well.

The interesting thing is that the Blanik design is about 50 years old,
not 40!

Hey, I love the Blanik. But for solo of someone who's never flown
a glider, for sheer time to solo I'll always use a 2-33.

But isn't the aim to get them a licence, not just send them solo? In
that case, even if it takes a few more flights to solo (which I'm not
convinced of), in the end isn't it the same total number of flights to
licence test?

I guess the 2-33 just is a more modern technology...
Anything's possible.

Graeme


--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA