![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 19, 11:52*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Sep 18, 5:53*pm, ray conlon wrote: Having flown a number of different gliders and power planes over the years, no two of them handle or land the same, different aircraft take different methods of landing, what works for a Cessna 150 may not do so well in a Bonanza, or what works in a 2-33 wont wor'k *well in a Blanik,Lark,ASK21, etc. Thats why we have instructors to work us throught the transistion. Orvile and Willber were the only guys who had a valid reson to teach themselves to fly.. Having flown a number of gliders and power planes over the years, they are all pretty much landed the same - at the slowest possible speed allowed by the configuration of the landing gear (and the conditions at hand - for example a strong gusty crosswind may require a different technique than a calm day on a short field). *It's that gear configuration that requires different techniques for different airplanes, not aerodynamics. That gear configuration is a driving factor in how 2-33s and Blaniks are landed vs how most modern gliders are landed (I say most because the PW-5 & 6 may be different, but I have no first hand experience in those two). If a student isn't taught the REASON for the specific landing technique (fixed attitude, slightly tail low, "flown-on" in 2-33s and Blaniks, due to weak tail vs tail and main at same time, min energy in glass such as K-21 or G-103) they will probably think that the first technique they are taught will apply to all future gliders. *That can get very expensive. Kirk 2-33 should NOT be "flown on" as you suggest above............ Yes, bottom line is "low energy landing" in ANY aircraft..........Low energy means "slow"....but not "slow a possible" it means slow as practical..........this leads to the nuances. But any glider landed in a low energy configuration will not tear itself into pieces as the 2-33 trained grob pilot did in the scenerio referred to in the earlier post. Thousands of pilots have been properly trained in 2-33 and progress seccessfully to all kinds of "more advanced" gliders without issue.......... True that a poorly trained 2-33 pilot, or one who has degenerated into bad habbits, may take those problems with him into the more advanced gliders.........but this is a training / pilot problem, not an aircraft problem. I see plenty of pilots, airplane and glider, who have developed some bad landing habits and have never set foti n a 2-33. The 2-33 will withstand less than perfect landings by beginners because it is designed to do so as a TRAINER. We are all allowed to make mistakes.........The idea is for the student / instructor to work out all these problems early in the program. Once consistant good landings are made in the 2-33 the pilot can then easily adapt to any glider. If poor landing technique is tolerated in the 2-33 then the less forgiving gliders will show this defeciency. But this is all the more arguement for the 2-33 as a trainer, and not using Grob or ASK as a trainer....... Cookie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club Class Gliders | Sam Giltner[_1_] | Soaring | 4 | December 3rd 08 03:28 AM |
Basic Training Gliders | Derek Copeland | Soaring | 35 | December 26th 05 02:19 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Soaring club close to NYC, with high-performance gliders | City Dweller | Soaring | 9 | September 29th 05 11:55 AM |