ASW20 or LS6

On 1/31/2011 1:16 PM, Jonathon May wrote:

You don't say how much experience you have, but both the ASW 20 and LS6
are flapped, and not suitable for low hours pilots.

Having transitioned - safely & entirely uneventfully (in the negative sense of
things) - from 2-33s/1-26s to a no-negative-flap, spoiler-less (i.e. large
deflection landing flaps-only), 'in-between'/non-nose tow-hooked single-seat
sailplane, with a total of 128+ glider-only hours logged, I would suggest the
above position may be just a tad overstated.

How one mentally approaches flaps and their use (or, non-use, as the
transitioning-case may be) is, I believe, vastly more important than seeking
comfort in hard-n-fast 'stick-time rules.'

For example, if the flaps are camber-changing-only (e.g. LS-6), you can simply
set/leave them at zero until such time as you feel comfortable experimenting
with them. Both ships permit use of spoilers to assist initial aileron
response if aero-towing (just as a transitionee might already be doing in
unflapped glass). Further, Schleicher's '20 (and Rolladen-Schneider's LS-6)
allow (insist-on) the use of spoilers as the primary glideslope control
device. (Kinda-sorta related, just because the ship being transitioning to has
retractable gear is no reason to believe one *must* retract or cycle the gear
on early flights.)

No harm in using the KISS philosophy of transitioning...

If you die on your first flight in such a ship using such a technique, perhaps
small comfort can be (briefly) obtained from the knowledge flap (mis-)use
wasn't the proximate cause of death. :-)


I have flown
neither,but I think if you spin either your first action is to select
negative flap.

Again, this advice may be OK (as far as it goes), perhaps even in the Pilot's
Operating Handbook (I don't know)...but not without some caveats. The devil -
as always - is in the details...

The first *2* flapped ships I transitioned to *had* no negative flaps (or, any
spoilers, either). And while in neither one did I ever experience an
inadvertent 'departure from controlled flight', in both the best (IMHO)
potential-overspeed-avoidance device in their bag of tricks had such a thing
happened and startled/scared me into not 'simply'/immediately reducing the AoA
(which worked every time I used it) would have been to *'2nd-immediately'*
roll/pump on ALL the flaps. Sure this would have had the short-term effect of
increasing the wing's effective AoA..but so what, as neither ship could
'reasonably' be induced to exceed max-flap/maneuvering speeds with 'em full
down. It would've bought time to sort things out without eating vast vertical
gobs of airspace or zooming above maneuvering speed.

So - is it preferable to 'inadvertently spin down through a thermal gaggle' in
an AS-W 20 and recover at high-ish speeds with negative flap, or, to spiral
down 'perhaps somewhat stalled' but vertically somewhat slower with full
flaps? (This is not a trick question.)

My vote is to avoid the situation in the first place. This'll work in the
LS-6, too. :-)

Regards,
Bob W.

P.S. Apologies for treading so far out onto this particular discussional ice,
but I must've 'felt a need'...!