Gliders in the Grand Canyon

"Mxsmanic" wrote :
........
Since according to you MSFS acurately simulates everything including
wake turbulance and posters here are not believeable, why are you
asking instead of just using MSFS to answer the question?

Because I know very little about flying gliders, and trial and error is a
slow
way to learn.


Why do you want this information?
What possible use is the answer to you, since by your own admission you'd
never dare to try it yourself?
Why can't you research it yourself? Google is your friend. And MSFS too, it
seems.
Why do you want us to spend our time on researching your problem, especially
since you seem to have lots of time yourself ?
Why do you pose the question to this group anyway, as you have already
repeatably dismissed our answers as "incorrect" ?
You say you base your present knowledge on your own research, yet now you
want to avoid learning by your own simulation experience, and instead rely
on our information, despite having numerous times dismissed such
information. Based on that behavior, how can we trust that you are actually
interested in the information, and not just in endless arguing ?

Snowbird writes:

Why do you want this information?
What possible use is the answer to you, since by your own admission you'd
never dare to try it yourself?
Why can't you research it yourself? Google is your friend. And MSFS too, it
seems.
Why do you want us to spend our time on researching your problem, especially
since you seem to have lots of time yourself ?
Why do you pose the question to this group anyway, as you have already
repeatably dismissed our answers as "incorrect" ?
You say you base your present knowledge on your own research, yet now you
want to avoid learning by your own simulation experience, and instead rely
on our information, despite having numerous times dismissed such
information. Based on that behavior, how can we trust that you are actually
interested in the information, and not just in endless arguing ?

If you don't know, there's no point in posting.

On Jun 3, 9:45 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

If you don't know, there's no point in posting.

Nor in your asking. The correct answer is that gliders are dangerous,
just like the powered "tin cans" your deathly fear and consider those
who fly them foolish.

F--

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Snowbird writes:

Why do you want this information?
What possible use is the answer to you, since by your own admission
you'd never dare to try it yourself?
Why can't you research it yourself? Google is your friend. And MSFS
too, it seems.
Why do you want us to spend our time on researching your problem,
especially since you seem to have lots of time yourself ?
Why do you pose the question to this group anyway, as you have
already repeatably dismissed our answers as "incorrect" ?
You say you base your present knowledge on your own research, yet now
you want to avoid learning by your own simulation experience, and
instead rely on our information, despite having numerous times
dismissed such information. Based on that behavior, how can we trust
that you are actually interested in the information, and not just in
endless arguing ?

If you don't know, there's no point in posting.


Well, there oyu are. You know nothing and you post like fjukk.


I know, though.

Bertie

On Jun 3, 5:16 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Since according to you MSFS acurately simulates everything including
wake turbulance and posters here are not believeable, why are you
asking instead of just using MSFS to answer the question?

Because I know very little about flying gliders, and trial and error is a slow
way to learn.

Do you know anything about gliders?

FFS hasn't this pillock learnt anything while he's been polluting the
group

Another War Story

In the time frame '49-'53 I was instructing in F-80A/B's at Willie
Field, Chandler AZ (just south of Phoenix).

On numerous occasions I would fly up to the Grand Canyon and do loops
in Canyon below the rim.

They finally made us stop as we were scaring the donkeys carrying
tourists up and down from rim to river at bottom.

Oh, those were the days )

Big John

**********************************************

On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:05:06 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

If there were no airspace restrictions, would it be possible/safe to fly
gliders in the Grand Canyon? There's not much of a place to land in the
canyon, of course, but I don't know if there are thermals or something (?)
that would allow a glider to climb back up out of the canyon after gliding
below the rim. Is it possible? Has anyone done it?

As a cross-country soaring enthusiast, the notion of soaring below the
rim and out again (assuming the legalities of course) is exciting --
and foolish.

A fundamental rule of safe soaring is that you always have a safe
place to land, iow never assume there is a thermal between you and the
closest place on the ground that will not break your glider. I've seen
the Big Ditch a number of times from the air (and twice from my
sailplane) and have never seen a safe place to land.

-ted
Ventus 2C "2NO"

Tuno writes:

As a cross-country soaring enthusiast, the notion of soaring below the
rim and out again (assuming the legalities of course) is exciting --
and foolish.

A fundamental rule of safe soaring is that you always have a safe
place to land, iow never assume there is a thermal between you and the
closest place on the ground that will not break your glider. I've seen
the Big Ditch a number of times from the air (and twice from my
sailplane) and have never seen a safe place to land.

Understood.

If you _did_ have a safe place to land, somewhere, would there be enough
rising air in the canyon to safely lift you out after gliding some distance
below the rim? If so, how low could you go? I don't know much about sources
of rising air for gliding, so the question may be naïve.

If you _did_ have a safe place to land, somewhere, would there be enough
rising air in the canyon to safely lift you out after gliding some distance
below the rim? If so, how low could you go? I don't know much about sources
of rising air for gliding, so the question may be naïve.

The answer to your first question is Yes. I have thermalled over the
canyon once, I have friends who have thermalled over the canyon a
number of times, and those thermals had to have originated on the
canyon floor, where daytime heating would be good.

Next time you're there in warm weather and you see cumulus clouds
forming over the canyon, visualize lines from their bottoms down to
the ground, adjusted for winds. You'll see that many of the CUs
originated from thermals by the river bank.

Good thermals, too. Making it to the Canyon is a real treat for
Arizona x/c pilots. I hope to do it again in a few weeks en route to
Parowan, UT.

-ted

Tuno writes:

Good thermals, too. Making it to the Canyon is a real treat for
Arizona x/c pilots. I hope to do it again in a few weeks en route to
Parowan, UT.

Don't the current rules pretty much exclude glider flights over the canyon,
even above the rim? It doesn't look like you can get below 11,500 MSL or so,
and not at all through the no-fly areas. Unless gliders are special (which
they could be, since I think the main motivation for the SFRA is noise).