New trainer from SZD Bielsko

for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.

This comment is solely about trainer L/D and not this specific trainer.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement. L/D then
becomes a safety factor.

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the instructor
THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high performance gliders,
he will pass that fear on to his students.

Bill Daniels

wrote in message
ups.com...
for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.

On Jun 21, 8:30 am, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
This comment is solely about trainer L/D and not this specific trainer.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement. L/D then
becomes a safety factor.

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the instructor
THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high performance gliders,
he will pass that fear on to his students.

Bill Daniels

wrote in message

ups.com...



for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

true Bill. as usual you got it right. with the flat fields to the
horizon in central Iowa ive never had to worry about those issues you
have to deal with teaching in Colorado.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement.

An instructor who cannot reliably judging his glide range should
immediately have pulled his instructor license. I don't know about the
place where you fly, but where I do, no student will be sent to his
check ride before he has demonstrated that he masters the calculations
in flight. Extra performance doesn't add any safety, it just shifts the
numbers in the calculations.

On 21 Jun, 14:30, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the instructor
THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high performance gliders,
he will pass that fear on to his students.

A high performance glider will always be slippery, which means it will
accelerate fast, which means that elevator/attitude/speed control will
be harder to learn. Won't it?

Ian

"Ian" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 21 Jun, 14:30, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the
instructor
THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high performance
gliders,
he will pass that fear on to his students.

A high performance glider will always be slippery, which means it will
accelerate fast, which means that elevator/attitude/speed control will
be harder to learn. Won't it?

Ian



No. The student just learns what is presented. They are largely unaware of
these 'percieved' difficulties - unless the instructor makes a big deal of
how difficult a particular glider is to fly. The hand/eye coordination just
isn't that difficult to learn. It's the INSTRUCTOR who makes a glider hard
to fly.

Slick gliders are 'hard' to fly only if one has a preconception they are.
The Duo Discus, for instance, is a real pussycat. Even non pilots have no
problem with "elevator/attitude/speed control" if you just tell them to
keep the nose on the horizon.

In fact I'm tempted to say that there are no difficult gliders - at least
none made in the last 30 years. I've never flown a glass glider that
presented the slightest problem. Now a Bell 47 helicopter, THAT is hard to
fly.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels wrote:
This comment is solely about trainer L/D and not this specific trainer.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement. L/D then
becomes a safety factor.

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the instructor
THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high performance gliders,
he will pass that fear on to his students.

Bill Daniels

wrote in message
ups.com...
for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.



I agree conditionally.

This is one area where the old crates make better trainers, as the difference in
effective glide ratio is much more affected by wind. The safe circuit differs
markedly with a 1:26 L/D and a wind component that can be a significant fraction
of stall speed. So it is easier to teach the mental calculations required, and
when to draw the line in terms of the - Is it safe to launch? decision.

A higher penetration , higher performance trainer makes the distances involved a
little bigger, so they may be harder to judge. In this instance I believe higher
performance may lower safety.

The downside of training exclusively in low performance gliders is that
transition to even a moderate performance single seater is more difficult.

Bruce

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Bill Daniels wrote:
This comment is solely about trainer L/D and not this specific trainer.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement. L/D then
becomes a safety factor.

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the
instructor THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high
performance gliders, he will pass that fear on to his students.

Bill Daniels

wrote in message
ups.com...
for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.



I agree conditionally.

This is one area where the old crates make better trainers, as the
difference in effective glide ratio is much more affected by wind. The
safe circuit differs markedly with a 1:26 L/D and a wind component that
can be a significant fraction of stall speed. So it is easier to teach the
mental calculations required, and when to draw the line in terms of the -
Is it safe to launch? decision.

How so? A 2-33 stalls (really) at about 40 MPH. My Nimbus 2C stalls at
38mph and I can turn inside a 1-26 if the ballast tanks are dry. If I open
the dive brakes to the point they want to rest, the Nimbus 2C glides about
like a 2-22. If I open them all the way it's 1:1 at 55mph.


A higher penetration , higher performance trainer makes the distances
involved a little bigger, so they may be harder to judge. In this instance
I believe higher performance may lower safety.

Yes harder, but the errors will be on the safe side - i.e. the HP glider
will go farther than the student is willing to believe.


The downside of training exclusively in low performance gliders is that
transition to even a moderate performance single seater is more difficult.

You bet! And once you have created the mind set that higher performance
glider are difficult to fly - they WILL be more difficult to fly for that
student.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels wrote:
"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Bill Daniels wrote:
This comment is solely about trainer L/D and not this specific trainer.

L/D IS important especially if you operate from a field where nearby
landings are hazardous. Students ( and for that matter some instructors)
aren't good at judging just how far they can glide. In this situation,
extra performance is what gets them home after a mis-judgement. L/D then
becomes a safety factor.

There's no downside to training in higher performance unless the
instructor THINKS there is. If the instructor is afraid of high
performance gliders, he will pass that fear on to his students.

Bill Daniels

wrote in message
ups.com...
for a trainer 40:1 is plenty. heck 18:1 is plenty, as proven by the
multitudes of pilots trained in 2-22 and 2-33 Schweizers over the
years. We're not talking about an open class nationals competitor
here.


I agree conditionally.

This is one area where the old crates make better trainers, as the
difference in effective glide ratio is much more affected by wind. The
safe circuit differs markedly with a 1:26 L/D and a wind component that
can be a significant fraction of stall speed. So it is easier to teach the
mental calculations required, and when to draw the line in terms of the -
Is it safe to launch? decision.

How so? A 2-33 stalls (really) at about 40 MPH. My Nimbus 2C stalls at
38mph and I can turn inside a 1-26 if the ballast tanks are dry. If I open
the dive brakes to the point they want to rest, the Nimbus 2C glides about
like a 2-22. If I open them all the way it's 1:1 at 55mph.

Perhaps I was unclear here. The low performance trainer typically has a limited
speed range it can fly in. If the wind factor is a significant fraction of stall
speed then you have a lot less speed range available. For example maneuvering
speed in a Bergfalke II/55 is only 120km/h - it stalls at ~60km/h. At 120km/h
the L/D is such that you can just about fly a circuit without leaving the
vertical confines of the runway. You can get the same L/D with a glass ship, but
you can't emulate the ultra low wingloading, and high drag airframe. All the
penetration of a well thrown newspaper.


A higher penetration , higher performance trainer makes the distances
involved a little bigger, so they may be harder to judge. In this instance
I believe higher performance may lower safety.

Yes harder, but the errors will be on the safe side - i.e. the HP glider
will go farther than the student is willing to believe.

True - the higher performance trainer generally has a safety advantage (more
options and greater margin, better control)- but the bigger distances mean more
exposure to variable conditions. Have watched someone fail to make it back to
the runway because of complacency by instructor. From the close in circuit the
low performance guys were doing he would have been able to reach the alternate
runway when the wind picked up. From further out, the time exposed to the
headwind put him in a no - win situation.


The downside of training exclusively in low performance gliders is that
transition to even a moderate performance single seater is more difficult.

You bet! And once you have created the mind set that higher performance
glider are difficult to fly - they WILL be more difficult to fly for that
student.

Bill Daniels


Many of my worst habits come from learning my initial judgment in a vintage. I
know I'm not gifted, but the transition from a Bergfalke to a 15m standard class
single seater was interesting...
That is why I like the K21 so much. Similar performance to the kind of single
seater many students will move up to - and a pleasure to fly.