Future Club Training Gliders

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

On Sep 18, 11:50*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Sep 18, 3:04*am, "

wrote:
A 2-33 should be landed just like any other "nose dragger
glider" (G-103 II or ASK 21 etc)

Really? *The correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (and Blanik) is a
recipe for high energy landings in K-21s or G-103s (or worse case, a
high sink rate bounced landing leading to the infamous "galloping
Grob"!). *I hope you have a long runway and a big budget for brake
pads!


Kirk

Please explain further........how is the correct landing procedure for
a 2-33 going to result in a high energy landing in a Grob?

IMHO....the correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (low energy, slow
speed, nose high, tail low, etc) will result in a similar low energy
landing in a Grob..........this would be a short runway landing, with
little or no need for brakes......

Cookie

On Sep 18, 7:52*pm, "
wrote:
On Sep 18, 11:50*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:

On Sep 18, 3:04*am, "

wrote:
A 2-33 should be landed just like any other "nose dragger
glider" (G-103 II or ASK 21 etc)

Really? *The correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (and Blanik) is a
recipe for high energy landings in K-21s or G-103s (or worse case, a
high sink rate bounced landing leading to the infamous "galloping
Grob"!). *I hope you have a long runway and a big budget for brake
pads!

Kirk

Please explain further........how is the correct landing procedure for
a 2-33 going to result in a high energy landing in a Grob?

IMHO....the correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (low energy, slow
speed, nose high, tail low, etc) will result in a similar low energy
landing in a Grob..........this would be a short runway landing, with
little or no need for brakes......

Cookie

That is exactly correct.

However, regardless of instructor efforts to prevent it, students will
learn on their own a 2-33 stops really well with the skid on the
runway and the more weight on the skid, the faster it stops. Trying
to teach a student not to use this very useful trick is fruitless.

This primary learning will transfer to a Grob and other gliders where
it puts the new pilot at risk of a damaging accident. When a new
pilot really, really needs to stop, it's going to be hard for him not
to push the nose down.

On Sep 20, 2:26*am, bildan wrote:
This primary learning will transfer to a Grob and other gliders where
it puts the new pilot at risk of a damaging accident. *When a new
pilot really, really needs to stop, it's going to be hard for him not
to push the nose down.

When you really really need to stop, pushing the nose down hard works
well on anything that doesn't have a nose wheel. We were taught to do
it in an emergency in the Blanik L13 and I've seen it done in a Grob.

By "really really need to stop" I mean that you're going to die or be
seriously injured if you don't stop and you don't care about damaging
the nose skin and structure or slamming the tail back down afterwards.

Incidentally, someone landed their Cirrus on a suburban street here on
Sunday morning. They reportedly deliberately used the poles on either
side of a pedestrian crossing to slow down. I believe my instructors
mentioned tree trunks in this context, but whatever...

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/glid...-alive-3785681
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4144...g-and-a-prayer
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10674749

On Sep 18, 6:52*pm, "
wrote:

Please explain further........how is the correct landing procedure for
a 2-33 going to result in a high energy landing in a Grob?

IMHO....the correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (low energy, slow
speed, nose high, tail low, etc) will result in a similar low energy
landing in a Grob..........this would be a short runway landing, with
little or no need for brakes......

Cookie

So, when you are teaching landings to a student in a 2-33, do you
first sit him in the front seat, level the wings, then hold the nose
up until the tailwheel is on the ground and say "this is your landing
attitude"? Do you do that in a G-103? Didn't think so. Where that
tailwheel is relative to the ground is the difference. The landing
angle of attack is probably about the same, but a student who learns
to land on the main in a 2-33, nice and slow, but never touching the
tailwheel, then who transfers that technique to the G-103, is a prime
candidate for high energy landing problems. It's not a killer problem
- but it needs to be taught correctly!

Kirk

At 16:07 19 September 2010, kirk.stant wrote:
On Sep 18, 6:52=A0pm, "
wrote:

Please explain further........how is the correct landing procedure for
a 2-33 going to result in a high energy landing in a Grob?

IMHO....the correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (low energy, slow
speed, nose high, tail low, etc) will result in a similar low energy
landing in a Grob..........this would be a short runway landing, with
little or no need for brakes......

Cookie

So, when you are teaching landings to a student in a 2-33, do you
first sit him in the front seat, level the wings, then hold the nose
up until the tailwheel is on the ground and say "this is your landing
attitude"? Do you do that in a G-103? Didn't think so. Where that
tailwheel is relative to the ground is the difference. The landing
angle of attack is probably about the same, but a student who learns
to land on the main in a 2-33, nice and slow, but never touching the
tailwheel, then who transfers that technique to the G-103, is a prime
candidate for high energy landing problems. It's not a killer problem
- but it needs to be taught correctly!

Kirk

I did exactly that when teaching students to land a G103 except I would
push down on the tail so that they could see the picture in front of them.
The correct attitude is that where the main wheel and tailwheel touch the
ground at the same time. The glider should then be kept running on the
main and tailwheel for as long as possible, directional control is lost
when the glider goes nosewheel down.

On Sep 19, 12:07*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Sep 18, 6:52*pm, "

wrote:

Please explain further........how is the correct landing procedure for
a 2-33 going to result in a high energy landing in a Grob?

IMHO....the correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (low energy, slow
speed, nose high, tail low, etc) will result in a similar low energy
landing in a Grob..........this would be a short runway landing, with
little or no need for brakes......

Cookie

So, when you are teaching landings to a student in a 2-33, do you
first sit him in the front seat, level the wings, then hold the nose
up until the tailwheel is on the ground and say "this is your landing
attitude"? *Do you do that in a G-103? *Didn't think so. *Where that
tailwheel is relative to the ground is the difference. *The landing
angle of attack is probably about the same, but a student who learns
to land on the main in a 2-33, nice and slow, but never touching the
tailwheel, then who transfers that technique to the G-103, is a prime
candidate for high energy landing problems. *It's not a killer problem
- but it needs to be taught correctly!

Kirk

Correct landing attitude in a 2-33 is NOT tail all the way
down..........this comes under the category of "too slow"

2-33 should be landed tail low, nose high, low energy, slow a
practical, not slow as possible, and the skid kept off the ground as
long as possible during ground roll.

2-33 has a unique shape in that the main wheel is mounted low on the
bulbus belly, and the tail wheel is mounted high on the up swept
fuselage tail.

Grob should be landed nose high, tail low, as slow as practical (tail
first is OK if subtle), nose wheel held off during ground taxi as long
as possible


So tell me agian how a proper low energy 2-33 landing relates to
making a high energy Grob landing???


Cookie

On Sep 18, 11:50*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Sep 18, 3:04*am, "

wrote:
A 2-33 should be landed just like any other "nose dragger
glider" (G-103 II or ASK 21 etc)

Really? *The correct landing procedure for a 2-33 (and Blanik) is a
recipe for high energy landings in K-21s or G-103s (or worse case, a
high sink rate bounced landing leading to the infamous "galloping
Grob"!). *I hope you have a long runway and a big budget for brake
pads!

Some older gliders (and not all nose draggers) require a flown on
landing - tail low, but on the main wheel - due to the tail wheel not
being stressed for landing forces. *Examples are the 2-33 and Blanik
(note, one is a nose dragger, one a tail dragger). *This is similar in
concept to a wheel landing in a taildragger airplane - or a somewhat
flat normal landing in a tricycle-geared airplane. *The trick is that
once you have established the pitch attitude for touchdown, you can't
continue to increase the angle of attack to slow down or you will
touch the weak tail wheel/skid too early, so some judgement and skill
is required.

The later generation of trainers, whether nose draggers (k-21, g-103)

Suggested reading: Derek Piggot "Beginning Gliding" Chapter 4


Cookie
or tail draggers (DG-500/1000, Duo) are designed to land main and tail
at the same time - minimum energy landings - the equivalent of a 3-
point landing in a taildragger airplane. *This is also the way almost
all current single seat gliders are designed to be landed, for obvious
reasons - gliders are now heavier and land faster, and need to be
landed at the slowest possible speed in an off-field landing.

That is one of the reasons the 2-33 is a poor trainer for today's
glider pilots (assuming they intend to move on to something more
interesting than a 1-26). *If all training is done in a 2-33 (or
Blanik, to be fair), then a careful checkout in a modern glider is
essential to properly prepare the transitioning pilot for the landing
characteristics of most modern gliders.

Just to keep this discussion interesting, we can now argue whether a
low energy tailwheel-first landing is OK or bad for a modern glider
(assuming a reasonable sink rate at touchdown)...

Kirk

..

Just to keep this discussion interesting, we can now argue whether a
low energy tailwheel-first landing is OK or bad for a modern glider
(assuming a reasonable sink rate at touchdown)...

Kirk

Ok....I'll start.........on a tail dragger glider.... landing "ever
so slightly" tail first touch down is a good thing..........if the
approach is stable, and the sink rate is reasonable at touch
down..........by touching the tail first, the main gear will come to
the ground next, lowering the angle of attack on the wing, making it
not likely for the glider to "bounce".

Landing slightly tail first will also indicate that the glider is in
the "low energy" state.....i.e. as slow as practical..(not as slow as
possible, just as slow as practical)

Landing slightly tail first should not put any undue stress on the
airframe, tailwheel/skid etc, because the "weight" at the tail is very
light..........the CG is far forward of the tail...........the glider
will soon settle (softly) on the main gear, where the majority of the
weight is taken by the robust structure / shock absorber etc
there.....

Note............this technique does not mean ....get close to the
ground and jerk the stick back......this would cause the tail to slam
into the ground with consideral impact......not good.

Landing tail high in a taildragger glider is not a good
thing........It indicates excess speed.......since the CG is behind
the main gear, there is a tendancy of the tail to drop after main
touch down, increasing the angle of attack, and possibly resulting in
a "bounce".

Yes, a "wheel type" landing can be done successfully in a taildragger
glider, but in requires a slight stick forward pressure after touch
down to prevent bouncing, (by lowering the angle of attack.....) and
excessive speed, onger ground roll etc.

Landing tail first in a nose dragger glider is not a good
thing.................

Landing tail first in a nose dragger will result in the main gear next
touching down, but since the CG is in FRONT of this wheel, the
tendancy is for the glider to continue to pitch forward (nose down)
and contact the skid /nosewheel immediately..........as I mentioned
earlier, the nose wheel or skid is not a "landing gear"......


IMHO......a nose dragger glider should be landed with "low
energy" (slow airspeed), but not so slow that the tail touches first
(too slow)......The nose skid/ wheel should be held off the ground
during the ground taxi, as long as elevator authority allows......when
the nose finally drops, the ground speed is very slow........

Same technique works for 2-33, 1-26, ASK-21, Grob 103......


This is far different from a "wheel type landing" and far different
form "flying the glider on"




Cookie

On Sep 18, 8:23*pm, "
wrote:
.



Just to keep this discussion interesting, we can now argue whether a
low energy tailwheel-first landing is OK or bad for a modern glider
(assuming a reasonable sink rate at touchdown)...

Kirk

Ok....I'll start.........on a tail dragger glider.... landing *"ever
so slightly" tail first touch down is a good thing..........if the
approach is stable, and the sink rate is reasonable at touch
down..........by touching the tail first, the main gear will come to
the ground next, lowering the angle of attack on the wing, making it
not likely for the glider to "bounce".

Landing slightly tail first will also indicate that the glider is in
the "low energy" state.....i.e. as slow as practical..(not as slow as
possible, just as slow as practical)

Landing slightly tail first should not put any undue stress on the
airframe, tailwheel/skid etc, because the "weight" at the tail is very
light..........the CG is far forward of the tail...........the glider
will soon settle (softly) on the main gear, where the majority of the
weight is taken by the robust structure / shock absorber etc
there.....

Note............this technique does not mean ....get close to the
ground and jerk the stick back......this would cause the tail to slam
into the ground with consideral impact......not good.

Landing tail high in a taildragger glider is not a good
thing........It indicates excess speed.......since the CG is behind
the main gear, there is a tendancy of the tail to drop after main
touch down, increasing the angle of attack, and possibly resulting in
a *"bounce".

Yes, a "wheel type" landing can be done successfully in a taildragger
glider, but in requires a slight stick forward pressure after touch
down to prevent bouncing, (by lowering the angle of attack.....) * and
excessive speed, onger ground roll etc.

Landing tail first in a nose dragger glider is not a good
thing.................

Landing tail first in a nose dragger will result in the main gear next
touching down, but since the CG is in FRONT of this wheel, the
tendancy is for the glider to continue to pitch forward (nose down)
and contact the skid /nosewheel immediately..........as I mentioned
earlier, the nose wheel or skid is not a "landing gear"......

IMHO......a nose dragger glider should be landed with "low
energy" *(slow airspeed), but not so slow that the tail touches first
(too slow)......The nose skid/ wheel should be held off the ground
during the ground taxi, as long as elevator authority allows......when
the nose finally drops, the ground speed is very slow........

Same technique works for 2-33, 1-26, *ASK-21, Grob 103......

This is far different from a "wheel type landing" and far different
form "flying the glider on"

Cookie

Well said.

I would differ a tiny bit in that a very slight tail low touchdown in
a nose wheel glider isn't going to be a problem - but nothing more
than a couple of inches low.