Buying a 1-35 pros and cons?

On Saturday, March 23, 2013 4:13:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Weston wrote:
Does anyone have any inside info on the pros / cons of buying a 1-35. I am interested in learning cross country.

Since I'm at the same stage of glider piloting as you are, I thought that you might appreciate my perspective. It's a bit different than the more experienced pilots.

To rephrase your question, "What are the pros and cons of a low-hour pilot buying a glider that has flaps only (no spoilers)?"

Back in August 2012, I asked RAS "how does a pilot learn to fly a flaps only glider?" Not easily. There are very few tandem trainers that only have flaps.

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fro...ng/DqKTBzfdZxM

What settled it for me was this. A former owner of a flaps-only glider privately communicated off-RAS that he had wasted an entire year teaching himself how to properly land a flaps only glider. He also pointed out that some of the 1-35 landings on Youtube and such are extremely long and inept. In other words, some pilots do a crappy job of flying 1-35s and live to upload videos of their efforts. The pilot who pointed this out to me is now accomplished in XC. For that and other reasons I consider him a reliable source. Not all advice is good advice on RAS.

So maybe you're a natural pilot who can quickly master flaps-only landings. Maybe you've have thousands of hours flying airplanes with flaps. I'm not a natural pilot, and so I figured that there was a good chance that I would end up wasting a year just learning how to properly land a 1-35, and that I might get completely discouraged with the sport, scare myself badly, or worse.

A lot of the attributes that attracted me to the 1-35 were also present in the SGS 1-34. I flew a 1-34, landed it no problem on the first try, but I found the cockpit to be very uncomfortable.

I settled on buying a PW-5 or a SZD 51-1 Junior. Both of these types would be an easy transition for me after soloing in an ASK-21. They are docile, have decent performance, and they stay up in weak lift. I'm better positioned to transition to a high performance glider down the road (compared to flying a 1-34 in the meantime).

On 3/23/2013 4:39 PM, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Saturday, March 23, 2013 4:13:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Weston wrote:
Does anyone have any inside info on the pros / cons of buying a 1-35. I
am interested in learning cross country.

Since I'm at the same stage of glider piloting as you are, I thought that
you might appreciate my perspective. It's a bit different than the more
experienced pilots.

To rephrase your question, "What are the pros and cons of a low-hour pilot
buying a glider that has flaps only (no spoilers)?"

Back in August 2012, I asked RAS "how does a pilot learn to fly a flaps
only glider?" Not easily. There are very few tandem trainers that only
have flaps.

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fro...ng/DqKTBzfdZxM

What settled it for me was this. A former owner of a flaps-only glider
privately communicated off-RAS that he had wasted an entire year teaching
himself how to properly land a flaps only glider. He also pointed out that
some of the 1-35 landings on Youtube and such are extremely long and inept.
In other words, some pilots do a crappy job of flying 1-35s and live to
upload videos of their efforts. The pilot who pointed this out to me is
now accomplished in XC. For that and other reasons I consider him a
reliable source. Not all advice is good advice on RAS.

Snip...

I'm in 100% agreement with Mr. Flubber's son's segment-ending sentence
immediately above. Free advice is worth every cent you pay for it, & it's up
to you to determine if there's anything of value in it to you...

Moreover, I've never flown a 1-35 (of any stripe) but I've a brother (not a
RASident) who bought a 1-35C as his first single-seat ship. Does that count?
:-) In any event, here comes free advice!

My brother flew his 1-35C 800 hours, going from badge-less to gold in it. He
next bought a PIK-20A (no spoilers), flew that several hundred more hours,
then went to the dark side and bought an LS-6. His 1-35 transition occurred
prior to the web appearing, and his research included picking my brain.

As to my (abbienormal?) brain, with ~125 total hours (all glider) I
transitioned from a 1-26 to a Concept-70 (15-meter, experimental glass, large
positive-only deflection flaps/no spoilers), flew it 50 hours, transitioned to
an HP-14 (even larger positive-only deflection flaps/no spoilers), flew it 195
hours then transitioned to a +75/-10 flapped Zuni (no spoilers, relatively
weenie flaps) and have flown it over 2,000 hours. The 1-26 to C-70 transition
occurred in 1975 at a time and place lacking internet, flap-experienced
instructors or 2-seaters with flaps of any sort. IOW, all my preparation was
"book 'larnin'" and mental.

My transition occurred at Heber City, UT (roughly 5,000' msl as I recall, on a
~4500' runway). My brother's (early 90's?) was at Frederick, MD. Both his and
my transitions were no-sweat (as visible-to-the-peanut-galleries) affairs,
suggesting either our mental preparation was adequate, we were naturally
superb pilots, or we were incredibly lucky. You get to decide. :-)

My broad brush advice concerning "transitioning and proper use" of large
deflection flaps tends to fall into the "they're no big deal to safely
transition to and use"...so long as Joe Glider Pilot (aka JGP) has in mind
(and believes!) a few fundamental truths regarding their use. If he believes,
then so will he act...

I'll tangentially note here that the only mental error I identified subsequent
to my C-70 transition, was a pre-1st-flight decision to not use more than
30-degrees of flap in order to avoid the "major pitch change" I was aware
accompanied full-deflection use. Thanks to the Very Large difference in clean
glide angle between 1-26 and C-70, on long final it quickly became apparent my
choices we 1) overshoot with 30-degrees; 2) do one or more 360's on final;
or 3) use more flap (I used 'em all). Choosing option 3) was a
no-brainer...and a no-sweater, since I was/am a believer that pitch angle
falls out in the wash, if you believe "proper speed" matters in the landing
pattern (as I do, dry chuckle). BTW (writes this engineer), the "flap
associated pitch change" is largely "engineer speak" in the sense that ANY
glider with beaucoup drag WILL also require "major pitch-down" to maintain
speed when the boards are all out, as witness any full spoiler approach in
(say) a 2-32 or 1-34. Anyhow...

Fundamental Truth #1:
ANY flaps-only glider (including the massively-flapped HP-14) will happily
float the length of 4,000+ foot runways if flown into ground effect "too
fast", regardless of flap setting (i.e. relatively small OR full deflection).
Point being: adding some safety knots for Mom and the kids isn't wise in
flaps-only gliders...whereas when rounded out from "a proper approach speed"
any of them (including my weenily-flapped Zuni), can easily be plunked down
and stopped in a shorter distance than equivalent spoilered ships. As to
"proper approach speed", in the absence of manufacturer suggestions, standard
rules of thumb have worked well for me...after I've done "my usual" 3,000'
transition tow and stall/indicated ASI-calibration series. (In both the HP-14
and Zuni, I subsequently soared several hours prior to my initial landings.)
If for any reason JGP opts to fly high final "at some arbitrarily high safety
speed," the time to begin bleeding it off is in the early part of the
roundout, not the final (say) 3 vertical feet or so (which as-noted will
require a l-o-n-g runway!)...but I've rarely encountered pattern conditions
"opting me" to do that..certainly not on a transition condition day. IOW, I
recommend NOT "flying faster for extra safety" in flaps-only transition
flights...because it ISN'T safer. (Arguably, it's the opposite because it
unavoidably complicates the roundout/flare details).

Fundamental Truth #2:
It's MUCH easier to judge your roundout/touchdown location from a steep
approach than from a shallow approach...yet another rationale to not be afraid
to use as much flap drag as you need. If there's a 1-35 or PIK-20 at your home
field whose pilot regularly flies such approaches, you should have a sense of
how steep a glide angle full flap use will generate. There's no need to use
your drag early, as it's not necessary, and doing so will unnecessarily
complicate your approach by destabilizing it, just as if Joe Glider Pilot
opted to go back and forth from full spoiler to no spoiler in an approach. If
you KNOW you can generate a steeper glide angle than any previous ship you've
flown, why would you want to approach at prior ships' (relatively, compared to
your flapped bird) shallower glide angles? Stated another way, if I flew a
glider that could hover safely to a landing, I'd land that way every
time...but maybe that's just me!

Fundamental Truth #3:
If you come in low and slow in a flapped ship, you WILL land (crash?) short.
That said, ponder Truth #2 a bit more. Remember, we're talking transitioning
here, not squeezing 99% performance from yourself and ship on some off-field
landing quite possibly preceded by a whole bunch of dumb and dumber
decisions...there's simply no reason/excuse to EVER come in short in any ship
with gobs of drag. The draggier the ship, the easier (and higher) your
approach cone can (should) be. Point being, try and place every "con" existing
in your mind about large-deflection landing-flaps into some sort of context,
so's to make the best decision about ship choice of which you're capable. This
particular canard (always trotted out by the fearful and/or
less-than-informed), is bushwah nonsense (albeit accurate within a limited,
theoretical, sense). Tangentially, if you're aiming at the very approach end
of the runway on your transition flights for any reason, well...maybe you
shouldn't be. :-)

Clearly, flaps-only gliders aren't for everyone. Clearly not every pilot of
one is extraordinarily skillful. (I've always considered myself a
"workmanlike" pilot with a healthy desire to not break my neck.) Less clearly,
large-deflection landing-flapped gliders are the shortest-landing,
most-landing-fun gliders yet devised. Yeah, there're a number of You Tube
videos showing some (ahem!) rather ragged approaches and landings in such
ships...from which a savvy observer can get reinforced what NOT to do, and
from which to maybe even glean some bits of "why not." There're also some You
Tube examples of well flown patterns, including some by Wayne Paul in an HP-14
using full flaps, from which you can determine his roundout-stop distance is
somewhere between 200 and 300 feet. My shortest-ever ground roll in my HP-14
was 3 (paced off) fuselage lengths into a 3-5 knot, light, late evening
breeze. Five hundred feet was my planning purposes distance when "on" in my
Zuni flying.

Your mileage WILL vary...

Bob W.

P.S. Have fun with your search and transition!

P.P.S. As recently stated in another post, keep asking "Why do you recommend
that?" of every purveyor of advice, until you understand the reasoning...with
which you may not agree. I've tried to include my "why's" above.