FAA to ground 80% of Glider Training Fleet... it's just a question of when

At 15:26 05 April 2013, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Apr 4, 8:50=A0pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:

I talked to Greg Cole of Windward performance today about this subject.
He thinks the ideal two-seat trainer...

+ should have good performance, significantly better than an ASK 21

I think that Greg is right, but only if what we want to do is train an
elite cadre of cross-country and competition pilots. And I happen to
think that that is not necessarily what we want to do.

I worked at one of the busiest training gliderports in the US for
about five years, and I saw the kind of abuse that a real training
glider gets, and I saw what a real training glider does. And I know
that performance better than ASK21 might sound good and look good, and
might be an interesting design challenge, but it is to a great extent
secondary to what we want to do, and is in some ways counterproductive
to what we need.

I have talked with several commercial operators, and what they seem to
value above all else is operational availability. The glider has to be
functional and ready to go when it is needed. That means more than
rugged construction, it means minimum downtime. It means that the
glider is easy to repair, and that replacement parts are easily
available, and easy to install. It means that you can change a wheel,
tire, and brake assembly in fifteen minutes. It means that FedEx can
deliver a replacement canopy, with frame, ready to latch on and fly
with, overnight. It means wings that interchange so you can mix and
match your fleet when things get rough.

What we need is a glider that will launch 7200 times a year, every
year. A glider that will expose thousands of potential pilots to the
experience of soaring flight in a way that shows them the potential
and makes them want more. Because the reality is that, while soaring
is a wonderful and fascinating and engrossing activity, it is not for
everyone. Maybe one in person in what, 300? 500? maybe 1000? takes a
20 minute ride and sticks with it through to the license.

Another important thing is that the glider has to offer a pleasant and
effective training environment for those that do stick. And that means
ease of entry and exit, good seating, and good communication with the
instructor.

Electric motor in nose? Sure, that's a reasonable option. But the
important thing is to produce new starts. We have to launch a few
thousand people into the air and see which ones stick. The ones that
stick can get their own gliders with performance "significantly better
than an ASK 21," because that's easy to do with single-seaters.

Thanks, Bob K.
https://www.facebook.com/AuroraTrainingSailplaneProject

Apologies if I say something that has already been said, but I haven't read
all the postings. You are obviously in a similar situation to that which
the UK was in many years ago, no local manufacturers, so the only place to
go was Europe, which most clubs have done.
However, you are a lot further away, and by the sound of it, there could be
a good market, so why does not some composite aircraft manufacturer try for
a licence? Why re-invent the wheel? There are a number of good designs
available.
Dave

On Apr 5, 9:38*am, David Salmon wrote:

Apologies if I say something that has already been said, but I haven't read
all the postings. You are obviously in a similar situation to that which
the UK was in many years ago, no local manufacturers, so the only place to
go was Europe, which most clubs have done.
However, you are a lot further away, and by the sound of it, there could be
a good market, so why does not some composite aircraft manufacturer try for
a licence? Why re-invent the wheel? There are a number of good designs
available.

Dave, those are excellent questions!

Part of the genesis of the Aurora project was the suggestion that a
license might be obtained to manufacture ASK21s locally. The question
then became, how would you manufacture them cost-effectively, with
minimum ramp-up time, and what might you do differently?

One of the big issues is that of obtaining production certification.
You don't just have to obtain license to manufacture a design that has
been certificated to meet regulatory requirements. You also have to
prove to the authorities that you can manufacture it so that every
single unit meets certification requirements. And that means
developing and implementing a variety of technologies that ensure that
you stay within allowable tolerances in several dimensions.

These considerations led to the idea that a training glider should be
designed from the start with the idea of making it as cost-effective
as possible to meet both design and production certification
requirements. And that led back towards a clean-sheet design. But this
isn't reinventing the wheel. This is developing a wheel that meets our
current needs, not someone else's needs from a bygone era.

Thanks, Bob K.