![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 05:40 30 September 2016, Surge wrote:
On Thursday, 29 September 2016 15:00:07 UTC+2, Don Johnstone wrote: I would agree with you IF gliders, especially 2 seat gliders were always flown by pilots experience as you and I. Truth is they are not, they are frequently flown by very inexperienced and sometimes inept pilots, that i= s the nature of gliding. The wheel brake on a glider is not a mission critical item, unlike a powered aircraft the brakes are not tested before taxiing, in most cases we only find they do not work on landing which is why I never rely on them. If a student is inept then he/she should not be sent solo. I had less than 10 flights to my name and I could already feel when I was o= ver braking and skidding on a grass runway in the clubs G103 without an ins= tructor needing to correct me. Do you propose that we send students into the air with only half the tools = in the bag and then plead ignorance when they decapitate themselves going t= hrough a fence during an off field landing because they couldn't stop in ti= me and messed up an attempted ground loop? I consider brakes mission critical and test them on every pre- flight. No brakes or inefficient brakes means the glider is grounded. Sheesh ... just now someone is going to propose that a half functioning ele= vator is safer for students because it will help reduce PIO's. I have just spent a week flying in the backseat of nothing but a Twin Astir, with a cable and drum brake. I found that the well maintained drum brake is more than efficient enough to stop the glider and is well able to rub the nose on the ground if over used. So I repeat my question, why would anyone want to "improve" the brake by including a hydraulic system when proper maintenance will provide a perfectly effective brake and one which is far less likely to cause problems? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, October 7, 2016 at 5:00:07 PM UTC-7, Don Johnstone wrote:
So I repeat my question, why would anyone want to "improve" the brake by including a hydraulic system when proper maintenance will provide a perfectly effective brake and one which is far less likely to cause problems? Perhaps because some people have a different idea of maintenance? Jim |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For sale: Grob Twin Astir | [email protected] | Soaring | 3 | April 8th 14 05:29 PM |
Grob 103 Twin Astir tailwheel axle? | Roger Worden[_2_] | Soaring | 3 | June 26th 13 05:27 AM |
Tailwheel For GROB Twin Astir | Mike J. | Soaring | 2 | December 3rd 12 04:49 PM |
Grob Twin Astir Tailshaking | Peter | Soaring | 11 | January 14th 07 11:54 PM |
Grob Twin Astir 1 Manual / Flughandbuch | Sebastian Schroeter | Soaring | 2 | June 14th 04 11:41 AM |