A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Anyone flown a SHK-1?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 21st 17, 11:39 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the technical
side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic value for money.
Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a root trestle at rigging
height and a tip trestle along with a wing dolly at the root end and I
could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting of the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k. Climbs
beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in the mornings.
Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found any discomfort in the
cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given (which goes
against all training)! was that if seriously too high IN NO WIND conditions
and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes and raise the nose to take it to
the back of the drag curve. It comes down smoothly and rapidly. When back
to the correct angle lower the nose and complete approach as normal. It
works. I'll bet people will want to come on here who have never flown one
and say different but try it at altutude first. I could even do this whilst
playing with the rudder and it showed no tendency to drop a wing.


Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.
  #12  
Old May 21st 17, 12:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,224
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sun, 21 May 2017 03:39:09 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the
technical side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic value
for money. Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a root trestle
at rigging height and a tip trestle along with a wing dolly at the root
end and I could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting of
the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k.
Climbs beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in the
mornings. Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found any
discomfort in the cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given (which
goes against all training)! was that if seriously too high IN NO WIND
conditions and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes and raise the
nose to take it to the back of the drag curve. It comes down smoothly
and rapidly. When back to the correct angle lower the nose and complete
approach as normal. It works. I'll bet people will want to come on here
who have never flown one and say different but try it at altutude
first. I could even do this whilst playing with the rudder and it
showed no tendency to drop a wing.


Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.


As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a Std
Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at a
field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems may
limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one axis are
used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK. Disclaimer:
I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
  #13  
Old May 21st 17, 01:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike Oliver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

I did slip the SHK and can't remember anything too disconcerting but
ruddeer forces needed to be quite high. Of course there's always the tail
chute too.

As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a Std


Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at a
field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems may
limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one axis are
used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK. Disclaimer:
I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |


  #14  
Old May 21st 17, 01:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Chris Rollings[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 133
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

At 11:24 21 May 2017, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 03:39:09 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the
technical side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic value
for money. Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a root trestle
at rigging height and a tip trestle along with a wing dolly at the

root
end and I could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting of
the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k.
Climbs beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in the
mornings. Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found any
discomfort in the cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given (which
goes against all training)! was that if seriously too high IN NO WIND
conditions and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes and raise the
nose to take it to the back of the drag curve. It comes down smoothly
and rapidly. When back to the correct angle lower the nose and

complete
approach as normal. It works. I'll bet people will want to come on

here
who have never flown one and say different but try it at altutude
first. I could even do this whilst playing with the rudder and it
showed no tendency to drop a wing.


Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.


As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a Std


Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at a
field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems may
limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one axis are
used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK. Disclaimer:
I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |


It's interesting to note that many, possibly most, of the glider and light
aircraft types that started out with a V-tail, went over to a conventional
tail-plane and rudder if the went on to a mark 2 or other later development
In the current context, the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK,
the prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over to
the conventional tail-plane and elevator.

  #15  
Old May 21st 17, 02:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 4:00:05 PM UTC+3, Chris Rollings wrote:
At 11:24 21 May 2017, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 03:39:09 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the
technical side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic value
for money. Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a root trestle
at rigging height and a tip trestle along with a wing dolly at the

root
end and I could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting of
the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k.
Climbs beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in the
mornings. Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found any
discomfort in the cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given (which
goes against all training)! was that if seriously too high IN NO WIND
conditions and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes and raise the
nose to take it to the back of the drag curve. It comes down smoothly
and rapidly. When back to the correct angle lower the nose and

complete
approach as normal. It works. I'll bet people will want to come on

here
who have never flown one and say different but try it at altutude
first. I could even do this whilst playing with the rudder and it
showed no tendency to drop a wing.

Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.


As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a Std


Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at a
field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems may
limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one axis are
used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK. Disclaimer:
I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |


It's interesting to note that many, possibly most, of the glider and light
aircraft types that started out with a V-tail, went over to a conventional
tail-plane and rudder if the went on to a mark 2 or other later development
In the current context, the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK,
the prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over to
the conventional tail-plane and elevator.


ITYM "all-flying tailplane"
  #16  
Old May 21st 17, 06:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,224
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sun, 21 May 2017 06:28:00 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 4:00:05 PM UTC+3, Chris Rollings wrote:
At 11:24 21 May 2017, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 03:39:09 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the
technical side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic
value for money. Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a
root trestle at rigging height and a tip trestle along with a wing
dolly at the

root
end and I could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting
of the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k.
Climbs beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in
the mornings. Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found
any discomfort in the cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given
(which goes against all training)! was that if seriously too high
IN NO WIND conditions and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes
and raise the nose to take it to the back of the drag curve. It
comes down smoothly and rapidly. When back to the correct angle
lower the nose and

complete
approach as normal. It works. I'll bet people will want to come on

here
who have never flown one and say different but try it at altutude
first. I could even do this whilst playing with the rudder and it
showed no tendency to drop a wing.

Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.

As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a
Std


Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at
a field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems
may limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one
axis are used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK.
Disclaimer: I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |


It's interesting to note that many, possibly most, of the glider and
light aircraft types that started out with a V-tail, went over to a
conventional tail-plane and rudder if the went on to a mark 2 or other
later development
In the current context, the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK,
the prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over
to the conventional tail-plane and elevator.


ITYM "all-flying tailplane"


Early ones, yes. After that they first got rather more washout twisted
into the wing and final versions had a conventional tailplane plus
elevators.

I've never flown any of them, but I have crawled round and sat in a late
one with normal elevators (VTC built G/81). Biggest cockpit I've ever sat
in and even more limited rear view than an SZD Junior.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
  #17  
Old May 21st 17, 07:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Friesen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 3:00:07 AM UTC-7, Mike Oliver wrote:

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given (which goes
against all training)! was that if seriously too high IN NO WIND conditions
and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes and raise the nose to take it to
the back of the drag curve. It comes down smoothly and rapidly. When back
to the correct angle lower the nose and complete approach as normal. It
works. I'll bet people will want to come on here who have never flown one
and say different but try it at altutude first. I could even do this whilst
playing with the rudder and it showed no tendency to drop a wing.

Lovely glider, sometimes I regret moving on.


To get my Austria S down, I go the opposite way. I add about 5 knots airspeed. It is my experience that the air brakes are significantly more effective at or above 60 knots. 55 knots, not much happening. 65 knots, she is coming down, for sure.

My particular airframe - and, note, mine is an early example with a NACA airfoil - seems to have a 'knee' in the lift/speed curve. It tends to pop up on aerotow round about the end of the runway. I have thought that and the airbrake behaviour may be related.

Bruce
  #18  
Old May 21st 17, 09:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 8:30:16 PM UTC+3, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 06:28:00 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 4:00:05 PM UTC+3, Chris Rollings wrote:
At 11:24 21 May 2017, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 03:39:09 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 1:00:07 PM UTC+3, Mike Oliver wrote:
I flew one for many years. 1000 hrs+ Can't add anything on the
technical side but what I would say is that it remains fantastic
value for money. Make sure you get or make good rigging aids, a
root trestle at rigging height and a tip trestle along with a wing
dolly at the
root
end and I could easily rig mine single handed without any lifting
of the wings.

Flew at least 8 flights over 500k here in the UK longest was 564k.
Climbs beautifully on the early thermals so could leave early in
the mornings. Longest flight time was over 8 hours and never found
any discomfort in the cockpit. I'm just under 6'0.

Brakes are weak if you have no headwind but a tip I was given
(which goes against all training)! was that if seriously too high
IN NO WIND conditions and NO TURBULENCE you can open the brakes
and raise the nose to take it to the back of the drag curve. It
comes down smoothly and rapidly. When back to the correct angle
lower the nose and
complete
approach as normal. It works. I'll bet people will want to come on
here
who have never flown one and say different but try it at altutude
first. I could even do this whilst playing with the rudder and it
showed no tendency to drop a wing.

Std Libelle brakes are similar. But a slip works better.

As Bruce says, its easy to do a full deflection, full-brake slip in a
Std

Libelle. This turns it into quite a satisfactory brick and compensates
nicely for its rather weak brakes if you're a bit high on finals or at
a field, such as Borders, that needs a higher descent rate.

How vigorously can you slip an SHK?

I ask because I've seen a comment that applying full rudder in an SH
affected its pitch trim. I've heard that many V-tail control systems
may limit the available deflections if deflections on more than one
axis are used and am wondering if that limits slipping in an SHK.
Disclaimer: I've never flown anything with a V tail.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |


It's interesting to note that many, possibly most, of the glider and
light aircraft types that started out with a V-tail, went over to a
conventional tail-plane and rudder if the went on to a mark 2 or other
later development
In the current context, the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK,
the prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over
to the conventional tail-plane and elevator.


ITYM "all-flying tailplane"


Early ones, yes. After that they first got rather more washout twisted
into the wing and final versions had a conventional tailplane plus
elevators.


When someone says "the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK, the prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over to the conventional tail-plane and elevator" I tend to the assumption they're talking about "early" ones -- which are the vast majority of examples in NZ.
  #19  
Old May 21st 17, 11:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,224
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

On Sun, 21 May 2017 13:39:31 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

When someone says "the first Cirrus was essentially a glass SHK, the
prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over to the
conventional tail-plane and elevator" I tend to the assumption they're
talking about "early" ones -- which are the vast majority of examples in
NZ.


Understood: apparently only the first prototype had a V-tail, so I'd
expect the "early" Cirruses in NZ to be T-tailed with all flying tails.

I also know that the first production Std Cirrii had 1.5 degrees washout
on the wing and were a bit prone to tip stalling and spinning. Later Std
Cirrii had 3 degrees of washout which, apparently cost them some
performance but killed the tip stalling tendency, but I have no idea what
Wrk.Nr this change applied to. It would be interesting to know which
group most NZ-registered Std Cirri fall in.

I've heard it said that Std Cirri dominated Club Class until the ones
with 1.5 degrees of washout had all been broken and that after that Std
Libelles took over. Make what you will of that!



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
  #20  
Old May 22nd 17, 01:46 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Michael Opitz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Anyone flown a SHK-1?

At 22:36 21 May 2017, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2017 13:39:31 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

When someone says "the first Cirrus was essentially a glass

SHK, the
prototype inherited the V-tail, the production versions went over

to the
conventional tail-plane and elevator" I tend to the assumption

they're
talking about "early" ones -- which are the vast majority of

examples in
NZ.


Understood: apparently only the first prototype had a V-tail, so I'd
expect the "early" Cirruses in NZ to be T-tailed with all flying

tails.

I also know that the first production Std Cirrii had 1.5 degrees

washout
on the wing and were a bit prone to tip stalling and spinning.

Later Std
Cirrii had 3 degrees of washout which, apparently cost them some
performance but killed the tip stalling tendency, but I have no idea

what
Wrk.Nr this change applied to. It would be interesting to know

which
group most NZ-registered Std Cirri fall in.

I've heard it said that Std Cirri dominated Club Class until the ones
with 1.5 degrees of washout had all been broken and that after

that Std
Libelles took over. Make what you will of that!



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

The change over came in the spring/summer of 1972 as I was
working at S-H as a summer student. I helped lay up the first sets
of increased twist wings. Sorry, I don't recall the serial numbers.
If you want to buy a pre-1972 Std Cirrus, make sure you determine
the turning stall/spin characteristics and speeds (at altitude) before
you buy it. If it behaves differently (one direction compared to the
other) don't buy it.

RO


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone flown atn LPV yet? Sam Spade Instrument Flight Rules 40 January 13th 07 11:28 AM
Has anyone flown in here? john smith Piloting 2 October 2nd 05 11:36 AM
has anyone flown with these ? Damian John Paul Brown Rotorcraft 4 April 16th 04 09:48 PM
has anyone flown with these ? Damian John Paul Brown General Aviation 0 April 15th 04 04:26 AM
has anyone flown with these ? Damian John Paul Brown Aviation Marketplace 0 April 15th 04 04:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.