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
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
Hi all
Anybody got any links to a Kestrel 19 T59D owner group,pages etc? I have obtained a broken one for a long term project and want to obtain any info that is available re parts, mods and drawings. I remember from somewhere talk of a one piece canopy ala DG mod. Any info much appreciated. E-mail me at p_buchanan(at)rocketmail.com Cheers Paul |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
Hi Paul,
I own a T.59D (1789) and love it A bit heavy to rig, but it handles my size and weight. There is a Yahoo! group called "Kestrel401" that caters to the Kestrel crowd. It's not very active, but the people are fairly decent and responsive. You'll find the various approved mods there, as well as the TNs and ADs (there are 2 annual-check ADs). The PoH is also there. The various mods were designed by the factory as they went through series production (there are 4 series), including enlarging the rudder and adding an anti-balance tab to the elevator (standard in series 2 and later). There was one (two?) modified to have a double-panel spoiler, but it wasn't approved for general use and apparently didn't do much except make more noise. Some support for the type is available through Glasfaser at www.streifly.de.. Slingsby is now known as Slingsby Advanced Composites and has various drawings for the Kestrel... at a price. The Kestrel has no life limits, it's "on condition" for everything, although the rudder actuator has a slight design flaw (annual AD to check the weld joints: any cracks and it's to be replaced... not sure if there are any replacements available). There are a few other Kestrel owners that follow r.a.s. so others may chime in. Good luck getting your Kestrel back into the air! - John |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
At 22:29 27 May 2018, C-FFKQ 42 wrote:
Hi Paul, I own a T.59D (1789) and love it A bit heavy to rig, but it handles my = size and weight. There is a Yahoo! group called "Kestrel401" that caters to the Kestrel crow= d. It's not very active, but the people are fairly decent and responsive. = You'll find the various approved mods there, as well as the TNs and ADs (t= here are 2 annual-check ADs). The PoH is also there. The various mods wer= e designed by the factory as they went through series production (there are= 4 series), including enlarging the rudder and adding an anti-balance tab t= o the elevator (standard in series 2 and later). There was one (two?) modi= fied to have a double-panel spoiler, but it wasn't approved for general use= and apparently didn't do much except make more noise. Some support for the type is available through Glasfaser at www.streifly.de= .. Slingsby is now known as Slingsby Advanced Composites and has various dr= awings for the Kestrel... at a price. The Kestrel has no life limits, it's "on condition" for everything, althoug= h the rudder actuator has a slight design flaw (annual AD to check the weld= joints: any cracks and it's to be replaced... not sure if there are any re= placements available). There are a few other Kestrel owners that follow r.a.s. so others may chime= in. Good luck getting your Kestrel back into the air! - John G-DCTL has a one piece canopy. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
"modified to have a double-panel spoiler, but it wasn't approved for general use and apparently didn't do much except make more noise"
Is more airbrake really needed on a Kestrel? I've never had a chance to fly one but seriously considered buying one several years ago and the pilots I talked to who had flown them seemed to think the brakes were fine and the landing flap setting made it even easier to do a steep approach - and then if you still needed more you could deploy the chute. Everyone who I talked to loved the ship. One peculiarity of the Slingsby Kestrel, at least as certified in Canada, that I remember from that research is that a parachute, specifically a "back type parachute" is listed on the TCDS as required equipment. I've never seen that on any other glider. The German ships all seem to include a back type parachute or a back cushion of a specified thickness as required equipment but the Slingsby TCDS just flat out says you've got to carry a parachute.. I wonder if it was a typo that no one caught back in the early 70's when they were certifying it in Canada. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
On Monday, 28 May 2018 02:51:06 UTC-4, wrote:
Is more airbrake really needed on a Kestrel? I've never had a chance to fly... YES. Even the PoH mentions that the airbrakes aren't very effective! At best, they add about 1.5 kt of sink on my ship. There are 35-degree landing flaps and, if needed, the drogue chute (I practice with it at my home field); the airbrakes are used to fine-tune the approach. Lots of planning and adjusting in the circuit to make a decent approach. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
The brakes on the Kestrel are too far back on the wing to be very effective.
The Slingsby Kestrels had poor sutface accuracy too, thats why the extra 2 meters of wing only improved the LD by one point. The ultimate ineffective use of span. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
So there I was… just a foot or so off the ground with a full regiment of hay bales charging at me.
I was landing in a field just south of Big Pine - a farm field. The north side of the field had been recently cut and cleared. The south side was populated by hay bales. The wind was from the south. There was a road and high-tension power lines along the north side. The plan was to come in over the power lines and land in the first half of the field, short of the hay bales… without using the drag chute. The thing about the drag chute on the Kestrel is that there two separate actuation cables with similar “T” handles but very different functions. One, labeled “Deploy”, presents the chute to the airstream whereupon it opens up and immediately generates enormous drag. The other, labeled “Jettison”, disconnects the chute at the point where the shrouds attach to the sailplane’s tail, whereupon there is no more drag. The thinking behind this design was, no doubt, that you might misjudge your pattern with the chute such that you are not able to make it over a fence or trees at the approach end of the field. Rather than punish you for this misdeed, the plane allows you to jettison the whole thing, land without it (if you have enough room to do so) and walk back later to pick it up. Of course, once you jettison it, there is no way to deploy it again during that flight. In fact, and this is the tricky bit, if you select jettison first and then subsequently deploy it, you will get both a deployment and jettison simultaneously, with no significant effect on drag. All this means is that it’s important to select the correct control for any given occasion. The other thing to realize about the drag chute on the Kestrel is that it is stunningly effective. You have to push the nose down when it opens to keep the plane flying. My brother, and partner in this particular aircraft, had warned me about this. He had also warned that the chute might not always open. It might get stuck. Or it might have already been inadvertently jettisoned (there was no way of knowing until the chute was deployed). His advice was, if you elect to use the chute, do so on downwind so you can adjust your pattern for a steep descend if it opens, or not if it doesn’t. I had practiced with the chute at the home field until I was comfortable with it use, but on this occasion, I decided it wasn’t needed. Alas, that is, until well into the flair. It seems that after the steep descent over the power lines I was carrying a bit more speed than expected. And though the hay bales had, from the air, looked to be widely scattered, from down here they seemed to have formed up into an impenetrable rank, at least for a 19-meter wing. At that point I elected to deploy the chute to slow things down a bit - avoid engagement. As mentioned previously, this requires that I pull the correct handle, which means looking down in the cockpit to make my selection. The self-preservation instincts of humans would be a fine subject for a grand dissertation. For our purposes, let it suffice to say that if you put your head down for any significant length of time while zooming over the ground at low level, you will instinctively pull back on the stick, at least a little. Apparently, I ballooned up a bit before locating the correct handle. The chute opened immediately as evidenced by a sudden jerk. By the time I got my head back up looking out the canopy the plane had come to a complete stop about 8 feet in the air. I felt like one of those cartoon characters that walks off a cliff and has a moment to realize it before they start to fall. I had enough just enough time to say “Uh oh”; then WHAM! Fortunately, the only damage was a broken axle. It had been cut down to about half its diameter just inside the fork as a weak link. The wheel was jammed up into the well sideways but still sticking out enough to protect the doors. Hannes Linke turned a new axle for me and I was back in the air and off on new adventure by the next weekend. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Kestrel 19 info wanted.
I contacted Striefeneder about this a couple of years ago, they told me they no longer supply this mod.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LS-3a Polar Info. Wanted. | Eric Nielsen | Soaring | 4 | January 21st 16 01:26 PM |
Color scheme info wanted. | Kees Mies | Piloting | 13 | November 12th 04 02:46 PM |
Wanted Info on Narco Com 810 | [email protected] | Owning | 1 | July 18th 04 12:20 PM |
Discus Info Wanted | Scott | Soaring | 0 | March 9th 04 05:59 AM |
Wanted info on Buttercup | Charlie | Restoration | 0 | November 20th 03 05:03 PM |