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

Landing with reduced airbrake



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 23rd 18, 05:05 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
CindyB[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

On Friday, May 18, 2018 at 12:25:02 AM UTC-7, Richard McLean wrote:

You have a couple options to 'soften' the touch/sink rate, but you know those....

1) add a couple knots of approach speed and buy time to feel for(get closer to) ground.
2) lessen spoilers near the ground to lengthen the flaring and 'feel for ground time'.

Neither of those teaches what you really seek, which is -- Identification of the chosen attitude.

One technique I find helpful for students to reinforce or identify ANY desired touching attitude is to seat the student with closed canopy on the runway threshold (or adjacent). Have a helper level the tip, and you walk to the empennage. Using a hand on the empennage centerline, you can rocking chair the glider to show nose-low attitude (forward 2-point), nose-level attitude for liftoff and your described almost-preferred touchdown attitude, and the nose-high tail-low 2-point attitude.

This rocking chair exercise can be repeated prior to any flight by using your launch helpers. It helps the student define the look -- comparing the panel top or side rails of cockpit to comparative external visual keys.

It doesn't matter what glider is used. The new-pilot trainee needs to 'see' the chosen attitude several times - and contrast it to the 'wrong' attitudes. This is a Cheap and Effective tool to assist a student who might be struggling with the rapidly changing and Brief moments of touchdown finesse..

Good luck to you and the students, with wishes for smooth touches.

Cindy B
Mojave, CA

Ads
  #32  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:35 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Richard McLean[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

On Wednesday, 23 May 2018 12:05:28 UTC+8, CindyB wrote:
On Friday, May 18, 2018 at 12:25:02 AM UTC-7, Richard McLean wrote:

You have a couple options to 'soften' the touch/sink rate, but you know those....

1) add a couple knots of approach speed and buy time to feel for(get closer to) ground.
2) lessen spoilers near the ground to lengthen the flaring and 'feel for ground time'.

Neither of those teaches what you really seek, which is -- Identification of the chosen attitude.

One technique I find helpful for students to reinforce or identify ANY desired touching attitude is to seat the student with closed canopy on the runway threshold (or adjacent). Have a helper level the tip, and you walk to the empennage. Using a hand on the empennage centerline, you can rocking chair the glider to show nose-low attitude (forward 2-point), nose-level attitude for liftoff and your described almost-preferred touchdown attitude, and the nose-high tail-low 2-point attitude.

This rocking chair exercise can be repeated prior to any flight by using your launch helpers. It helps the student define the look -- comparing the panel top or side rails of cockpit to comparative external visual keys.

It doesn't matter what glider is used. The new-pilot trainee needs to 'see' the chosen attitude several times - and contrast it to the 'wrong' attitudes. This is a Cheap and Effective tool to assist a student who might be struggling with the rapidly changing and Brief moments of touchdown finesse.

Good luck to you and the students, with wishes for smooth touches.

Cindy B
Mojave, CA


Cheers Cindy.

You're right, the key to avoiding a hard tail-strike is not pulling past the correct landing attitude .. unfortunately I think when a high rate of descent is present the instinct is to keep pulling, hence the focus on addressing the rate of descent. I guess the answer is to address both issues.

Thanks again,

Richard
  #33  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tim Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 636
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

I am not an instructor, but have done many real life off field landings. I don’t understand why you would be wanting to do landings with full spoilers? The goal is minimum energy at the point of touch down, not maximum spoilers. The perfect approach would be with a glide angle 50% between full spoilers and no spoilers. That would have shown you have capability to adapt to any change in conditions. A full spoiler landing shows the pilot was too high and miss judged the approach.

My target on off field landings is to be stalling the plane on with the tail wheel touching just before the main. The only situation that calls for a full spoiler landing is clearing an obstacle on final. That should be an advanced maneuver, not standard practice.

So yes, less than full spoilers are the way to teach landings, and better for the aircraft.



  #34  
Old May 23rd 18, 08:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
krasw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 426
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

Yes, occasionally outlanding requires flying over obstacles like trees. And occasionally the field is shorter than your home airfield. Then you would probably make full airbrakes approach.
  #35  
Old May 24th 18, 01:24 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Eight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 616
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 2:49:32 PM UTC-4, Tim Taylor wrote:
I am not an instructor, but have done many real life off field landings. I don’t understand why you would be wanting to do landings with full spoilers? The goal is minimum energy at the point of touch down, not maximum spoilers. The perfect approach would be with a glide angle 50% between full spoilers and no spoilers. That would have shown you have capability to adapt to any change in conditions. A full spoiler landing shows the pilot was too high and miss judged the approach.

My target on off field landings is to be stalling the plane on with the tail wheel touching just before the main. The only situation that calls for a full spoiler landing is clearing an obstacle on final. That should be an advanced maneuver, not standard practice.

So yes, less than full spoilers are the way to teach landings, and better for the aircraft.


Hi Tim,

I see things very differently.

Being able to anticipate, intercept and execute a smooth, controlled, minimum energy glide slope with full flaps and full brakes is a basic skill every XC pilot should have in his toolbox.

I practice this at every opportunity and encourage my advancing XC students and flying buddies to do the same.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8
  #36  
Old May 24th 18, 01:50 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

Less spoilers near touchdown should cause a lower sink rate and lower the chance of a bad attitude tail strike breaking something.

But doing the last half of final aiming for the end of the runway with a small spoiler setting puts you in a low energy situation. With a long runway, this could be fixed by moving the aim point down the runway and expecting the student to get there.

As far as training is concerned, I wonder if this might miss the goal of landing with the right sight picture, right touchdown attitude, in a short field, or over a tree line. That seems a lot of forced relearning later in trade for saving the trainer.

Maybe this isn't the right trainer to use first to teach landing?

  #37  
Old May 24th 18, 06:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Richard McLean[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Landing with reduced airbrake

On Thursday, 24 May 2018 08:50:42 UTC+8, wrote:
Less spoilers near touchdown should cause a lower sink rate and lower the chance of a bad attitude tail strike breaking something.

But doing the last half of final aiming for the end of the runway with a small spoiler setting puts you in a low energy situation. With a long runway, this could be fixed by moving the aim point down the runway and expecting the student to get there.

As far as training is concerned, I wonder if this might miss the goal of landing with the right sight picture, right touchdown attitude, in a short field, or over a tree line. That seems a lot of forced relearning later in trade for saving the trainer.

Maybe this isn't the right trainer to use first to teach landing?


We teach initial landings in the ASK21 & now the DG-1001 (nosewheel version) which has replaced the SZD-50 Puchacz. Here in Oz we teach "1/2 to 2/3 airbrake on final" .. the problems only come into play when the student mishandles the approach & overshoots, then corrects by pulling full brake & consequently over-rotating ... all I'm suggesting is that in this specific scenario we limit the amount of airbrake used to help avoid the over-rotation & instead accept the overshoot. The DG is fine otherwise, it just lands a little hot as described in the previous posts, and it has a heavy tail.
 




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
Kestrel 19 Airbrake Mod [email protected] Soaring 1 January 13th 14 06:06 PM
asw19 airbrake kit steve[_2_] Soaring 2 April 7th 11 08:32 PM
LS3a Airbrake question [email protected] Soaring 5 April 29th 08 03:10 AM
airbrake position while tied outside CK Soaring 18 January 19th 04 02:34 PM
airbrake question miso Military Aviation 17 December 4th 03 04:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.