How about some talk about flying?

[Mike Ash]

Since this group is being overwhelmed by an incredible quantity of crap,
and contains virtually no actual reasonable on-topic posts, here's a
little attempt to switch things up. I wrote this message to my club, but
it ought to fit in here OK. Even though it's not about big complicated
machines with spinning fans up front, at least it's about flying!

....

And an incredible testament to the power of XCSkies here.

I checked the XCSkies forecast in the morning before I left home. It
showed good lift to about 3,000ft over the Massanutten, and to 6,000ft
over the Blue Ridge. Since they're so close together, I figured this
couldn't POSSIBLY be really accurate, and just took it to mean that the
lift would be spotty.

After the shortest non-rope-break tow I have EVER experienced (the vario
needle disappeared past 10kts before the end of the runway, and
eventually pegged so hard that the needle went all the way around past
zero a second time) I climbed in good lift over the Massanutten to... a
little over 3,000ft. Couldn't get much past that no matter what I tried.

Remembering the XCSkies forecast, I fell back to the Blue Ridge. Lift
was consistent enough that I got there at around 3,200ft still, and hit
solid lift again. A few minutes later I banged into cloudbase and
checked the altimeter... 6,200ft.

Now THAT is incredible weather forecasting precision. An XCSkies
subscription is worth every penny in my view.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[george]

On Nov 7, 7:15*am, Mike Ash > wrote:
> Since this group is being overwhelmed by an incredible quantity of crap,
> and contains virtually no actual reasonable on-topic posts, here's a
> little attempt to switch things up. I wrote this message to my club, but
> it ought to fit in here OK. Even though it's not about big complicated
> machines with spinning fans up front, at least it's about flying!
>
> ...
>
> And an incredible testament to the power of XCSkies here.
>
> I checked the XCSkies forecast in the morning before I left home. It
> showed good lift to about 3,000ft over the Massanutten, and to 6,000ft
> over the Blue Ridge. Since they're so close together, I figured this
> couldn't POSSIBLY be really accurate, and just took it to mean that the
> lift would be spotty.
>
> After the shortest non-rope-break tow I have EVER experienced (the vario
> needle disappeared past 10kts before the end of the runway, and
> eventually pegged so hard that the needle went all the way around past
> zero a second time) I climbed in good lift over the Massanutten to... a
> little over 3,000ft. Couldn't get much past that no matter what I tried.
>
> Remembering the XCSkies forecast, I fell back to the Blue Ridge. Lift
> was consistent enough that I got there at around 3,200ft still, and hit
> solid lift again. A few minutes later I banged into cloudbase and
> checked the altimeter... 6,200ft.
>
> Now THAT is incredible weather forecasting precision. An XCSkies
> subscription is worth every penny in my view.

Sounds like there might be decent wave in that area..

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
george > wrote:

> > Remembering the XCSkies forecast, I fell back to the Blue Ridge. Lift
> > was consistent enough that I got there at around 3,200ft still, and hit
> > solid lift again. A few minutes later I banged into cloudbase and
> > checked the altimeter... 6,200ft.
> >
> > Now THAT is incredible weather forecasting precision. An XCSkies
> > subscription is worth every penny in my view.
>
> Sounds like there might be decent wave in that area..

I had similar thoughts. The satellite picture showed unmistakable signs
of wave farther south, terminating about 30 miles or so south of my
airport. The clouds in the area weren't classic wave formations, but I
thought they looked promising. However, no matter how hard I searched, I
never found wave. The area where I was flying was very rotor-like, with
strong turbulence everywhere, decreasing slowly with altitude, but I
only ever found very bumpy lift under the clouds, never anything away
from them, and never anything smooth.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[george]

On Nov 7, 1:23*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:
> In article
> >,
>
> *george > wrote:
> > > Remembering the XCSkies forecast, I fell back to the Blue Ridge. Lift
> > > was consistent enough that I got there at around 3,200ft still, and hit
> > > solid lift again. A few minutes later I banged into cloudbase and
> > > checked the altimeter... 6,200ft.
>
> > > Now THAT is incredible weather forecasting precision. An XCSkies
> > > subscription is worth every penny in my view.
>
> > Sounds like there might be decent wave in that area..
>
> I had similar thoughts. The satellite picture showed unmistakable signs
> of wave farther south, terminating about 30 miles or so south of my
> airport. The clouds in the area weren't classic wave formations, but I
> thought they looked promising. However, no matter how hard I searched, I
> never found wave. The area where I was flying was very rotor-like, with
> strong turbulence everywhere, decreasing slowly with altitude, but I
> only ever found very bumpy lift under the clouds, never anything away
> from them, and never anything smooth.
>
Get a tow into the 30 mile south area and do an orbit on tow.
If theres anything you'll feel it.
It may be that the areas pretty dry and lenticular won't form.
Was the rotor visible?

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
george > wrote:

> On Nov 7, 1:23*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> > *george > wrote:
> > > > Remembering the XCSkies forecast, I fell back to the Blue Ridge. Lift
> > > > was consistent enough that I got there at around 3,200ft still, and hit
> > > > solid lift again. A few minutes later I banged into cloudbase and
> > > > checked the altimeter... 6,200ft.
> >
> > > > Now THAT is incredible weather forecasting precision. An XCSkies
> > > > subscription is worth every penny in my view.
> >
> > > Sounds like there might be decent wave in that area..
> >
> > I had similar thoughts. The satellite picture showed unmistakable signs
> > of wave farther south, terminating about 30 miles or so south of my
> > airport. The clouds in the area weren't classic wave formations, but I
> > thought they looked promising. However, no matter how hard I searched, I
> > never found wave. The area where I was flying was very rotor-like, with
> > strong turbulence everywhere, decreasing slowly with altitude, but I
> > only ever found very bumpy lift under the clouds, never anything away
> > from them, and never anything smooth.
> >
> Get a tow into the 30 mile south area and do an orbit on tow.
> If theres anything you'll feel it.
> It may be that the areas pretty dry and lenticular won't form.

Well, there were lenticular-looking things on the satellite photo. I
wasn't up to doing such a long tow, though, especially since the 30
miles was just a rough estimate.

> Was the rotor visible?

There were a couple of lower-level clouds that looked like they may have
been rotor clouds, but for the most part no.

Another interesting part to this day. It had been mostly calm all day.
The report came in from another fellow that there was lift, so I started
getting ready for takeoff. As I was standing next to my glider getting
the cockpit prepped, there was this sudden WOOSH as the wind went from 0
to 10+kts instantaneously, and just stayed there for the rest of the
day. Really odd stuff!

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[george]

On Nov 7, 6:35*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:

> Well, there were lenticular-looking things on the satellite photo. I
> wasn't up to doing such a long tow, though, especially since the 30
> miles was just a rough estimate.

You -could- always go slumming and get a ride with a friendly power
pilot in the general direction :-)
If its wave it'll be there :-)
What, might I ask, are you flying?

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
george > wrote:

> On Nov 7, 6:35*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:
>
> > Well, there were lenticular-looking things on the satellite photo. I
> > wasn't up to doing such a long tow, though, especially since the 30
> > miles was just a rough estimate.
>
> You -could- always go slumming and get a ride with a friendly power
> pilot in the general direction :-)
> If its wave it'll be there :-)

Funny idea. Alas, that day we had virtually no traffic at the field
other than that related to gliders, and the tow plane we had out that
day only takes one person. There was a Cherokee who came in briefly
while I was airborne, but that was it.

> What, might I ask, are you flying?

I'm part owner of an ASW-20. It's an incredibly wonderful machine.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[Jim Logajan]

Mike Ash > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> george > wrote:
>> What, might I ask, are you flying?
>
> I'm part owner of an ASW-20. It's an incredibly wonderful machine.

You should point him to your web site Mike! I.e.:

http://www.mikeash.com/?page=my_glider.html

[a[_3_]]

On Nov 7, 8:00*pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> Mike Ash > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > *george > wrote:
> >> What, might I ask, are you flying?
>
> > I'm part owner of an ASW-20. It's an incredibly wonderful machine.
>
> You should point him to your web site Mike! I.e.:
>
> http://www.mikeash.com/?page=my_glider.html

I am officially green with envy. My M20J is fun to fly, but it's
mostly a point to point business machine for me. VFR for fun? What a
neat idea. I'll have to start thinking of it having 66 gallons of
lift.

One guy I know who owns a Mooney does shut it down when he is playing
and there's lift around, but the only time I don't want to hear the
engine run is when the hull is parked.

NIce photo on the web site, thanks for the link.

[Mike Ash]

In article >,
Jim Logajan > wrote:

> Mike Ash > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > george > wrote:
> >> What, might I ask, are you flying?
> >
> > I'm part owner of an ASW-20. It's an incredibly wonderful machine.
>
> You should point him to your web site Mike! I.e.:
>
> http://www.mikeash.com/?page=my_glider.html

Heh, duh.... I completely forgot I even had that page. Thanks for the
reminder.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[george]

On Nov 8, 6:42*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:

>
> http://pix.mikeash.com/v/H3/

I'm deliberately leaving the link in :-)

My favourite sailplane up until the glass machines was the Ka6 but
these latest sailplanes are more seamless art than engineering.

[a[_3_]]

On Nov 8, 12:27*am, Mike Ash > wrote:
> In article >,
> *Jim Logajan > wrote:
>
> > Mike Ash > wrote:
> > > In article
> > > >,
> > > *george > wrote:
> > >> What, might I ask, are you flying?
>
> > > I'm part owner of an ASW-20. It's an incredibly wonderful machine.
>
> > You should point him to your web site Mike! I.e.:
>
> >http://www.mikeash.com/?page=my_glider.html
>
> Heh, duh.... I completely forgot I even had that page. Thanks for the
> reminder.
>
> --
> Mike Ash
> Radio Free Earth
> Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

I had one flight in a glider, decades ago. Not that I overcontrolled
or anything, but the instructor had bruises on his thighs from the
stick banging from side to side. Control pressures with a yoke vs a
stick were an adventure and keeping the piece of yarn pointing
straight back . . . well, it did that when passing from left to right
to left. . . The Mooney's controls are responsive, it's like
thinking the change in attitude and the airplane does it. That glider
however was a mind reader -- and it was hardly a high performance
machine.

For now, it'll be point to point SEL, hoping for solid IMC, where I
use 9 gallons of lift an hour.

I did get lots of the other kind of lift once, flew into an embedded
thunderstorm in CO: got to 22,000 feet with a pegged rate of climb.
Center assured me I had clearance for unrestricted climb when I told
them what happened, and later, unrestricted descent when the downdraft
took over. When it was all over the controller told me to resume
normal nav, and thanked me for not crashing because "there's so much
paperwork to fill out at this end. . .".

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
a > wrote:

> I had one flight in a glider, decades ago. Not that I overcontrolled
> or anything, but the instructor had bruises on his thighs from the
> stick banging from side to side. Control pressures with a yoke vs a
> stick were an adventure and keeping the piece of yarn pointing
> straight back . . . well, it did that when passing from left to right
> to left. . . The Mooney's controls are responsive, it's like
> thinking the change in attitude and the airplane does it. That glider
> however was a mind reader -- and it was hardly a high performance
> machine.

Sounds like a pretty typical experience for a transition pilot. While
they might both qualify as "aircraft", the handling is really different
and takes some getting used to. I'm sure I would be plenty ham-fisted,
albeit differently, if you plopped me into your plane.

I'm not sure that performance and control sensitivity are too closely
related in gliders. Certainly the big open-class monsters (with 70+ft
wingspans) have fairly poor roll response, not sure about the rest. The
1-26 I flew for a while (best glide ratio of about 22:1, Vne around
110MPH) was light as a feather on the stick.

> For now, it'll be point to point SEL, hoping for solid IMC, where I
> use 9 gallons of lift an hour.

Interesting to think in terms of "per hour". If I stick around the low
end of my speed range, I need 9,000ft per hour. More if I want to go
faster.

> I did get lots of the other kind of lift once, flew into an embedded
> thunderstorm in CO: got to 22,000 feet with a pegged rate of climb.
> Center assured me I had clearance for unrestricted climb when I told
> them what happened, and later, unrestricted descent when the downdraft
> took over. When it was all over the controller told me to resume
> normal nav, and thanked me for not crashing because "there's so much
> paperwork to fill out at this end. . .".

Sounds a little too exciting for my tastes. I think it was an article I
read in _Soaring_ a couple of months back, wherein they described how
the crazy people back in the 40s would actually go seek out and soar in
thunderstorms *on purpose*.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
george > wrote:

> On Nov 8, 6:42*pm, Mike Ash > wrote:
>
> >
> > http://pix.mikeash.com/v/H3/
>
> I'm deliberately leaving the link in :-)
>
> My favourite sailplane up until the glass machines was the Ka6 but
> these latest sailplanes are more seamless art than engineering.

They all have their charms, even (or perhaps especially) the older ones.
My delight in the ASW-20 is only superficially related to how pretty it
is, although that certainly doesn't hurt!

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon