Landing on Tow - YouTube link.

[Uncle Fuzzy]

This was discussed here recently. JS was kind enough to drop by Jean
and share his experience with the instructors of the LVVSA. Here's a
link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT_IkCb4Tzk

[Bob]

I wonder how this would go in a Nimbus 4D? Any opinions? ;>

[Tony[_5_]]

On Nov 10, 1:31*am, Bob > wrote:
> I wonder how this would go in a Nimbus 4D? Any opinions? ;>

You'd have to approach with the airbrakes out to keep from over-
running the towplane.

[ContestID67[_2_]]

I have to take umbrage at practicing something that is such an
incredibly rare event.

I have never even heard of a single tow rope release failure (but I am
sure that they have happened) let alone a double release failure.
Practicing slack rope and rope break (basically a single failure)
recoveries is important. But we simulate these at a decent altitude
which allows time and height to recover in case of something going
badly. Practicing what this video shows invites trying to recover at
the worse possible time - just a few feet above the ground. Would you
practice a much-more-likely-to-occur spin ... but at 100 feet?

Anyone know of a real life double release failure?

My $1.99.

- John DeRosa

[SoaringXCellence]

On Nov 10, 9:36*am, ContestID67 > wrote:
> I have to take umbrage at practicing something that is such an
> incredibly rare event.
>
> I have never even heard of a single tow rope release failure (but I am
> sure that they have happened) let alone a double release failure.
> Practicing slack rope and rope break (basically a single failure)
> recoveries is important. *But we simulate these at a decent altitude
> which allows time and height to recover in case of something going
> badly. *Practicing what this video shows invites trying to recover at
> the worse possible time - just a few feet above the ground. *Would you
> practice a much-more-likely-to-occur spin ... but at 100 feet?
>
> Anyone know of a real life double release failure?
>
> My $1.99.
>
> - John DeRosa

I have NOT had a double release failure but I have had a single, at
the glider end, in a SGS 2-33. We were never able to duplicate or
determine the cause. Hasn't happened again. The glider had a
Schweizer release as did the tow-plane.

Our club has done significant testing on release forces for both TOST
and Schweizer hook systems (we have tow-planes with both) at various
angles and loads. I'll see if we have details and reports that can be
shared here. I'm sure it will be interesting to all.

But back to topic; I agree that it seems incredibly rare, the question
is: Does practicing something potentially dangerous present a greater
danger than the actual event? This is the premise behind the
avoidance of spin training in the US as well as the virtual ban on
practicing single engine failures (of twin-engined aircraft) on
liftoff.

A discussion of the options and developing a good understanding of the
elements of the process may be the safest approach. As a pilot of
many hours I have experienced several "eventualities" including failed
engines in various stages of flight and extreme icing. We don't
really train to specific circumstances but rather to the understanding
of principles surrounding a situation. With an understanding of those
principles and some basic intelligence most pilots can chose a
reasonable course of action.

I know that most accidents fly in the face of the previous statement,
however the crux of the statement is "an understanding of those
principles". I'm a full-time flight instructor and teach
international students as well as US pilots in SEL, MEL and gliders.
I've been doing it for 15 years and have worked with close to a
thousand individuals. I have seen that in most cases individual try
to learn "just enough". It is a very rare individual that digs into
the library of materials I offer or even researchs the web pages that
are available. In defense of gliders pilots: they seem to be more
interested, as a group, in gaining knowledge for knowledges sake and
thus are better at understanding the principles.

Rather that rattle on longer. Summary: teach the principles, practice
in safe scenarios, review frequently.

[AndersP]

ContestID67 wrote:
> I have to take umbrage at practicing something that is such an
> incredibly rare event.
>
> I have never even heard of a single tow rope release failure (but I am
> sure that they have happened) let alone a double release failure.
> Practicing slack rope and rope break (basically a single failure)
> recoveries is important. But we simulate these at a decent altitude
> which allows time and height to recover in case of something going
> badly. Practicing what this video shows invites trying to recover at
> the worse possible time - just a few feet above the ground. Would you
> practice a much-more-likely-to-occur spin ... but at 100 feet?
>
> Anyone know of a real life double release failure?
>
> My $1.99.
>
> - John DeRosa

I think practicing this is pretty darn stupid, why risk a collision
between two perfectly fine aircrafts during decent and ground roll ?

The risk of a slippery glass glider catching up with the towplane during
decent is simply not worth it.

Better things to practice that have a much higher probability includes;
tow plane power loss (at safe height, do wing rocking - glider pilot
should react correctly, i.e release), spin entry/recovery, air brake
deployment during tow at safe height, landing with full airbrakes
deployed and of course, procedures for rope break at various heights,
etc etc

Being an instructor myself, I had a very interesting ride with a
(talented) student when I pulled the release handle to simulate rope
brake at around 330ft/110m in strong straight side-wind (i.e. 90 degrees
from takeoff direction).

The student turned around to land downwind, which was OK. But he turned
the wrong way since he didn't turn into the wind. Since we were
practising at a very large airfield I let him continue and he corrected
his position before landing since he was well off the centerline once
the turn was finished.

The student realized his mistake at an early stage but did the right
thing and continued the turn instead of consuming height trying to
reverse the turn. This particular student will NEVER do this mistake
again since he got to experience what happens when doing it the wrong way.

An example of practicing a probable scenario that at a fairly low risk
gives much in return for the student.

Double release failure ?! Bah !

/AndersP

[bildan]

On Nov 10, 12:31*am, Bob > wrote:
> I wonder how this would go in a Nimbus 4D? Any opinions? ;>

In a 2C it would be terrifying. A 4D has to be worse.

I also note the Pawnee was making a low, power-on approach which had
it below the power-off glide path to the runway - something most light
airplane pilots are taught not to do.

Lets talk about an alternative procedure with a typical glider like a
G103. The 103 POH specifies max weak link as 1662 Lbs and the max
weight as 1278. 1662/1278 = a 1.3 G momentary jerk that would be
required to break the link. Open the spoilers with slack in the tow
rope and 1.3G is easy to achieve.

Of course, the glider might be flown lighter if solo which could have
a flying weight as low as 992 Pounds. 1662/992 = 1.7G - still easy to
achieve with a little slack and spoiler. 103's are just as likely to
be flown over gross weight in many clubs. Also many operations sue an
old, worn piece of rope as a weak link that is likely to be weaker
than 1662 Lbs.

I'm convinced just breaking the weak link is the safer procedure in
the extremely unlikely case of a double release failure. It can't be
hard - students do it all the time.

[Mike the Strike]

>
> I'm convinced just breaking the weak link is the safer procedure in
> the extremely unlikely case of a double release failure. *It can't be
> hard - students do it all the time.

When this subject last came up some time ago, we had an informal poll
at our club of a mix of experienced cross-country and aerobatic pilots
and every one said they would opt for breaking the weak link at
altitude rather than try an on-tow landing.

Not one of us thought that trying a coordinated landing would be safer
than breaking the link. Not one!

Yet some seem to believe that we should train low-time students to do
this maneouver. Why?

Mike

[Surfer!]

In message >, AndersP
> writes
<snip>
>
>The risk of a slippery glass glider catching up with the towplane
>during decent is simply not worth it.
<Snip>

Opening the airbrakes works very well at stopping the glider catching up
the towplane... Descending on tow (though not all the way down) was one
of the things I had to do on my final flight before going solo.

--
Surfer!

[Andreas Maurer]

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:48:59 -0800 (PST), bildan >
wrote:

>On Nov 10, 12:31*am, Bob > wrote:
>> I wonder how this would go in a Nimbus 4D? Any opinions? ;>
>
>In a 2C it would be terrifying. A 4D has to be worse.

Add the Schleicher open class gliders to that list.


>I'm convinced just breaking the weak link is the safer procedure in
>the extremely unlikely case of a double release failure. It can't be
>hard - students do it all the time.

Basically a good idea... but...

.... unfortunately there are many gliding operations which do not use
weak links at all - especially in the French Alps where the area in
the vicinity of the airport is unlandable and a weak link break would
result in the certain destruction of the glider.

[jeplane]

On Nov 10, 1:22*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:


> When this subject last came up some time ago, we had an informal poll
> at our club of a mix of experienced cross-country and aerobatic pilots
> and every one said they would opt for breaking the weak link at
> altitude rather than try an on-tow landing.
>
> Not one of us thought that trying a coordinated landing would be safer
> than breaking the link. *Not one!

> Mike


Nope. Not me. I am not doing that. I've never try to break a rope
before, and quite frankly, I don't trust my 35 years old ASW19 to
remain intact.

So I will do what I was trained to do from France, which is easy to
do:

- Open the airbrakes full.
- Go down below the tow pilot wake turbulence.
- Let the tow pilot set a rate of descent. He is in charge at this
point. And hopefully, he will remember to arrive higher on short
final!!!...:-)
I did this maneuver numerous times as a student, and later on as a
CFI. Really not a biggy.

Richard
Phoenix,AZ

[[email protected]]

I agree, breaking the rope makes more sense in the event of release
failure.

But, the notion that landing on tow is SO dangerous is really
curious.

Everything we do in gliders is potentially dangerous, if you screw it
up. If you do it right it's fun and satisfying.

Some argue that landing on tow is not necessary or practical.

Soaring is not necessary or practical. It's only fun and satisfying.

So is landing on tow. Especially touch-and-goes!

Matt Michael

[BT]

"AndersP" > wrote in message
...
> ContestID67 wrote:

>
> Being an instructor myself, I had a very interesting ride with a
> (talented) student when I pulled the release handle to simulate rope brake
> at around 330ft/110m in strong straight side-wind (i.e. 90 degrees from
> takeoff direction).
>
> The student turned around to land downwind, which was OK. But he turned
> the wrong way since he didn't turn into the wind. Since we were practising
> at a very large airfield I let him continue and he corrected his position
> before landing since he was well off the centerline once the turn was
> finished.
>
>

I guess he was not as talented student as you thought?

[GARY BOGGS CFIG]

> Nope. Not me. I am not doing that. I've never try to break a rope
> before, and quite frankly, I don't trust my 35 years old ASW19 to
> remain intact.


You and that sailplane had better stop flying altogether if you don't
think it is airworthy enough to survive a rope break!!!

[Frank[_12_]]

On Nov 10, 1:06*am, Uncle Fuzzy > wrote:
> This was discussed here recently. *JS was kind enough to drop by Jean
> and share his experience with the instructors of the LVVSA. *Here's a
> link.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT_IkCb4Tzk

I did a simulated double release failure touch-and-go, followed by a
simulated rope break as part of my Commercial glider ride in a 2-33.
Used spoilers as appropriate to maintain position - nothing
particularly scary about any of it, if done properly.

TA

[JS]

It's pretty funny that people who haven't done LOTs think it's scary,
dangerous, insane, etc. and those who have done them think the
excercise is a "non-event".
Yes, the chance of needing it due to double release failure is about
nil.
The experience of completing a LOT is a confidence builder.
Done these in a few different types.
It's not dangerous. The three instructors, two of which did them from
both ends of the rope, did great on the first one.
Jim
Got to go, there are a few landouts at the Australian Club and Sports
Class Nationals and I'll need to crew.
http://www.keepitsoaring.com/LKSC/

[stephanevdv]

On 10 nov, 08:31, Bob > wrote:
> I wonder how this would go in a Nimbus 4D? Any opinions? ;>

I did that at Saint-Auban (France) in 1995 with one of their
instructors in the back of the Nimbus. Followed the rules: opened the
airbrakes and went under the slipstream. Not really difficult, but the
towplane must descend very slowly! In our case, whenever the descent
rate was higher than something like - 1,5 m/s (some 300 ft/min, if I
remember correctly), the glider started to overtake. I then had to
slip the beast to keep the cable under tension. That wasn't really
funny...

By the way, that was my first flight on type, and the towpilot was a
pupil with instructor.

This exercise is done regularily in Europe. In my opinion, the big
difficulty is the correct training of the towpilot. He has to know the
characteristics of the glider he is towing, and not forget to come in
higher than usual to allow for the gider being lower and behind. The
glider pilot should just have to follow...

[[email protected]]

Not this again. JS is spreading the LOT disease to Vegas! Bad Jim!

I suppose this is why he bought the glider with the noisy bit so he
avoids such DANGEROUS procedures as aero tow altogether. Thank God
you are SAFE now!

As with JS, I am amazed (but probably shouldn't be) at how many folks
categorically state that LOT's are dangerous - having never
experienced them. If these same people had never done a standard aero
tow, they would probably be exclaiming how dangerous that was. Maybe
if the "It's dangerous" types think of LOT's as a normal tow in the
negative direction you can get past the baseless fears.

Have done dozens and dozens of these with pre-solo kids, pre-solo old
folks, high time test pilots, and and everything in between, no one
felt threatened. It was part of the pre-solo syllabus when I first
started working at Skylark in the early 90's. In all that time I
observed only 1 "blown" landing that required a release due to the
USAF test pilot forgetting the briefing (which he gave) and began
manipulating the spoilers on final.

There is no need to go into low tow or for the glider pilot to do much
of anything unusual. Deploy full air brakes (no wheel brake), sit in
high tow, and let the tuggie set up a 5 kt down, 60-65 kt pattern
speed (Pawnee). Flair and land when it looks right. Use the wheel
brake only to keep the rope taught.

Or Not. I understand that being wrapped in cotton balls and standing
in the closet is pretty safe.

[Anders Pettersson]

BT wrote:
> "AndersP" > wrote in message
> ...
>> ContestID67 wrote:
>
>> Being an instructor myself, I had a very interesting ride with a
>> (talented) student when I pulled the release handle to simulate rope brake
>> at around 330ft/110m in strong straight side-wind (i.e. 90 degrees from
>> takeoff direction).
>>
>> The student turned around to land downwind, which was OK. But he turned
>> the wrong way since he didn't turn into the wind. Since we were practising
>> at a very large airfield I let him continue and he corrected his position
>> before landing since he was well off the centerline once the turn was
>> finished.
>>
>>
>
> I guess he was not as talented student as you thought?
>

Yes he was talented, but not overly. He had been doing time in TMGs' and
needed additional time in pure gliders before being checked out for a
certificate.

Towing was therefore fairly new to him despite being completely capable
of manouvering the aircraft properly. This was his first rope brake and
I gave it to him a few hours after a thorough walk-through of all do's
and don'ts with our students on that day.

/Anders

[AndersP]

wrote:
> Not this again. JS is spreading the LOT disease to Vegas! Bad Jim!
>
> I suppose this is why he bought the glider with the noisy bit so he
> avoids such DANGEROUS procedures as aero tow altogether. Thank God
> you are SAFE now!
>
> As with JS, I am amazed (but probably shouldn't be) at how many folks
> categorically state that LOT's are dangerous - having never
> experienced them. If these same people had never done a standard aero
> tow, they would probably be exclaiming how dangerous that was. Maybe
> if the "It's dangerous" types think of LOT's as a normal tow in the
> negative direction you can get past the baseless fears.
>
> Have done dozens and dozens of these with pre-solo kids, pre-solo old
> folks, high time test pilots, and and everything in between, no one
> felt threatened. It was part of the pre-solo syllabus when I first
> started working at Skylark in the early 90's. In all that time I
> observed only 1 "blown" landing that required a release due to the
> USAF test pilot forgetting the briefing (which he gave) and began
> manipulating the spoilers on final.
>
> There is no need to go into low tow or for the glider pilot to do much
> of anything unusual. Deploy full air brakes (no wheel brake), sit in
> high tow, and let the tuggie set up a 5 kt down, 60-65 kt pattern
> speed (Pawnee). Flair and land when it looks right. Use the wheel
> brake only to keep the rope taught.
>
> Or Not. I understand that being wrapped in cotton balls and standing
> in the closet is pretty safe.
>
>

The point was that it is unnecessary since it is an extremely unlikely
event. Balanced against that, it is completely unnecessary to train this
on a regular basis. There are other more important things to train, I
mentioned rope brakes and power loss on the tug as two good examples. I
think we can come up with a bunch of more useful things that spends the
money more wisely.

This is the type of emergency procedure that you can learn theoretically
and bring forward when necessary.

I don't fly around doing outlandnings for training purposes either, not
because it is dangerous or unsafe, but because most outlandnings poses a
small risk of damaging the glider. It might be as simple as a small
hidden rock in the grass that knocks a big dent in your fuselage. Or
similar.

Not dangerous at all, but completely unnecessary. For it to be worth the
risk I want a real reason, like the familiar "didn't find enough lift"

People claim that this is done in Europe on a regular basis, in which
country/countries may I ask ?

/AndersP

[jeplane]

On Nov 11, 2:20*pm, AndersP > wrote:
> wrote:

> People claim that this is done in Europe on a regular basis, in which
> country/countries may I ask ?

France for one. It's part of the PVT curriculum there. When you see a
student doing this maneuver, you know he is close to fly solo....

Richard
Phoenix,AZ

[JC]

Here in Argentina it´s not a required maneuver but lots of clubs do it
as a pre solo confidence builder. A double release failure is highly
unlikely but it´s a good test to see if the student responds well to
an unusual situation.
We usually do a touch and go and then a low release to simulate a rope
break.
A good briefing and a good tow pilot make it a fun exercise.

Juan Carlos

[John Smith]

JC wrote:
> as a pre solo confidence builder.

And as a good exercise for a future aero-retrieve or aero-relocation,
during which it is not unlikely to face a situation where one must sink
on tow a couple of hundred feet (due to clouds, airspace, whatever).

[Burt Compton - Marfa]

Tom Knauff says the rare double release failure has occurred.
On your checkride, it is required -- sort of.

In the USA the "Double Release Failure" is included in the Private
Glider Pilot Practical Test Standards (PTS), Area of Operation IV,
Task G. It states that the applicant "Demonstrates simulated aero tow
abnormal occurrences as required by the examiner." Double release
failure is also referenced in the Commercial and Flight Instructor-
Glider PTS.

Some examiners in the USA require this demonstration. Others ask the
applicant to explain their actions (and signals).
Ask your CFIG and Examiner about this Task (and any other) in advance
in order to prepare for it.

Some important points.

The wake (prop wash / wing wash) of the towplane in descent will trail
behind almost level. The glider should be under this wake during the
descent.

Airbrakes should be kept unlocked and in hand, then deployed as
required for drag. The towrope must be kept tight.

The glider pilot should not be in a hurry to touchdown, but definitely
touch down just a bit before the towplane. Glider touch down while
the towplane is still higher than 1 meter may slow the towplane to
near stall.

Towpilots must understand the mission, particularly pattern shape,
power settings, descent rate and the options for go-around on tow.

I've done it many times at several sites after receiving excellent
instruction from Cindy at Caracole in California City many years ago.
Training is the key for all glider pilots and towpilots for this
maneuver.

Should we ask FAA to eliminate this requirement? NO, we don't need
the FAA digging into our PTS.

Do I require this maneuver at Marfa, Texas on your Practical Test
(checkride)?

Come visit! I'll show you a good time, and help you toward your
goals.

Burt Compton, Master CFI / FAA Designated Pilot Examiner
Marfa Gliders Soaring Center, southwest Texas
www.flygliders.com

[[email protected]]

On Nov 12, 8:58*am, Burt Compton - Marfa > wrote:

>
> Towpilots must understand the mission, particularly pattern shape,
> power settings, descent rate and the options for go-around on tow.
>

I thought a regular descent rate and tighter than normal pattern was
standard. :)

[CindyB]

On Nov 12, 6:58*am, Burt Compton - Marfa > wrote:
> Tom Knauff says the rare double release failure has occurred.
> On your checkride, it is required -- sort of.
>

Burt:
I'll invite you for some refresher training . . .
(gentle smile)

and since it is non-fly season in some parts of the world, and folks
are still seeking their flight training from a monitor, I will add
details
that I have written before, and do not occur in any published
soaring text of which I am aware.

I am aware of several single release failures on gliders, both SGS
and Tost mechanisms, for many causes. I am aware of a couple
failures to release on tugs.

Why do a few of us offer this training?
To improve understanding of many concepts in towed flight,
descents, maneuvers, respect for the tugs contribution/training,
proficiency in signals/conversations, broadening skills and
confidence, enthralling power pilot observers.

We also recall this if for TRAINING, not for real, and we supervisors
(hopefully) recall we can abort the exercise by pulling the release,
should the learner need more ground school or proficiency,
if it gets messy or we are uncomfortable about our ability to remain
assured of a safe outcome. I recommend only one new person/greenhorn
being introduced into the 3-person procedure at a time. A two seater
tug is nice for tow pilot training also. (Love them Cessnas.)


> Some important points.
>
> The wake (prop wash / wing wash) of the towplane in descent will trail
> behind almost level. *The glider should be under this wake during the
> descent.

This is nice, less unsettling for the "learner". But it is the second
step.

> Airbrakes should be kept unlocked and in hand, then deployed as
> required for drag. * The towrope must be kept tight.

After you tell the tug you cannot release, and he brought you home....
adjacent the airfield, and he discovered he couldn't
release you, then he tells you he cannot release.
Yes, there is a US standard signal for this.

After the tug told you he couldn't release, it is the glider's option
to break the
line or request a descent on tow. How will the tug know which you
prefer?
With NORDO, you make the descent configuration, 75% spoilers open.
With RDO, you still make the descent configuration, 75% spoilers open.

This will work in anything from 2-33s to Duo Discus. No one has
offered me
a Schempp 3D or similar, but I would wager the tow price it works just
fine.
But, I do prefer my tug driver has training or supervision also.


> The glider pilot should not be in a hurry to touchdown, but definitely
> touch down just a bit before the towplane. *Glider touch down while
> the towplane is still higher than 1 meter may slow the towplane to
> near stall.

THE most common misconception, perpetrated by a single line in a
couple
training manuals is the thought that the gliders 'need' to touch
first.
A glider typically has a slower stall speed than a tug, more so in
ground
effect. Whoever touches first is irrelevant, as long as neither does
anything
very quickly.

Personally, I have had more gliderpilots screw up rushing the touch,
into a PIO,
than had trouble with the tug who is very reluctant to have a glider
rear-end him.

If the glider touches first , only use enough brake to keep the line
taut.
The tug made his approach carrying power to maintain a minimal sink
rate
on descent, like less than 300-400 fpm. The tug may be fine tuning
his
graceful touch while easing the power off very gently. (Long runways
are
appreciated for this exercise).
The tug should check aft to confirm the glider is landed/rolling
before
continuing easing power off, allowing the glider to keep the line
taut.


> Towpilots must understand the mission, particularly pattern shape,
> power settings, descent rate and the options for go-around on tow.
>
> I've done it many times at several sites after receiving excellent
> instruction from Cindy at Caracole in California City many years ago.
> Training is the key for all glider pilots and towpilots for this
> maneuver.

And there is value in refresher-recurrent training for anything rarely
reviewed.


> Should we ask FAA to eliminate this requirement? *NO, we don't need
> the FAA digging into our PTS.

AMEN.

> Do I require this maneuver at Marfa, Texas on your Practical Test
> (checkride)?
Awwww - you hedged!

> Come visit! *I'll show you a good time, and help you toward your
> goals.

Sure he will.
And so will we.
And we can show you how to break your legal limit tow rope
without scaring you, your glider A&P, or the tuggie.

Cindy B

www.caracolesoaring.com

[Wayne Paul]

Cindy,

Any thoughts on the subject procedure for those of us who fly the PIK-20B, 1-35 or HP-14?

Wayne

"CindyB" > wrote in message ...
On Nov 12, 6:58 am, Burt Compton - Marfa > wrote:
> Tom Knauff says the rare double release failure has occurred.
> On your checkride, it is required -- sort of.
>

Burt:
I'll invite you for some refresher training . . .
(gentle smile)

and since it is non-fly season in some parts of the world, and folks
are still seeking their flight training from a monitor, I will add
details
that I have written before, and do not occur in any published
soaring text of which I am aware.

I am aware of several single release failures on gliders, both SGS
and Tost mechanisms, for many causes. I am aware of a couple
failures to release on tugs.

Why do a few of us offer this training?
To improve understanding of many concepts in towed flight,
descents, maneuvers, respect for the tugs contribution/training,
proficiency in signals/conversations, broadening skills and
confidence, enthralling power pilot observers.

We also recall this if for TRAINING, not for real, and we supervisors
(hopefully) recall we can abort the exercise by pulling the release,
should the learner need more ground school or proficiency,
if it gets messy or we are uncomfortable about our ability to remain
assured of a safe outcome. I recommend only one new person/greenhorn
being introduced into the 3-person procedure at a time. A two seater
tug is nice for tow pilot training also. (Love them Cessnas.)


> Some important points.
>
> The wake (prop wash / wing wash) of the towplane in descent will trail
> behind almost level. The glider should be under this wake during the
> descent.

This is nice, less unsettling for the "learner". But it is the second
step.

> Airbrakes should be kept unlocked and in hand, then deployed as
> required for drag. The towrope must be kept tight.

After you tell the tug you cannot release, and he brought you home....
adjacent the airfield, and he discovered he couldn't
release you, then he tells you he cannot release.
Yes, there is a US standard signal for this.

After the tug told you he couldn't release, it is the glider's option
to break the
line or request a descent on tow. How will the tug know which you
prefer?
With NORDO, you make the descent configuration, 75% spoilers open.
With RDO, you still make the descent configuration, 75% spoilers open.

This will work in anything from 2-33s to Duo Discus. No one has
offered me
a Schempp 3D or similar, but I would wager the tow price it works just
fine.
But, I do prefer my tug driver has training or supervision also.


> The glider pilot should not be in a hurry to touchdown, but definitely
> touch down just a bit before the towplane. Glider touch down while
> the towplane is still higher than 1 meter may slow the towplane to
> near stall.

THE most common misconception, perpetrated by a single line in a
couple
training manuals is the thought that the gliders 'need' to touch
first.
A glider typically has a slower stall speed than a tug, more so in
ground
effect. Whoever touches first is irrelevant, as long as neither does
anything
very quickly.

Personally, I have had more gliderpilots screw up rushing the touch,
into a PIO,
than had trouble with the tug who is very reluctant to have a glider
rear-end him.

If the glider touches first , only use enough brake to keep the line
taut.
The tug made his approach carrying power to maintain a minimal sink
rate
on descent, like less than 300-400 fpm. The tug may be fine tuning
his
graceful touch while easing the power off very gently. (Long runways
are
appreciated for this exercise).
The tug should check aft to confirm the glider is landed/rolling
before
continuing easing power off, allowing the glider to keep the line
taut.


> Towpilots must understand the mission, particularly pattern shape,
> power settings, descent rate and the options for go-around on tow.
>
> I've done it many times at several sites after receiving excellent
> instruction from Cindy at Caracole in California City many years ago.
> Training is the key for all glider pilots and towpilots for this
> maneuver.

And there is value in refresher-recurrent training for anything rarely
reviewed.


> Should we ask FAA to eliminate this requirement? NO, we don't need
> the FAA digging into our PTS.

AMEN.

> Do I require this maneuver at Marfa, Texas on your Practical Test
> (checkride)?
Awwww - you hedged!

> Come visit! I'll show you a good time, and help you toward your
> goals.

Sure he will.
And so will we.
And we can show you how to break your legal limit tow rope
without scaring you, your glider A&P, or the tuggie.

Cindy B

www.caracolesoaring.com

[CindyB]

Well - try it in a spoiler equipped, dual flown ship first.
Learn the procedures.
Make sure your tuggie knows the procedures.
This was a discussion about training, not experimentation.

Why should LOT be any different using a different
drag/descent tool? Flaps may be 'more' draggy, but you are already
used
to the quicker decel and settle-on for landing.
The tug driver will be the one doing the compensating,
not you very much.

Just be smoooooth in the configuration change for descent,
and anticipate the pitch/trim changes necessary to remain
steady in towing position. And you had best also be proficient
with slipping with flaps, as the supplemental drag tool, rather than
changing configurations/lift/drag abruptly.

And if you are not happy with the idea, learn to break a rope,
safely, calmly, under supervision - please not 'self-taught.'

Cindy


On Nov 13, 6:18*am, "Wayne Paul" > wrote:
> Cindy,
>
> Any thoughts on the subject procedure for those of us who fly the PIK-20B, 1-35 or HP-14?
>
> Wayne
>
> "CindyB" > wrote in ...
>
SNIPPED

> Why do a few of us offer this training?
> To improve understanding of many concepts in towed flight,
> descents, maneuvers, respect for the tugs contribution/training,
> proficiency in signals/conversations, broadening skills and
> confidence, enthralling power pilot observers.
>
> We also recall this if for TRAINING, not for real, and we supervisors
> (hopefully) recall we can abort the exercise by pulling the release,
> *should the learner need more ground school or proficiency,
> *if it gets messy or we are uncomfortable about our ability to remain
> assured of a safe outcome. *I recommend only one new person/greenhorn
>
SNIPPED off