Round out and flare with fully open spoilers in a PW-6? Other gliders?

[son_of_flubber]

The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)

How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?

I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.

Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?

And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?

[George Haeh]

I witnessed a fatal Junior crash in 2007:

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-
reports/aviation/2007/a07o0233/a07o0233.asp

The report left a lot out.

Yes, full spoilers were put out in a panic move, but the small stature
student
rotated her shoulders to get them out and inadvertently pushed the stick
forward.

Ergonomics played a much bigger part than aerodynamics.

A high flare with full spoilers will likely result in a hard landing, but
futzing with
spoilers low down can destabilize a landing. I recall three landings in my
first
solo in a certain two seater not that long ago.

A low flare at good speed with full spoilers can work. Reducing spoilers at
that
point can add a few hundred yards to the landing.

[Tom[_21_]]

Well - you've gotten me to bite.

From the PW-6 AFM:

AIR BRAKE OPERATION
With the air brakes extended fully, the sailplane gliding ratio at the approach speed is 6.4. Diving at 45° with air brakes extended fully does not exceed the airspeed of 141 kts. Extending and retracting the air brakes do not cause the sailplane to pitch up or down. Operation of the air brakes is allowed within the whole airspeed range. The brakes can be retracted at the airspeed below 89 kts.

NOTE:
When extending the air brake at the airspeed above 108 kts
the negative vertical acceleration is significant. Therefore the air brake should be extended gently. The aircrew should have the safety belts fastened tightly.

My thoughts - the full air brake usage on a normal landing, stabilized descent by 100', on speed is not going to be what "gets you". Just like in any aircraft if you throw in a configuration change close to the ground and don't compensate for it you'll pay a price down the line - too little and you'll float, too much and you'll land way short of where you want. There is a lot of elevator authority to arrest the descent rate even with the air brakes fully open.

Speed would be a factor - meaning if one (for some bizarre reason) flew the darn thing straight at the ground at high rate of descent and speed with the air brakes out (or in for that matter) if you started your round out and flare late you'd break people and glider.

I've landed the PW-6 numerous times and coached students through it. It does some things well on landing - the controls are very effective, the feedback is pretty excellent, the air brakes are very effective and easy to adjust in small increments resulting in being able to "dial it in" well. I like that the brake is a lever on the air brake handle (hate it when people land with the air brakes on all the way in the ASK21 and pull it back actuating the wheel brake smoking the tire on touchdown. Also the geometry between the nose wheel and the tailwheel allows more of a margin to help prevent a tail strike.

And as always, your results may vary.

Regards Tom

[George Haeh]

I witnessed a fatal Junior crash in 2007:

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-
reports/aviation/2007/a07o0233/a07o0233.asp

The report left a lot out.

Yes, full spoilers were put out in a panic move, but the small stature
student
rotated her shoulders to get them out and inadvertently pushed the stick
forward.

Ergonomics played a much bigger part than aerodynamics.

A high flare with full spoilers will likely result in a hard landing, but
futzing with
spoilers low down can destabilize a landing. I recall three landings in my
first
solo in a certain two seater not that long ago.

A low flare at good speed with full spoilers can work. Reducing spoilers at
that
point can add a few hundred yards to the landing.

[krasw]

tiistai 27. maaliskuuta 2018 2.47.36 UTC+3 son_of_flubber kirjoitti:
> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>
> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>
> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>
> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>
> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?

Full spoilers landing is essential technique to teach students as this is the configuration they will use in 95% of the future outlandings. Requirements for speed control and timing of the flare are more demanding and some firm touchdowns inevitably follows.

[Tango Eight]

The yellow triangle on the ASI has a specific meaning. It's the recommended approach speed at maximum gross weight in calm conditions. A skilled pilot should be able to make a well executed full airbrake approach / flare / touchdown starting at this approach speed. The roundout will be brief. Adding a little speed (5 kts) gives a little more time in the transition from steep approach to landing for learning purposes.

With most airbrakes, the reduction in lift (at constant speed, AoA) happens in the first 2" of deployment, while the effect on drag is fairly linear over the whole range. The pilot must coordinate pitch attitude appropriately with airbrake deployment to control airspeed. If the airbrakes are opened just slightly and held there, a little back stick pressure may be required. If opened more fully, some forward stick is almost always required. That's a general characteristic of gliders with Schempp Hirth airbrakes.

The 2007 accident sounds like one of Piggot's sub gravity sensation accidents.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 7:47:36 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>
> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>
> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>
> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>
> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?

It is essential that full spoiler landings to a spot are taught during the training process for glider pilots. I have argued this for many years, there is no room for high energy approaches while landing off field. Back in my early days of training and I do go back for a long time ago, we were taught to make full spoiler landings to a certain spot. This came in pretty handy back in the late 70's when I made my first off field landing at a state prison facility. Believe me, there was no room for error and the interrogation afterwards was worse than the landing.
Now I see students being taught to make approaches to landing using very little spoiler and continuous adjustments until touchdown. I call it the power approach, I have stressed to some of the instructors that at some point the full spoiler approach to touchdown could be very helpful and increase the glider pilots skill.

[Tom[_21_]]

I'd agree that the full air brake or spoiler or dive brake approach to a spot landing is a critical skill. It's one more tool in the tool kit - ready to be used when needed. Pilots should be able to adapt, configure and fly the approach and landing as needed. Some student have been taught to apply full air brakes or spoiler or dive brakes abeam the touchdown point and hold that all the way until touchdown (excitement for sure). Some have been taught to not apply until short final. Some are not capable of adapting their pattern for winds, sink and or other variables,

Looking at the SSF and other data for landing accidents/incidents show, among other things, we can do a better job of teaching students and pilots to maintain a good situational awareness, adapt the pattern as necessary and actuall fly the glider all the way through the landing.

Regards Tom

[Dan Marotta]

Just curious - was the terrain outside the wall unlandable?Â* Sounds like
an interesting story, did I see it in "Soaring" long ago?

On 3/27/2018 5:06 AM, wrote:
> On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 7:47:36 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
>> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>>
>> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>>
>> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>>
>> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>>
>> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?
> It is essential that full spoiler landings to a spot are taught during the training process for glider pilots. I have argued this for many years, there is no room for high energy approaches while landing off field. Back in my early days of training and I do go back for a long time ago, we were taught to make full spoiler landings to a certain spot. This came in pretty handy back in the late 70's when I made my first off field landing at a state prison facility. Believe me, there was no room for error and the interrogation afterwards was worse than the landing.
> Now I see students being taught to make approaches to landing using very little spoiler and continuous adjustments until touchdown. I call it the power approach, I have stressed to some of the instructors that at some point the full spoiler approach to touchdown could be very helpful and increase the glider pilots skill.

--
Dan, 5J

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

I agree with "pushing the limits" a bit in a controlled situation.
When I was flying a -20A and -20C, I would get a couple local flights in during the spring.
Then, I would intentionally come in rather high, on final, "hang it all out" (landing flaps, full dive brakes) and remember how much I had to stuff the nose over to maintain speed as well as watch the ground come up fast. Then, land.

Better to remember/practice in a known environment than going into a small field under possible duress.

I do similar in other gliders (from a 1-26 SN002 to ASG-29 and lots in between) just to remember what they do/how hey behave when pushing them a bit.
I think everyone should do this every spring and a few times during the season.
Again, better to practice a tight fit with minimal variables so you have a current basis in a tight situation.

No, I don't practice tree or water landings. Hope I realize a bad situation before I need to exercise those skills..... Small fields can be bad enough.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 7:47:36 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>
> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>
> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>
> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>
> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?


Charlie , you hit the nail on the head! I also has a 20A L, that I would make some very short landings and my best friend Alfonso, AKA E9 would applaud me for my sticking to his approach to landing scenario. Trust me, no one did it better than the Fonzie! One better be prepared for what will certainly someday happen, and the best rule of logical thinking is that if you think it might happen, it probably will. Practice doesn't make perfect as we have all been told, but perfect practice results in perfect results. Bob

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 7:47:36 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>
> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>
> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>
> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>
> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?

Dan, the wall was very high, looked like they wanted people to stay, but I was inside the wall and wanted to get out! The cop was a real Barney type, looked like he came straight from Newberry except he must have stopped at every donut shop in Arcadia. Only think he was most concerned about was my drivers license. It was a great approach, just over the fence and into the inmate ballpark. They came with their guns drawn and sirens sounding, you would have thought that I would have planned some sort of prison break. I even asked the cop how many inmates do you have to help me take this thing apart? It was the end of an interesting day. Bob

[Nick Kennedy]

I think the OP has got the terms wrong. I don't think you Flare a glider into a landing. I think you roundout and then just hold it off until it lands itself.
I think Flaring is something you do in a C-172. Or most power airplane. If you try and flare a glider your likely to hit the tailboom hard and / or pound in. Tailboom first landings are the way the euro's try and land, but Flaring? I don't think so.
Am I wrong?
I think any pilot going XC should be able to spot land his glider with full Spoilers out and flaps too if you have them.
I don't know of any glider that can't be landed with everything hanging out to the max but I'm sure someone here will correct me on that point. My ASW20 was and my LS3a is, easy to land with everything out to the max. It is good to practice this a couple of times a year in good conditions thou.

[Richard McLean[_2_]]

I think "flare" and "round out" are exactly the same thing .. a change in
attitude to enable a low-energy landing. Powered or glider makes no
difference. That's how it works here downunder anyway!

At 23:49 27 March 2018, Nick Kennedy wrote:
>I think the OP has got the terms wrong. I don't think you Flare a glider
>in=
>to a landing. I think you roundout and then just hold it off until it
>land=
>s itself.
>I think Flaring is something you do in a C-172. Or most power airplane.
If
>=
>you try and flare a glider your likely to hit the tailboom hard and / or
>po=
>und in. Tailboom first landings are the way the euro's try and land, but
>Fl=
>aring? I don't think so.
>Am I wrong?
>I think any pilot going XC should be able to spot land his glider with
>full=
> Spoilers out and flaps too if you have them.
>I don't know of any glider that can't be landed with everything hanging
>out=
> to the max but I'm sure someone here will correct me on that point. My
>ASW=
>20 was and my LS3a is, easy to land with everything out to the max. It
is
>=
>good to practice this a couple of times a year in good conditions thou.
>
>

[John Wells[_2_]]

And the corollary is true... if you try to reduce flaps/airbrakes near
the ground on many gliders, you'll get an unpleasant surprise.

On my Mini Nimbus for example, full flap & airbrake approaches are
recommended, but don't try closing the airbrakes "a little" near the
ground -- all that does is keep the trailing edge airbrakes open but
reduce flap, which can get exciting.

At 23:49 27 March 2018, Nick Kennedy wrote:
>I think the OP has got the terms wrong. I don't think you Flare a
glider
>in=
>to a landing. I think you roundout and then just hold it off until it
>land=
>s itself.
>I think Flaring is something you do in a C-172. Or most power
airplane. If
>=
>you try and flare a glider your likely to hit the tailboom hard and /
or
>po=
>und in. Tailboom first landings are the way the euro's try and land,
but
>Fl=
>aring? I don't think so.
>Am I wrong?
>I think any pilot going XC should be able to spot land his glider
with
>full=
> Spoilers out and flaps too if you have them.
>I don't know of any glider that can't be landed with everything
hanging
>out=
> to the max but I'm sure someone here will correct me on that
point. My
>ASW=
>20 was and my LS3a is, easy to land with everything out to the
max. It is
>=
>good to practice this a couple of times a year in good conditions
thou.
>
>

[Jim[_33_]]

On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 12:00:05 AM UTC-7, Richard McLean wrote:
> I think "flare" and "round out" are exactly the same thing .. a change in
> attitude to enable a low-energy landing. Powered or glider makes no
> difference. That's how it works here downunder anyway!
>
> At 23:49 27 March 2018, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> >I think the OP has got the terms wrong. I don't think you Flare a glider
> >in=
> >to a landing. I think you roundout and then just hold it off until it
> >land=
> >s itself.
> >I think Flaring is something you do in a C-172. Or most power airplane.
> If
> >=
> >you try and flare a glider your likely to hit the tailboom hard and / or
> >po=
> >und in. Tailboom first landings are the way the euro's try and land, but
> >Fl=
> >aring? I don't think so.
> >Am I wrong?
> >I think any pilot going XC should be able to spot land his glider with
> >full=
> > Spoilers out and flaps too if you have them.
> >I don't know of any glider that can't be landed with everything hanging
> >out=
> > to the max but I'm sure someone here will correct me on that point. My
> >ASW=
> >20 was and my LS3a is, easy to land with everything out to the max. It
> is
> >=
> >good to practice this a couple of times a year in good conditions thou.
> >
> >

This is mostly a matter of terminology I guess. For me, "flair" is something I do in tricycle gear power aircraft to raise the aircraft's nose a bit to avoid having the nose wheel contact the ground on touch down. This is not what I do in landing a glider. I "round-out" ( progressively transition from final approach to the "hold-off" and let the glider land itself. When I have goofed this up (frequently) and raised the glider's nose too high ("flair" in my lingo) the glider touched down tail wheel first. Hardly a problem if the touchdown is gentle but I can't think of a reason to do it - if the approach airspeed is not too high.

[kirk.stant]

Same maneuver, different names. Flare is more US, Round-out more British, I think. Both mean the same thing - change aircraft attitude from approach to landing; this reduces sink rate and sets up for the specific type of landing touchdown being done: fully-held off low energy (tail and main at same time) or flown on main only (Blanik, Schweizers). Tailwheel airplanes can do 3-point, wheel landings, or one main wheel crosswind landings. And in an F-4 or F-18 you don't even have to bother, just drive it onto the runway (or, as my navy friends used to say back before PC: "Flare to land, squat to pee"). In my LS6 I can get the tail wheel to touch just before the main if really going for min energy; a "one wheel" landing?

And "flair" is how stylishly you accomplish the "flare".

66

[Edward Lockhart[_4_]]

At 16:59 28 March 2018, Jim wrote:
>On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 12:00:05 AM UTC-7, Richard McLean wrote:
>> I think "flare" and "round out" are exactly the same thing .. a change
>in=
>=20
>> attitude to enable a low-energy landing. Powered or glider makes no=20
>> difference. That's how it works here downunder anyway!
>>=20
>> At 23:49 27 March 2018, Nick Kennedy wrote:
>> >I think the OP has got the terms wrong. I don't think you Flare a
glider
>> >in=3D
>> >to a landing. I think you roundout and then just hold it off until it
>> >land=3D
>> >s itself.
>> >I think Flaring is something you do in a C-172. Or most power
airplane.
>> If
>> >=3D
>> >you try and flare a glider your likely to hit the tailboom hard and /
or
>> >po=3D
>> >und in. Tailboom first landings are the way the euro's try and land,
but
>> >Fl=3D
>> >aring? I don't think so.
>> >Am I wrong?
>> >I think any pilot going XC should be able to spot land his glider with
>> >full=3D
>> > Spoilers out and flaps too if you have them.
>> >I don't know of any glider that can't be landed with everything
hanging
>> >out=3D
>> > to the max but I'm sure someone here will correct me on that point.
My
>> >ASW=3D
>> >20 was and my LS3a is, easy to land with everything out to the max.
It
>> is
>> >=3D
>> >good to practice this a couple of times a year in good conditions
thou.
>> >
>> >
>
>This is mostly a matter of terminology I guess. For me, "flair" is
>somethi=
>ng I do in tricycle gear power aircraft to raise the aircraft's nose a
bit
>=
>to avoid having the nose wheel contact the ground on touch down. This is
>n=
>ot what I do in landing a glider. I "round-out" ( progressively
>transition=
> from final approach to the "hold-off" and let the glider land itself.
>Whe=
>n I have goofed this up (frequently) and raised the glider's nose too
high
>=
>("flair" in my lingo) the glider touched down tail wheel first. Hardly a
>p=
>roblem if the touchdown is gentle but I can't think of a reason to do it
-
>=
>if the approach airspeed is not too high.
>

"Flair" is either a natural aptitude for something or a synonym for
panache.

Flare is rounding out the end of something, think flared trousers or flared
tubing. In our case it refers to the transition from a (relatively) steep
approach path to a brief period of flight parallel to the landing surface.
Whether you land on the mainwheel or both wheels together is irrelevant, &
purely a matter of choice.

One reason for landing on both wheels is that it's virtually impossible to
bounce back into the air again.

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Yep, on my iPad, sorta a PITA to multi quote.

Final may be a "high decent rate, followed by varying horizontal movement to remove energy before touchdown".

My first thought, did you stop before some unmoveable object?
Yes?, great.
No?, sucks.

Flare, flair, roundout, WTF........you are transitioning between a potential high decent rate to a horizontal maneuver where you dissapate the remaining energy. Yes, for those of you that do "Queens English", I left out some letters. ;-)
If you have GREAT brakes, this helps.
Energy management is paramount. Even if you have great brakes, they "may" fail when you count on them the most.

Always, keep in mind, "does it look good, does it sound good, does it feel good?". Yep, I know.......I "thought" I had dumped a full load of water in a -20C going into a field.
Found out LATER, we did work on the system, the dump lever didn't go over center, thus, even though I did my bit, I still landed with FULL WATER in a field on the ridge in PA.
It didn't feel right, didn't sound right, I kept a decent speed.

[Jim[_33_]]

On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 10:40:23 AM UTC-7, kirk.stant wrote:
....
>
> And "flair" is how stylishly you accomplish the "flare".
>
> 66

Yes, of course. I can't spell any better than I can land.

[Jim[_33_]]

> "Flair" is either a natural aptitude for something or a synonym for
> panache.
>
> Flare is rounding out the end of something, think flared trousers or flared
> tubing. In our case it refers to the transition from a (relatively) steep
> approach path to a brief period of flight parallel to the landing surface.
> Whether you land on the mainwheel or both wheels together is irrelevant, &
> purely a matter of choice.
>
> One reason for landing on both wheels is that it's virtually impossible to
> bounce back into the air again.

Really good point. Thank you for pointing this out to me.

[son_of_flubber]

On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 1:45:05 PM UTC-4, b4soaring wrote:

> Flare is rounding out the end of something, think flared trousers or flared
> tubing. In our case it refers to the transition from a (relatively) steep
> approach path to a brief period of flight parallel to the landing surface..

That sounds about right. In Vermont, at least at Sugarbush, I'm pretty sure that the 'flare' refers to the last stage of the 'roundout'. The flare is part of the roundout?

Kinda like the cuff of a pair of 'flared bell bottoms' (this will make sense to the RAS demographic ;)

During a steep 'full airbrake' descent. I start to roundout slowly at about 30-50 feet AGL, then seamlessly and gradually transition to the flare.

Post-flare and after entering level flight just above the runway, the stick comes back gradually, and the nose goes up, as the speed bleeds off. If I'm simultaneously opening the airbrakes to increase drag in ground effect, the stick comes back faster and in harmony with the increase in drag. I don't have a label for that stage.

I always thought that the 'run out' begins after the wheels touch pavement and wheel braking becomes an option, but it might be more correct to say that the 'run out' starts when the glider enters level flight just above the runway, because the pilot has the option to put the wheels down at that point and do a 'wheel landing'.

If I have opened another can of worms, maybe it will help pass the time until that first flight of the season.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 7:47:36 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> The PW-6 has very effective spoilers, and some other gliders have even more effective spoilers. Assuming C.G. is within limits and runway is level, is it possible to round out and flare with the spoilers fully open? Does one need extra airspeed? How much extra? (Yep. I know it is advisable to reduce spoilers before entering roundout.)
>
> How do you teach steep descent to students? How steep? How fast?
>
> I saw this question come up in a discussion of a fatal accident in a SZD 51-1 Junior. Student pilot opened 'full spoilers' and failed to flare.
>
> Is a 'full spoiler flare' required to obtain glider certification in EASA?
>
> And finally, does the PW-6 have spoilers or airbrakes?

Define Flair, "Arriving in style", just like Rick Flair! WOW

[kirk.stant]

Yeah, sorry for the spelling police ;^)

Flare vs Flair
Brake vs Break
(etc.)

The nuns beat it into me a long time ago - spelling is improtent!

66

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

I see what you did there.....hopefully "tongue in cheek"..........

As I stated before, it is GOOD to push the envelope at the home field on a normal day......never know when you need to really push it in a real situation.
In my previous post here, full flaps was hard on the flap seals, so I didn't do it many times since I was part of the, "fix the seals" crew. If you needed it, use it, otherwise, practice was fine unless you wanted to fix the seals.....

[Jim[_33_]]

On Friday, March 30, 2018 at 10:05:18 AM UTC-7, kirk.stant wrote:
> Yeah, sorry for the spelling police ;^)
>
> Flare vs Flair
> Brake vs Break
> (etc.)
>
> The nuns beat it into me a long time ago - spelling is improtent!
>
> 66

The nuns beat it into me too but I am old and my brane (see what I did there?) has shrunk to the size of a walnut.

[[email protected]]

The nuns beat it into me a long time ago - spelling is improtent!

Dyslexics Untie!

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Hmmm.... I thought it was, "Bad spellers untie".

For yours it should be, "etinu"

[Dave Nadler]

On Friday, March 30, 2018 at 3:30:05 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> it is GOOD to push the envelope at the home field on a normal day

Yup, medical attention will be there quicker,
and there's more help to stuff the pieces back in the trailer...

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

OK, I chewed on this for a day.
My normal, "sanity checks before I reply" were not available.

My original comment was towards, "pushing the POH limits".
Nothing more, nothing less.

If you misread my post, fine. Do you change your reply?

If not........do you propose peeps, "landing wherever on the local field, have others push it back" and then "hope" they don't break stuff when under stress and landing off field?

I am good for training for the worst, hoping you don't need it.
Your reply (maybe out of context?.......giving you an out here dude.......) is just do whatever, good luck when your butt is pinched up.
Yes, I have misread a landing site, dealt with it, didn't break anything.

I wanted to argue about some electrical stuff, but let it lay.
I am not backing off this, unless, you misread my "intention" in this thread.

Ball in your court.

Popcorn........

[waiting for the calls or emails saying I should let this die.......]......,

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Posted a reply.
Deleted a reply.
Have a nice day.

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 4:20:26 PM UTC-4, Dave Nadler wrote:
> On Friday, March 30, 2018 at 3:30:05 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> > it is GOOD to push the envelope at the home field on a normal day
>
> Yup, medical attention will be there quicker,
> and there's more help to stuff the pieces back in the trailer...

I understood his message to be to learn the limits and know what you can do before doing it in a strange field. Seems like a good idea to me.
UH

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 11:06 27 March 2018, wrote:

>Now I see students being taught to make approaches to landing using
very
>li=
>ttle spoiler and continuous adjustments until touchdown. I call it the
>powe=
>r approach, I have stressed to some of the instructors that at some
point
>t=
>he full spoiler approach to touchdown could be very helpful and
increase
>th=
>e glider pilots skill.

I have never flown a glider that could not be landed with full
airbrake/spoiler.

I have witnessed many poor landings and a few where the glider has
been broken. In most cases and in all cases where the glider has been
broken the primary cause has been the same, too little or reducing
airbrake. Reducing the amount of airbrake before roundout is the best
way I know of breaking a glider.
>

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

Well, if reducing airbrake on landing meant they hit a tree/fence/solid object, yep, I may agree.

On my post 3/27 (which I believe someone thought I meant, "learn to be a test pilot" at the home field), get current, then do things towards the edges of the POH.
I see many that fly in the "middle 30% of the POH" and then are asked to heads towards the 100%, sometimes off field.
Get current, then move the flying/landing towards the limits in a sorta controlled way.
Calm day at home means you know the field, know the clues

You never know when bad planning means coming over trees into the bottom of a gravel pit. That is NOT the time to become sharp.

Sounds like your "broken gliders" with full or modulated brakes means too much time in the middle 30% and no training or exposure to the edges of the POH.

[Mike the Strike]

The only caveat I would make is to be careful about landing with fully open spoilers on a glider whose wheel brake is actuated by the spoiler lever!

otherwise, it's a good thing to practice - I know of one case where full spoilers were deployed accidentally and could not be retracted when part of the control mechanism broke.

Mike

[kirk.stant]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 12:01:47 PM UTC-5, Mike the Strike wrote:
> The only caveat I would make is to be careful about landing with fully open spoilers on a glider whose wheel brake is actuated by the spoiler lever!
>
> otherwise, it's a good thing to practice - I know of one case where full spoilers were deployed accidentally and could not be retracted when part of the control mechanism broke.
>
> Mike

Agree - something I like to practice every spring. Good reminder to check the spoilers mid field on downwind where a full-spoiler approach and landing can still be done!

66

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 15:52 02 April 2018, Charlie M. UH & 002 owner/pilot wrote:
>Well, if reducing airbrake on landing meant they hit a
tree/fence/solid
>object, yep, I may agree.
>
>On my post 3/27 (which I believe someone thought I meant, "learn
to be a
>test pilot" at the home field), get current, then do things towards
the
>edges of the POH.
>I see many that fly in the "middle 30% of the POH" and then are
asked to
>heads towards the 100%, sometimes off field.
>Get current, then move the flying/landing towards the limits in a
sorta
>controlled way.
>Calm day at home means you know the field, know the clues
>
>You never know when bad planning means coming over trees into
the bottom of
>a gravel pit. That is NOT the time to become sharp.
>
>Sounds like your "broken gliders" with full or modulated brakes
means too
>much time in the middle 30% and no training or exposure to the
edges of the
>POH.
>
Actually I didn't, the gliders I have seen broken were the result of
PIO which comes from reducing airbrake.
I do not know about the rest of the world but in the UK full airbrake
approach/landing is the norm. If you are going to be short the
teaching is to fully close the airbrake and re-establish, then use at
least half airbrake, more is preferable. To little airbrake on roundout
is more risky than too much.
If using full airbrake the pilot must ensure that if the wheel brake is
"on the end" of the airbrake that the lever is positioned to ensure
the wheel brake is not applied. This does not require the brake
paddles to be moved in any significant amount.

[Tango Whisky]

Le mardi 3 avril 2018 02:15:05 UTC+2, Don Johnstone a écritÂ*:
> At 15:52 02 April 2018, Charlie M. UH & 002 owner/pilot wrote:
> >Well, if reducing airbrake on landing meant they hit a
> tree/fence/solid
> >object, yep, I may agree.
> >
> >On my post 3/27 (which I believe someone thought I meant, "learn
> to be a
> >test pilot" at the home field), get current, then do things towards
> the
> >edges of the POH.
> >I see many that fly in the "middle 30% of the POH" and then are
> asked to
> >heads towards the 100%, sometimes off field.
> >Get current, then move the flying/landing towards the limits in a
> sorta
> >controlled way.
> >Calm day at home means you know the field, know the clues
> >
> >You never know when bad planning means coming over trees into
> the bottom of
> >a gravel pit. That is NOT the time to become sharp.
> >
> >Sounds like your "broken gliders" with full or modulated brakes
> means too
> >much time in the middle 30% and no training or exposure to the
> edges of the
> >POH.
> >
> Actually I didn't, the gliders I have seen broken were the result of
> PIO which comes from reducing airbrake.
> I do not know about the rest of the world but in the UK full airbrake
> approach/landing is the norm. If you are going to be short the
> teaching is to fully close the airbrake and re-establish, then use at
> least half airbrake, more is preferable. To little airbrake on roundout
> is more risky than too much.
> If using full airbrake the pilot must ensure that if the wheel brake is
> "on the end" of the airbrake that the lever is positioned to ensure
> the wheel brake is not applied. This does not require the brake
> paddles to be moved in any significant amount.

Well, where I fly and teach, a full airbrake approach is considered poor airmanship.
We train students to be on a stabilized approach with about half airbrakes at least during the second half of final. Half airbrakes give you the possibility to correct both ways.
If you are on a full airbrake approach to an outlanding field and you discover that you are too high, in many gliders you could call the insurance company right away.
And even if you need to touch down shorft behind a tree line, we teach that the approach should be half airbrakes until the tree tops, and then everything out.

[James Thomson[_2_]]

>I do not know about the rest of the world but in the UK full airbrake
>approach/landing is the norm. If you are going to be short the
>teaching is to fully close the airbrake and re-establish, then use at
>least half airbrake, more is preferable. To little airbrake on roundout
>is more risky than too much.
>If using full airbrake the pilot must ensure that if the wheel brake is
>"on the end" of the airbrake that the lever is positioned to ensure
>the wheel brake is not applied. This does not require the brake
>paddles to be moved in any significant amount.

Don,

Go and read the the BGA instructor's manual! It's available to everyone
on
the BGA website. The manual calls for the standard approach to be 1/2 to

2/3 airbrake thus giving you the freedom to correct for overshoot and
undershoot conditions.

Perhaps during your many years in the Air Training Corps you did
something different.

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 08:50 03 April 2018, James Thomson wrote:
>
>>I do not know about the rest of the world but in the UK full airbrake
>>approach/landing is the norm. If you are going to be short the
>>teaching is to fully close the airbrake and re-establish, then use at
>>least half airbrake, more is preferable. To little airbrake on roundout
>>is more risky than too much.
>>If using full airbrake the pilot must ensure that if the wheel brake is
>>"on the end" of the airbrake that the lever is positioned to ensure
>>the wheel brake is not applied. This does not require the brake
>>paddles to be moved in any significant amount.
>
>Don,
>
>Go and read the the BGA instructor's manual! It's available to
everyon
>on
>the BGA website. The manual calls for the standard approach to be
1/2 t
>
>2/3 airbrake thus giving you the freedom to correct for overshoot and
>undershoot conditions.
>
>Perhaps during your many years in the Air Training Corps you did
>something different.
>
You should not confuse what is taught with what is done in practice. My
point was that too much brake when in the final stages of landing is
better than too little. Nowhere have I said that anything other than the
standard approach is taught.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

One of the places I regularly fly has a very steep wind gradient coupled trees and hills on the final. More than once I have seen a power pilot not be able to get wheels on the twenty eight hundred foot long runway. At this airport I fly a much steeper approach on final than the "stabilized approach" as I know I can lose up to 10 knot of head wind on very short final. Students should be taught to fly the conditions, not every landing required the same approach as the last one.

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 10:41:14 PM UTC-7, Tango Whisky wrote:
> Le mardi 3 avril 2018 02:15:05 UTC+2, Don Johnstone a écritÂ*:
> > At 15:52 02 April 2018, Charlie M. UH & 002 owner/pilot wrote:
> > >Well, if reducing airbrake on landing meant they hit a
> > tree/fence/solid
> > >object, yep, I may agree.
> > >
> > >On my post 3/27 (which I believe someone thought I meant, "learn
> > to be a
> > >test pilot" at the home field), get current, then do things towards
> > the
> > >edges of the POH.
> > >I see many that fly in the "middle 30% of the POH" and then are
> > asked to
> > >heads towards the 100%, sometimes off field.
> > >Get current, then move the flying/landing towards the limits in a
> > sorta
> > >controlled way.
> > >Calm day at home means you know the field, know the clues
> > >
> > >You never know when bad planning means coming over trees into
> > the bottom of
> > >a gravel pit. That is NOT the time to become sharp.
> > >
> > >Sounds like your "broken gliders" with full or modulated brakes
> > means too
> > >much time in the middle 30% and no training or exposure to the
> > edges of the
> > >POH.
> > >
> > Actually I didn't, the gliders I have seen broken were the result of
> > PIO which comes from reducing airbrake.
> > I do not know about the rest of the world but in the UK full airbrake
> > approach/landing is the norm. If you are going to be short the
> > teaching is to fully close the airbrake and re-establish, then use at
> > least half airbrake, more is preferable. To little airbrake on roundout
> > is more risky than too much.
> > If using full airbrake the pilot must ensure that if the wheel brake is
> > "on the end" of the airbrake that the lever is positioned to ensure
> > the wheel brake is not applied. This does not require the brake
> > paddles to be moved in any significant amount.
>
> Well, where I fly and teach, a full airbrake approach is considered poor airmanship.
> We train students to be on a stabilized approach with about half airbrakes at least during the second half of final. Half airbrakes give you the possibility to correct both ways.
> If you are on a full airbrake approach to an outlanding field and you discover that you are too high, in many gliders you could call the insurance company right away.
> And even if you need to touch down shorft behind a tree line, we teach that the approach should be half airbrakes until the tree tops, and then everything out.

[[email protected]]

Just for the sport of it I'll point out that the 1-26 manual suggests reducing spoilers just before touchdown. POH also notes touchdown with full spoilers is OK at 50 mph.
Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?

[James Metcalfe[_2_]]

At 15:17 03 April 2018, wrote:
>Just for the sport of it I'll point out that the 1-26 manual suggests
>reducing spoilers just before touchdown. POH also notes
touchdown with
>full spoilers is OK at 50 mph.
>Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?

Are there any 1-26s in England ?

[Martin Gregorie[_6_]]

On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 16:30:10 +0000, James Metcalfe wrote:

> At 15:17 03 April 2018, wrote:
>>Just for the sport of it I'll point out that the 1-26 manual suggests
>>reducing spoilers just before touchdown. POH also notes
> touchdown with
>>full spoilers is OK at 50 mph.
>>Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?
>
> Are there any 1-26s in England ?

I've never flown a 1.26 (but its on my list) but some of the strongest
airbrakes I know are in the SZD Junior.

I've normally never needed or use more than half brake in a Junior, but
this time there was a strong wind, so I turned base to finals at 600-700
ft barely downwind of the threshold and stopped rolling less than 100m
into the field. That was a 65+ kt approach flown with full brakes. I saw
almost no float after rounding out: with that much brake a Junior turns
into a fairly decent brick. I knew it was a windy day: I got 2700 ft on
the winch - with the winch placed about 4000 ft from the launch point.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[Paul Agnew]

The purpose for reducing spoilers on the 1-26 is to help prevent landing tailwheel first.

The 1-26 POH also says to use full spoilers for downwind landings. Does anyone do that?

Paul A.

[Chris Rowland[_2_]]

Would the British equivalent to the 1-26 be the Swallow?

I went solo on the Swallow, after training on a T21 (makes my blood run
cold now). It wasn't a problem, I was carefully briefed to approach and
land with half brake the first time but by the third was briefed to use
full brake.

The Swallow had a reputation to be twitchy on landing but from what I saw
this was only if you closed the brakes entirely. 1/4" of brake was enough
to stop this while not giving much drag. What I now realise was that a
tiny amount of brake killed the lift over the part of the wing where the
brakes were and this increased the stability.

Typically we tend to touch down on the main wheel and tail wheel together,
touching down tail first needs a slightly higher round out so there's room
for the tail to go down.

Chris


At 22:28 03 April 2018, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 16:30:10 +0000, James Metcalfe wrote:
>
>> At 15:17 03 April 2018, wrote:
>>>Just for the sport of it I'll point out that the 1-26 manual suggests
>>>reducing spoilers just before touchdown. POH also notes
>> touchdown with
>>>full spoilers is OK at 50 mph.
>>>Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?
>>
>> Are there any 1-26s in England ?
>
>I've never flown a 1.26 (but its on my list) but some of the strongest
>airbrakes I know are in the SZD Junior.
>
>I've normally never needed or use more than half brake in a Junior, but
>this time there was a strong wind, so I turned base to finals at 600-700
>ft barely downwind of the threshold and stopped rolling less than 100m
>into the field. That was a 65+ kt approach flown with full brakes. I saw
>almost no float after rounding out: with that much brake a Junior turns
>into a fairly decent brick. I knew it was a windy day: I got 2700 ft on
>the winch - with the winch placed about 4000 ft from the launch point.
>
>
>--
>Martin | martin at
>Gregorie | gregorie dot org
>

[Andrew Ainslie]

Thank God summer is nearly here. Is choosing an air brake extension level really that hard? I can’t remember a single landing where I thought, “damn, Wrong airbrake setting�.

Seems like an extended winter boredom thread to me!

[Don Johnstone[_4_]]

At 15:17 03 April 2018, wrote:
>Just for the sport of it I'll point out that the 1-26 manual suggests
>reducing spoilers just before touchdown. POH also notes touchdown
with
>full spoilers is OK at 50 mph.
>Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?
>
As far as I am aware we don't, there are no metal monstrosities in the
UK, apart from the YS53 :-)

[son_of_flubber]

> At 15:17 03 April 2018, greggballou wrote:
> >Wonder how they land 1-26s in England?
>

On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:00:07 PM UTC-4, Don Johnstone wrote:
> As far as I am aware we don't, there are no metal monstrosities in the
> UK, apart from the YS53 :-)

It's socially acceptable to say bad things about the SGS 2-33, but hold the bad words about the SGS 1-26 until you've flown a nice one on a weak day with not much wind.