Personal bests and records climbing in Calif

[Caracole]

This week is IT.

In case you hadn't noticed, it's summer, and the soaring's HOT.
Here at least. Monday had a 900 km flight, Tuesday a late launch
and early finish got a quick 400 km (for a girl, dry).

Today, Mark Grubb flew 1100 km out of Tehachapi - yo-yo and landed
Cal City just before sundown. I just packed his AS-W 20 in the
trailer to go home.

Doug Turner flew his DG for about 700 km, Cal City, Mono, Basalt and
home then THP and drone around just because it was still working five
knots local at Cal City at 6:30. He set a new California Standard
Class O & R distance task.... updating the 1986 flight of Otto Croy
from Cal City.
(Steve, this is a notification !)

Gary Thompson flew his PIK-20 500km plus, his first PIK launch of the
season, Boundary Peak and return....

We have a few guys flying Thursday and Friday and I'm sure it will
still be good on the weekend. Don't bother looking at a forecast.
You can talk yourself out of anything by looking at numbers on paper.
Too wet, too dry, too hot, too windy, too many tractors working on the
airport....garp.

Thermals are great, cu popped here at 9:45 on Cache Peak.
Towplane's all gassed up tonight.
I'm going home now...... all of So Cal should call in sick
and go soaring tomorrow or Friday.


Cindy Brickner
Caracole Soaring
22570 Airport Way
California City, CA 93505
760-373-1019
www.caracolesoaring.com

[Sue McMaster]

(Caracole) wrote in message >...
> This week is IT.
>
> In case you hadn't noticed, it's summer, and the soaring's HOT.
> Here at least. Monday had a 900 km flight, Tuesday a late launch
> and early finish got a quick 400 km (for a girl, dry).
>
> Today, Mark Grubb flew 1100 km out of Tehachapi - yo-yo and landed
> Cal City just before sundown. I just packed his AS-W 20 in the
> trailer to go home.
>
> Doug Turner flew his DG for about 700 km, Cal City, Mono, Basalt and
> home then THP and drone around just because it was still working five
> knots local at Cal City at 6:30. He set a new California Standard
> Class O & R distance task.... updating the 1986 flight of Otto Croy
> from Cal City.
> (Steve, this is a notification !)
>
> Gary Thompson flew his PIK-20 500km plus, his first PIK launch of the
> season, Boundary Peak and return....
>
> We have a few guys flying Thursday and Friday and I'm sure it will
> still be good on the weekend. Don't bother looking at a forecast.
> You can talk yourself out of anything by looking at numbers on paper.
> Too wet, too dry, too hot, too windy, too many tractors working on the
> airport....garp.
>
> Thermals are great, cu popped here at 9:45 on Cache Peak.
> Towplane's all gassed up tonight.
> I'm going home now...... all of So Cal should call in sick
> and go soaring tomorrow or Friday.
>
>
> Cindy Brickner
> Caracole Soaring
> 22570 Airport Way
> California City, CA 93505
> 760-373-1019
> www.caracolesoaring.com

BRAVO Cindy! It's always best to kick ass and take names later!

Best of luck to all who take advantage of the awesome SCA wx and who
are smart enough to accept Caracole's welcome invitation! It's their
loss if they don't show up.

Fly safe, Sue

[Mark Grubb]

I must commend and thank Cindy for all the professionalism,
comraderie, and attention she has shown me and countless other.

An example:

A few weeks ago I pair-flew with KB from Ely to Teh (me) and Cal City
(KB). KB was new to the area (and doing an excellent job, I might
add!) and was being poorly vectored by me (brain dead, 7+ hrs in
cockpit) and ultimatley expertly by Cindy into Cal City. Barry rolled
up on the ramp to Cindy holding a Wet Towel, a Bottled Water, a Soda,
and an Adult Beverage. He had never received such a welcome at an FBO
and was pleasantly stunned.

Cindy stayed till 9:00 pm last nite to help me unrig and get home.

Thanks Cindy!!

As Jimmy Buffet once wrote: The weather is here, I wish you were
beautiful...

As CB said, you can find a million reason not to fly. That is
ridiculous.
Come out and soar!

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
(Mark Grubb) wrote:

> A few weeks ago I pair-flew with KB from Ely to Teh (me) and Cal City
> (KB). KB was new to the area (and doing an excellent job, I might
> add!) and was being poorly vectored by me (brain dead, 7+ hrs in
> cockpit) and ultimatley expertly by Cindy into Cal City. Barry rolled
> up on the ramp to Cindy holding a Wet Towel, a Bottled Water, a Soda,
> and an Adult Beverage. He had never received such a welcome at an FBO
> and was pleasantly stunned.

As a visiting pilot I too had a good reception from Cindy at Cal City.
I turned up unannounced one day in June and said I'd like to go fly over
Mojave (half an hour's drive away) and she was quick to oblige me in the
ASK21. Especially remarkable was the contrast with nearby Tehachapi an
hour earlier where they had a Blanik and Grob but didn't have any
instructor rated for them (2-33 only), and in any case they "didn't fly
cross country on rides".

-- Bruce

[Raphael Warshaw]

I think I can top this. Cindy retrieved me from land-outs on two
consecutive days a few weeks ago, once in her own vehicle because I
had the keys to mine in my pocket. It doesn't get any better than
that.

Ray Warshaw
1LK

Bruce Hoult > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (Mark Grubb) wrote:
>

[Andreas Maurer]

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:57:08 +1200, Bruce Hoult >
wrote:

> Especially remarkable was the contrast with nearby Tehachapi an
>hour earlier where they had a Blanik and Grob but didn't have any
>instructor rated for them (2-33 only), and in any case they "didn't fly
>cross country on rides".

Pretty interesting - how can someone be instructor rated in a 2-33 and
not in a Blanik or Grob? Are the latter being regarded as that hard to
fly?


Bye
Andreas

[Kirk Stant]

Andreas Maurer > wrote in message >...

> Pretty interesting - how can someone be instructor rated in a 2-33 and
> not in a Blanik or Grob? Are the latter being regarded as that hard to
> fly?
>
>
> Bye
> Andreas

Not surprising in the US; and probably the result of so many years of
the 2-33 being used almost exclusively for training - It's not ususual
to find glider pilots (including instructors) over here who have never
flown anything else! And of course, they are often rabid supporters
of the horrible beast.

Part of the 2-33 cult is to badmouth any other 2-seat glider as being
too hard to handle by students, and to insist on the need for an
extensive checkout in "high-performance" 2-seaters, such as the
Blanik, Grob 103, and ASK-21. Of course, if all your experience is in
a 2-33, that might be a good thing, judging by the lack of skill
demonstrated by most 2-33 drivers (in either seat).

And we wonder why soaring is declining in the US. Until every last
one of those dreadful POSs are turned into hubcaps, we will remain
firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.

This should be fun...

Kirk

[Jack]

Kirk Stant wrote:

> Until every last one of those dreadful POSs are turned into hubcaps,
> we will remain firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.

Yo Mama!


Jack

[Nyal Williams]

At 21:12 13 August 2004, Jack wrote:
>Kirk Stant wrote:
>
> > Until every last one of those dreadful POSs are turned
>>into hubcaps,
> > we will remain firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.
>
>Yo Mama!
>
>Jack

>Now, now!

You can have fun in a 12-meter sailboat, and you can
have fun on a raft. There is plenty of room for EVERYbody

[Lennie the Lurker]

(Kirk Stant) wrote in message >...
>
> And we wonder why soaring is declining in the US. Until every last
> one of those dreadful POSs are turned into hubcaps, we will remain
> firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.
>
The check for your opinion is on it's way.

Leon Bibb did a song called "Little Boxes", describes kraut plastic perfectly.

"Yes they all made out of ticky tacky
and they all look just the same."

[Liam Finley]

Nyal Williams > wrote in message >...
> At 21:12 13 August 2004, Jack wrote:
> >Kirk Stant wrote:
> >
> > > Until every last one of those dreadful POSs are turned
> >>into hubcaps,
> > > we will remain firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.
> >
> >Yo Mama!
> >
> >Jack
>
> >Now, now!
>
> You can have fun in a 12-meter sailboat, and you can
> have fun on a raft. There is plenty of room for EVERYbody

What do you call a dozen busted 2-33's?

A good start.

[Eric Greenwell]

Liam Finley wrote:


> What do you call a dozen busted 2-33's?
>
> A good start.

I'd call it a sad loss to the sport, as most of those gliders would not
be replaced at today's prices. Each one likely added several glider
pilots to our roles each year, and that won't happen if they are busted.
--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Bruce Greeff]

Nyal Williams wrote:
> At 21:12 13 August 2004, Jack wrote:
>
>>Kirk Stant wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Until every last one of those dreadful POSs are turned
>>>into hubcaps,
>>>we will remain firmly stuck in twirlybirdland.
>>
>>Yo Mama!
>>
>>Jack
>
>
>>Now, now!
>
>
> You can have fun in a 12-meter sailboat, and you can
> have fun on a raft. There is plenty of room for EVERYbody
>
>
>
>
As Long as you know it's a raft...

Personally - if it flies I'm game. Having learned to fly in a 1956 tube and
fabric, wooden wing vintage I am constantly pleasantly surprised by the other
types I fly. And equally happy to go up in the vintage (German) bird. Just know
what you are flying, and appreciate it for what it is.

Tried to get a flight in a 2-33 last time in the USA but some genius had just
decided to invade Iraq...

Bruce

[Bullwinkle]

On 8/14/04 8:31 AM, in article , "Eric
Greenwell" > wrote:

> Liam Finley wrote:
>
>
>> What do you call a dozen busted 2-33's?
>>
>> A good start.
>
> I'd call it a sad loss to the sport, as most of those gliders would not
> be replaced at today's prices. Each one likely added several glider
> pilots to our roles each year, and that won't happen if they are busted.

The 2-33 is a poor sailplane, but a great training glider. It fits its niche
perfectly, as a bulletproof trainer. It is a great introduction to the sport
for many people.

Lots of clubs couldn't exist if they had to use more expensive trainers.

Blaniks are also fine aircraft, but fragile in high volume training
operations. Witness the recent experience of the Air Force Academy: their
switch to Blaniks has just about shut down their operation. 90% of their
2-33 (TG-4A) flights landed on the grass; they broke so many Blanik's doing
that that now 90% of the Blanik flights are going to the paved runway. They
are requiring a through-flight inspection by a mechanic after every flight.
This really slows the training pace, reducing the number of cadets who can
soar at all, let alone solo (they're not saying "soar for all" anymore,
either).

Think about the milestones section of Soaring every month: how many proud
teenage first-solo's are standing in front of 2-33's? Answer: most of them.
Without the availability of an inexpensive trainer, they probably couldn't
afford to fly, and many of their clubs or commercial operations couldn't
stay in business.

You may have grown beyond the 2-33: most of us do after a while. But it fits
it's niche very well, and will likely continue to do so for many years.

Bullwinkle

[Kirk Stant]

(Lennie the Lurker) wrote in message >...
> >
> The check for your opinion is on it's way.

I wonder how high it will bounce...

> Leon Bibb did a song called "Little Boxes", describes kraut plastic perfectly.
>
> "Yes they all made out of ticky tacky
> and they all look just the same."

Funny, with the exception of the 2-32, most Schweitzer 2 seaters (and
most of their early single-seaters) look like peas in a pod. And the
quality of the workmanship and engineering in them is pretty
agricultural. Strong, no doubt, but not very refined. If that
satisfies you, that's your problem.

Lennie, when you have 2000 hours in metal, fabric, wood, glass, and
carbon fiber gliders made in the US, Czechoslovakia, Romania,
Lithuania, Germany, or Poland, then you may have an opinion I might
consider listening to. Until then, try learning something for a
change. Like not being such a stupid racist, for a start.

Kirk

[Kirk Stant]

Bruce Greeff > wrote in message >...
>
> As Long as you know it's a raft...
>
> Personally - if it flies I'm game. Having learned to fly in a 1956 tube and
> fabric, wooden wing vintage I am constantly pleasantly surprised by the other
> types I fly. And equally happy to go up in the vintage (German) bird. Just know
> what you are flying, and appreciate it for what it is.
>
> Tried to get a flight in a 2-33 last time in the USA but some genius had just
> decided to invade Iraq...
>
> Bruce


Personally, I also enjoy flying anything with wings -including 2-33s -
they all are interesting in their own way, even their faults are
interesting to discover and work around. My objection to the 2-33 is
that it is SO non-representative of the current state of the art in
soaring that it results in a lot of potential (read "rich enough to
afford the sport") glider pilots leaving the sport shortly after
getting their licence, in search of some sport that doesn't force you
to train and fly in a beat-up doggy glider. These are the poeple
riding $20k motorcycles, boats, etc. NO WAY is a guy (or gal) like
that going to put up with a 2-33!

And since no-one in their right mind (except for some friends of mine
who raced a couple of 2-33s XC yesterday - see the ASA forum for
details) would take a 2-33 XC, they result in the total de-emphasis of
XC glider flying at most US schools, and a lack of XC experience among
US CFIGs.

You want to fly an antique, go for it, and have a good time doing it.
But if you want to grow the sport, get a good, modern trainer. THATS
my beef with the 2-33. Oh, and the trim is dangerous, and the back
seat is uncomfortable and is almost impossible to get out of wearing a
chute, and...

Re Blaniks, funny that the Soviet Air Force had no trouble training
all their pilots using Blaniks for 30 odd years (or more?). I've got a
sneaky suspicion that the real problem at the Zoo was due to a
lingering 2-33 trainig mentality, not a problem with the Blanik, which
was actually designed as a military trainer for the entire Warsaw
Pact.

And since I'm a Zoomie, I can say that!

Well, enough tilting at windmills.

Kirk

[Andrew Watson]

In article >,
Bullwinkle > wrote:

> Blaniks are also fine aircraft, but fragile in high volume training
> operations. Witness the recent experience of the Air Force Academy: their
> switch to Blaniks has just about shut down their operation. 90% of their
> 2-33 (TG-4A) flights landed on the grass; they broke so many Blanik's doing
> that that now 90% of the Blanik flights are going to the paved runway. They
> are requiring a through-flight inspection by a mechanic after every flight.
> This really slows the training pace, reducing the number of cadets who can
> soar at all, let alone solo (they're not saying "soar for all" anymore,
> either).

If they're breaking them that often, they're Doing Something Wrong. I
flew for five years with a club that did all two-seater work, including
ab-initio training, on L-23s, operating off both grass and asphalt. Yes,
I saw them get broken, but not often, and I can put my hand on my heart
and say I never saw a Blanik break where another glider wouldn't have
done. They're plenty tough enough for normal club training operations.

[Bullwinkle]

On 8/16/04 3:12 PM, in article
, "Andrew Watson"
> wrote:

> In article >,
> Bullwinkle > wrote:
>
>> Blaniks are also fine aircraft, but fragile in high volume training
>> operations. Witness the recent experience of the Air Force Academy: their
>> switch to Blaniks has just about shut down their operation. 90% of their
>> 2-33 (TG-4A) flights landed on the grass; they broke so many Blanik's doing
>> that that now 90% of the Blanik flights are going to the paved runway. They
>> are requiring a through-flight inspection by a mechanic after every flight.
>> This really slows the training pace, reducing the number of cadets who can
>> soar at all, let alone solo (they're not saying "soar for all" anymore,
>> either).
>
> If they're breaking them that often, they're Doing Something Wrong. I
> flew for five years with a club that did all two-seater work, including
> ab-initio training, on L-23s, operating off both grass and asphalt. Yes,
> I saw them get broken, but not often, and I can put my hand on my heart
> and say I never saw a Blanik break where another glider wouldn't have
> done. They're plenty tough enough for normal club training operations.

There's much truth to both your and Kirk's comments. They are flying them
like 2-33's, and, of course, That's Something Wrong. They're doing better
now: they flattened the approach angle for the Blaniks, and they're not
bending as many. Previously, with the 2-33's, they taught a near-Space
Shuttle approach angle. Try that with an L-13 and you're really asking for
trouble at the roundout/flare.

And of course, the zero defect mentality (which extends throughout most of
the USAF these days) means that accidents don't just happen anymore:
something breaks, and that means somebody's to blame, and that means
somebody's got to pay. Even if it's just a routine training accident. Oh,
and that's followed by a bunch of new rules and regs designed NOT to prevent
the accident from happening again, but rather to show their superiors that
the unit commander is Doing Something To Fix The Problem. (Looks great on
the OPR, especially if there aren't any more similar accidents before the CC
and DO leave, and might get the officer involved a DP. Because they Did
Something, and It Worked.)

Sorry: my cynicism is showing again.

I, too, have some inside knowledge of that program. By the way, they're
afraid to let anyone fly the 2 new Duo Discus's they bought.

You know, Tom Knauff is reported to have referred to the USAFA soar-for-all
program as "teaching Monkeys to fly." As in: if you make it simple enough,
and take judgment out of the equation making it just a hand-eye coordination
thing, you could teach a monkey to fly a glider.

It's worse than that. USAFA takes the very best Monkeys, and makes them into
IP's. Thus it is really Monkeys teaching Monkeys how to fly.

That's a gross oversimplification, and probably not fair to the many caring
and concerned folks trying hard at the 94th FTS, but there are some nuggets
of truth there.

But I still think the 2-33 has its place! Maybe not YOUR place, but plenty
of other places.

Best wishes, and let's agree to disagree.

[Nyal Williams]

(

Just remember, various critics of lowly gliders: If
all those horrible, cheap, clunky gliders disappeared,
YOUR glider would be at the bottom of the list of what's
good, and the rest of those pilots still flying would
be kicking dirt in YOUR face.

There is dignity in flying any kind of glider. If
you don't believe that, then you are attempting to
use gliding as a social weapon instead of sport or
recreation. Can you not endure the thought that lowly
pilots without your status are having as much fun as
you?

[Lennie the Lurker]

(Kirk Stant) wrote in message >...
>
> Personally, I also enjoy flying anything with wings -including 2-33s -
> they all are interesting in their own way, even their faults are
> interesting to discover and work around. My objection to the 2-33 is
> that it is SO non-representative of the current state of the art in
> soaring that it results in a lot of potential (read "rich enough to
> afford the sport") glider pilots leaving the sport shortly after
> getting their licence, in search of some sport that doesn't force you
> to train and fly in a beat-up doggy glider. These are the poeple
> riding $20k motorcycles, boats, etc. NO WAY is a guy (or gal) like
> that going to put up with a 2-33!

And after they've jumped through all the hoops, all the hurdles, and
are free to buy and fly anything they wish, they drop? No way are
they going to stay with any hobby that requires any skill or
concentration. The glider didn't drive them away, they did what they
always will. Instant gratification is the name of the game today.
("Oh! You've gotta work to do this? See ya.")
>
> And since no-one in their right mind (except for some friends of mine
> who raced a couple of 2-33s XC yesterday - see the ASA forum for
> details) would take a 2-33 XC, they result in the total de-emphasis of
> XC glider flying at most US schools, and a lack of XC experience among
> US CFIGs.

Why don't you see what else you can blame on the tool so you don't
have to look at the man? "'Tis a poor craftsman that blames his
tools." It was true when Ben said it, it's true today. The 2-33
didn't stop Judy from hammering "speed to fly" etc., from the first
time I got in until I finally told her I had no interest in it.
(Didn't stop her then either.)
>
> the back
> seat is uncomfortable

Maybe for you, but I found it comfortable. However, any of the
plastic I've sat in, with the exception of a Russia, were enough that
I don't want to spend any time in any of them. (Sat in it, not flew
in it, no piece of plastic is going to leave the ground with my ass
strapped in it.) TO be fair about it, I'm six feet tall and 155
pounds, which might explain why I'm not uncomfortable in a 2-33, front
or back. Two more inches of legroom would be appreciated, but that's
about all.

No, sorry. You can try to blame all the human failings on the 2-33,
but it isn't going to make them go away. Trying to build on a sense
of elitism isn't going to build anything but a reputation for
snobbery.

[[email protected]]

On 16 Aug 2004 12:24:14 -0700, (Kirk Stant)
wrote:

(Lennie the Lurker) wrote in message >...
>> >
>> The check for your opinion is on it's way.
>
>I wonder how high it will bounce...

I sent it postage due, so I know I can expect it back.
>
>Lennie, when you have 2000 hours in metal, fabric, wood, glass, and
>carbon fiber gliders made in the US, Czechoslovakia, Romania,
>Lithuania, Germany, or Poland, then you may have an opinion I might
>consider listening to. Until then, try learning something for a
>change. Like not being such a stupid racist, for a start.
>
Care to brag a little more, oh elittist schmuk? The 2-33 may be
"agricultural", but it's not where the grop 103SL spends most of it's
time, in the hangar being worked on because something else is wrong
with the damn thing. I've made six trips to the airport this year,
and have seen it fly on one occasion. I'm not impressed. groundhog
is a good description. Hangar queen also comes to mind easily.


Lennie the Lurker

[Bruce Greeff]

Kirk Stant wrote:
> Bruce Greeff > wrote in message >...
>
>>As Long as you know it's a raft...
>>
>>Personally - if it flies I'm game. Having learned to fly in a 1956 tube and
>>fabric, wooden wing vintage I am constantly pleasantly surprised by the other
>>types I fly. And equally happy to go up in the vintage (German) bird. Just know
>>what you are flying, and appreciate it for what it is.
>>
>>Tried to get a flight in a 2-33 last time in the USA but some genius had just
>>decided to invade Iraq...
>>
>>Bruce
>
>
>
> Personally, I also enjoy flying anything with wings -including 2-33s -
> they all are interesting in their own way, even their faults are
> interesting to discover and work around. My objection to the 2-33 is
> that it is SO non-representative of the current state of the art in
> soaring that it results in a lot of potential (read "rich enough to
> afford the sport") glider pilots leaving the sport shortly after
> getting their licence, in search of some sport that doesn't force you
> to train and fly in a beat-up doggy glider. These are the poeple
> riding $20k motorcycles, boats, etc. NO WAY is a guy (or gal) like
> that going to put up with a 2-33!
>
> And since no-one in their right mind (except for some friends of mine
> who raced a couple of 2-33s XC yesterday - see the ASA forum for
> details) would take a 2-33 XC, they result in the total de-emphasis of
> XC glider flying at most US schools, and a lack of XC experience among
> US CFIGs.
>
> You want to fly an antique, go for it, and have a good time doing it.
> But if you want to grow the sport, get a good, modern trainer. THATS
> my beef with the 2-33. Oh, and the trim is dangerous, and the back
> seat is uncomfortable and is almost impossible to get out of wearing a
> chute, and...
>
> Re Blaniks, funny that the Soviet Air Force had no trouble training
> all their pilots using Blaniks for 30 odd years (or more?). I've got a
> sneaky suspicion that the real problem at the Zoo was due to a
> lingering 2-33 trainig mentality, not a problem with the Blanik, which
> was actually designed as a military trainer for the entire Warsaw
> Pact.
>
> And since I'm a Zoomie, I can say that!
>
> Well, enough tilting at windmills.
>
> Kirk
Hi Kirk

We do have 3 private L13s for slightly more advanced flying, and then there are
a number of private single seater planes for students to move on to. The L13
tought the Soviet airforce to fly for years. They came here and have been worked
hard for thirty years. In general they remain servicable and withstand our rough
runway very well. Being metal and not exactly in the first blush of youth, they
tend to need maintenance, but nothing excessive. The only recurrent problem
appears to be the relatively weak tail post bulkhead which can get damaged by
agressive flares - landing tail first, and ground loops. (2 repairs in 30 years
for the one whose record I know)

Personally, I like the Grob 103 - It is very comfortable, easy to fly, low
maintenance. I only worked out that you COULD fly on trim after solo when I got
to fly a twin Astir...

So from relatively recent experience of learning to soar I can say that the
vintage lumps taught me to fly better in terms of much better demonstration of
bad habits like adverse yaw and lack of control harmonisation, and judgement -
"in a headwind if you can see it over the nose it is out of soaring range" .
Conversely I also have noted that there are many things I learned much better
from a more modern glass two seater - and getting my backside into a 1970's
German single seater opened up a whole new universe. I did my first XC in the
L13, and 25 miles was exciting. Best to date is 250km in the Cirrus - it teaches
a whole new perspective. Any club that does not have access to, and teach
something beyond local soaring is missing something important. Without something
to graduate to and continue to grow I think I would soon have lost some
motivation - and flown less. So I agree - to grow the sport you have to have
some modern two seaters, at least of the G103, or K21 league. Even in the deep
rural third world you can see the interest disappear when a visitor sees the
antiques. The two glass planes attract - fact.

Just for interest we had no instructors at my club with any interest in XC.
Though there were two private owners to emulate. Neither were particularly
interested in teaching the art.

So - I get to teach myself - and so far so good.

If we can get there we will work on buying a club glass 2 seater in the next
year or so. Probably buy one of the private L13s first though. Not my
prefference but some things are facts, whether we approve or not.

Tilting at clouds is more fun anyway.

[Kirk Stant]

Bruce Greeff > wrote in message >...

> Just for interest we had no instructors at my club with any interest in XC.
> Though there were two private owners to emulate. Neither were particularly
> interested in teaching the art.
>
> So - I get to teach myself - and so far so good.
>
> If we can get there we will work on buying a club glass 2 seater in the next
> year or so. Probably buy one of the private L13s first though. Not my
> prefference but some things are facts, whether we approve or not.
>
> Tilting at clouds is more fun anyway.

Bruce,

That's interesting (about the instructors having no interest in XC),
and I've noticed the same thing here in the US (at commercial
operations, I must add). I also had to teach myself to go XC, and
absolutely think it is what gliding is all about - for me, at least.

Funny, if the military and airlines (who train a lot more pilots than
glider schools do) believed what the "2-33 as the best trainer"
advocates did, they would still be using Cubs, Stearmans, Tiger Moths,
and T-6s to train their pilots. Now, I love those planes (have flown
in all except the Moth) and totally agree that in their day they were
excellent trainers - because they prepared pilots for the planes they
would fly for keeps - big prop taildraggers. But today, pilots moving
to jet, fly-by-wire, glass cockpits planes (that are incredibly easy
to fly by complex to manage) need to start off with trainers that are
similar in the crucial aspects. I just think the same applies to
gliders. For example, energy management (speed control) is more
important than altitude management in modern glass (within limits, of
course!). In a 2-33, it's the opposite: speed management is really
not too critical, but slavish attention to altitude is, if you expect
to get back. So how is this good training for a pilot who wants to
move up to a glass single seater? I've seen several pilots trained on
2-33's have problems converting to glass 2-seaters, and then scaring
themselves in their new (or worse - used) glass single seater - to the
point that they eventually dropped out of the game altogether.

Hey, I know what, lets make the 2-33 the Olympic class! You could put
a camera man/announcer/coxwain in the front seat, and have short
triangle laps around the airfield, in full view of the awed, admiring
(and probably intoxicated) audience!


Kirk

[Kirk Stant]

wrote in message >...
>
> (Lennie the Lurker) wrote in message >...
> >
> Care to brag a little more, oh elittist schmuk? The 2-33 may be
> "agricultural", but it's not where the grop 103SL spends most of it's
> time, in the hangar being worked on because something else is wrong
> with the damn thing. I've made six trips to the airport this year,
> and have seen it fly on one occasion. I'm not impressed. groundhog
> is a good description. Hangar queen also comes to mind easily.
>
>
> Lennie the Lurker


Lennie,

No brag, just fact.

Kirk
Elitist and proud of it

[Jacek Kobiesa]

Nyal Williams > wrote in message >...
> (
>
> Just remember, various critics of lowly gliders: If
> all those horrible, cheap, clunky gliders disappeared,
> YOUR glider would be at the bottom of the list of what's
> good, and the rest of those pilots still flying would
> be kicking dirt in YOUR face.
>
> There is dignity in flying any kind of glider. If
> you don't believe that, then you are attempting to
> use gliding as a social weapon instead of sport or
> recreation. Can you not endure the thought that lowly
> pilots without your status are having as much fun as
> you?

Very well said....flying in a glider is phenomenal. If people are
doing it because of wrong reasons then....

[Tony Verhulst]

>>There is dignity in flying any kind of glider. If
>>you don't believe that, then you are attempting to
>>use gliding as a social weapon instead of sport or
>>recreation.

I completely agree with that. However, do not confuse flying a glider
with training to fly a glider. For the latter there are better gliders
than a 2-33 - and I've got about 300 hours in the back seat of one.

Tony V.

[[email protected]]

3 hour flight yesterday in "Delilah" our 2-33A.

The Buzzards did not seem to care whether we were carbon fiber, glass
or a "tin bird". Still climbs and still soaring.

Anyway you look at it, beats staying on the ground.

Michael Henderson

[Kirk Stant]

Tony Verhulst > wrote in message >...
> >>There is dignity in flying any kind of glider. If
> >>you don't believe that, then you are attempting to
> >>use gliding as a social weapon instead of sport or
> >>recreation.
>
> I completely agree with that. However, do not confuse flying a glider
> with training to fly a glider. For the latter there are better gliders
> than a 2-33 - and I've got about 300 hours in the back seat of one.
>
> Tony V.

Thanks, Tony, that is exactly the point I was trying to make. I have
time in a lot of Schweitzer gliders - 2-22, 2-33, 2-32, 1-23, 1-26,
and 1-34 - and enjoyed flying all of them. I love the 1-23 and 2-32,
in particular.

But I didn't teach my son to drive in a Model T on dirt roads...

Oops, now that will start another war!

Anyway, all you 2-33 fans, get out there and fly the beasts (as I will
this winter giving rides)! Gotta admit, you can't beat flying around
with the window down and your elbow in the breeze on a hot summer day,
with a sweet young thing sitting there just inches in front...

Kirk