View Full Version : Jonker JS-3 in Sagebrush
Any news on new Jonker JS-3 Landing in Sagebrush, short of runway 30 @ Minden?
kinsell
April 16th 19, 02:02 AM
On 4/14/19 11:23 AM, wrote:
> Any news on new Jonker JS-3 Landing in Sagebrush, short of runway 30 @ Minden?
>
Two of them seen in N Colorado yesterday. Not a scratch on them.
Ok.....landout....no scratches.....what is the point?
Superior pilots making excellent decisions resulting in successful results.
R
Steve Koerner
April 16th 19, 05:27 AM
I know the pilot well and have had a lot of discussion with him about this. It turns out that this was the pilot's maiden flight in the JS3 and it turns out that the pilot has a bit of a thick brain and hadn't had enough opportunity to sit in the airplane and get familiar with the controls before setting sail.
After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position.
By the time the poor SOB got to the base turn position he realized he was a bit lower than he expected and attributed that to sink. Bringing the turn around, he concluded that he was still in some pretty nasty sink. His split second decision was to get the airplane down on the deck for the dual purpose of getting into ground effect and secondly to get under the sink (sink always has to end at ground level when the ground is itself level). The intention was to attack the perimeter fence fast so as to be able to pop over it then on to runway 30. Plan C would be to land before the fence in the sagebrush if there wasn't positively enough energy to get over the fence.
As you already know from the original poster, plan C, landing before the fence was selected. Not surprisingly, speeding up with partially deployed air brakes caused energy to bleed all the more surely and quickly.
At touchdown a ground loop ensued that partly happened on top of the dense 4 foot high brush.
There's now a little bit of fix-it to be done on this beautiful new glider; nothing big enough to involve insurance companies.
When things go wrong there's takeaways... For JS3 flying, one must put eyeballs on the divebrake lever and its detents. It's not just push forward and lock anymore. We've learned that the hard way.
The other takeaway relates to adequate familiarizing with a new type. What I've done in the past with new gliders is to take them home to my workshop and sit in them for hours just playing with the controls and the instruments to make sure that I was totally familiar before taking flight for the first time. That was impractical this time. The program letter specifically required first flight at Minden and we were especially time squeezed because there were two of us who'd traveled long distance to get to Minden to pick up gliders and we needed to share one set of probes between two gliders (my JS3 arrived without probes); I was nominated to go first being the borrower in this instance.
Of course, that's all just sort of excuses. None of that should really have been a problem. I was properly briefed on the dive brake detents by a knowledgeable instructor and signed off accordingly. That little difference in the dive brake control design, though, just wasn't sufficiently engrained in this pilot's brain quite yet.
It's unusual to accidentally land out on your maiden flight with a brand new airplane. I'm feeling like a dodo for doing so and sad to have hurt my new bird.
Another big thank you to Mike and Tim and to Jim Lee for helping with my retrieve in that nasty sage brush.
As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open dive brakes is really a good idea. I'll think about that some more. I may decide to remove the detents. I suspect that there are other variations of the problem that I just had. It would be especially embarrassing if something like this happened to me again.
On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 10:27:40 PM UTC-6, Steve Koerner wrote:
> I know the pilot well and have had a lot of discussion with him about this. It turns out that this was the pilot's maiden flight in the JS3 and it turns out that the pilot has a bit of a thick brain and hadn't had enough opportunity to sit in the airplane and get familiar with the controls before setting sail.
>
> After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position..
>
> By the time the poor SOB got to the base turn position he realized he was a bit lower than he expected and attributed that to sink. Bringing the turn around, he concluded that he was still in some pretty nasty sink. His split second decision was to get the airplane down on the deck for the dual purpose of getting into ground effect and secondly to get under the sink (sink always has to end at ground level when the ground is itself level). The intention was to attack the perimeter fence fast so as to be able to pop over it then on to runway 30. Plan C would be to land before the fence in the sagebrush if there wasn't positively enough energy to get over the fence.
>
> As you already know from the original poster, plan C, landing before the fence was selected. Not surprisingly, speeding up with partially deployed air brakes caused energy to bleed all the more surely and quickly.
>
> At touchdown a ground loop ensued that partly happened on top of the dense 4 foot high brush.
>
> There's now a little bit of fix-it to be done on this beautiful new glider; nothing big enough to involve insurance companies.
>
> When things go wrong there's takeaways... For JS3 flying, one must put eyeballs on the divebrake lever and its detents. It's not just push forward and lock anymore. We've learned that the hard way.
>
> The other takeaway relates to adequate familiarizing with a new type. What I've done in the past with new gliders is to take them home to my workshop and sit in them for hours just playing with the controls and the instruments to make sure that I was totally familiar before taking flight for the first time. That was impractical this time. The program letter specifically required first flight at Minden and we were especially time squeezed because there were two of us who'd traveled long distance to get to Minden to pick up gliders and we needed to share one set of probes between two gliders (my JS3 arrived without probes); I was nominated to go first being the borrower in this instance.
>
> Of course, that's all just sort of excuses. None of that should really have been a problem. I was properly briefed on the dive brake detents by a knowledgeable instructor and signed off accordingly. That little difference in the dive brake control design, though, just wasn't sufficiently engrained in this pilot's brain quite yet.
>
> It's unusual to accidentally land out on your maiden flight with a brand new airplane. I'm feeling like a dodo for doing so and sad to have hurt my new bird.
>
> Another big thank you to Mike and Tim and to Jim Lee for helping with my retrieve in that nasty sage brush.
>
> As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open dive brakes is really a good idea. I'll think about that some more. I may decide to remove the detents. I suspect that there are other variations of the problem that I just had. It would be especially embarrassing if something like this happened to me again.
Well done Steve. Confession is good for the soul or so I'm told. I still have my old sack cloth and a pot of ashes if you feel the need for them. Glad you are OK and the JS just a bit dinged.
Bill Hill
Jonathan St. Cloud
April 16th 19, 01:28 PM
Thank you for sharing, glad the pilot is Okay. Glad the glider is not too badly damaged either.
BobW
April 16th 19, 01:30 PM
On 4/15/2019 10:55 PM, wrote:
> On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 10:27:40 PM UTC-6, Steve Koerner wrote:
>> I know the pilot well and have had a lot of discussion with him about
>> this.
<Snip...>
>> As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open dive
>> brakes is really a good idea. I'll think about that some more. I may
>> decide to remove the detents. I suspect that there are other variations
>> of the problem that I just had. It would be especially embarrassing if
>> something like this happened to me again.
>
> Well done Steve. Confession is good for the soul or so I'm told. I still
> have my old sack cloth and a pot of ashes if you feel the need for them.
> Glad you are OK and the JS just a bit dinged.
>
> Bill Hill
+1 on the "Well done..." salvaging a foot shot without physical injury to
yourself, and minimal injury to your new bird.
And, THANK YOU! for sharing the details and assessment with 'the gliding
world' so quickly and forthrightly. Having recently absorbed a JS-3 Flight
Manual (future crewdog) I'd noted the dive brakes' multiple detents without
giving further thought regarding in-flight pros/cons/potentialities.
Good old Murphy - a powerful guy...
Bob W.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Thank you. You are helping our community become safer.
I have a newly-installed “Piggott Hook” on my ASH-26E, different function, but it is a physical change to the dive brake mechanism with added blockages. I am thinking over the pilot error modes as a result of your report.
Jim J6
Dave Nadler
April 16th 19, 02:48 PM
On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 12:27:40 AM UTC-4, Steve Koerner wrote:
> As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open dive
> brakes is really a good idea.
Steve first thanks for sharing this and glad you're OK and bird
only slightly dinged.
Detent on spoiler is an oft-requested feature for many gliders and
sometimes retrofitted. In common cases where you want to fly onto
the ground and dump flaps, no detent on spoiler causes bounding
back into the air when you take hand of spoiler to dump flaps.
Please do not ask (remind) me how I know.
Thanks again and speedy repair,
Best Regards, Dave
Robin Clark
April 16th 19, 03:01 PM
OK. I'll fess up.
On my first landing in the 29 my hand somehow went from the spoilers to the flaps. I tried to extend the glide by closing the spoilers, but what I did was go into flaps negative. And the ship started falling out of the sky. I figured it out and touched down where I intended, but only because I had 1,000 feet of grass to float over. If there had been trees ...
Robin
Maybe add a red light on the panel when the brakes are unlocked? If you have an UC warning buzzer, there will already be a microswitch on the airbrakes.
Not the first bird in the sagebrush with spoilers out at Minden..........we got a 20B that was totaled there. Spoilers not locked and sucked open on takeoff! Pilot never did figure it out and put it in the sagebrush, shortly after release. I have made it routine to peek over my shoulder at 300 feet just to insure they are closed. Same on landing when I pull them, just to make sure they both are operating after a DG driver had only one spoiler deploy at Truckee, years ago. Mustle-memory is REAL, it became normal to shove the stick forward, after touchdown in the Genesis-2 in order to get the nose-wheel on the pavement while aiming straight down the runway. After 1000 hours of doing this, I flew an LS3a..........yep, I touched the nose on the pavement because muscle memory told me to shove the stick forward after touchdown. OK, lesson learned, right? Nope, I did it a second time!
The older we get, the more vigilant we must become!
JJ
PS, I’m thinking spoiler detent’s may be just asking for trouble? Better to keep your hand on the spoiler handle as long as you want them and still need them?
Michael Opitz
April 16th 19, 05:48 PM
At 04:27 16 April 2019, Steve Koerner wrote:
>I know the pilot well and have had a lot of discussion with him
about
>this.=
> It turns out that this was the pilot's maiden flight in the JS3 and
it
>tu=
>rns out that the pilot has a bit of a thick brain and hadn't had
enough
>opp=
>ortunity to sit in the airplane and get familiar with the controls
before
>s=
>etting sail. =20
>
>After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved.
On
>downwind,=
> the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude
starting
>=
>from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on
downwind the
>bra=
>kes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly.
The JS3
>ha=
>s several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial
>positions=
> whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked
position.
>=
>=20
>
>By the time the poor SOB got to the base turn position he realized
he was
>a=
> bit lower than he expected and attributed that to sink. Bringing
the
>turn=
> around, he concluded that he was still in some pretty nasty sink.
His
>spl=
>it second decision was to get the airplane down on the deck for the
dual
>pu=
>rpose of getting into ground effect and secondly to get under the
sink
>(sin=
>k always has to end at ground level when the ground is itself
level). The
>i=
>ntention was to attack the perimeter fence fast so as to be able to
pop
>ove=
>r it then on to runway 30. Plan C would be to land before the fence
in the
>=
>sagebrush if there wasn't positively enough energy to get over the
fence.
>
>As you already know from the original poster, plan C, landing
before the
>fe=
>nce was selected. Not surprisingly, speeding up with partially
deployed
>ai=
>r brakes caused energy to bleed all the more surely and quickly.
>
>At touchdown a ground loop ensued that partly happened on top of
the dense
>=
>4 foot high brush. =20
>
>There's now a little bit of fix-it to be done on this beautiful new
>glider;=
> nothing big enough to involve insurance companies.
>
>When things go wrong there's takeaways... For JS3 flying, one
must put
>eye=
>balls on the divebrake lever and its detents. It's not just push
forward
>a=
>nd lock anymore. We've learned that the hard way. =20
>
>The other takeaway relates to adequate familiarizing with a new
type. What
>=
>I've done in the past with new gliders is to take them home to my
workshop
>=
>and sit in them for hours just playing with the controls and the
>instrument=
>s to make sure that I was totally familiar before taking flight for
the
>fir=
>st time. That was impractical this time. The program letter
specifically
>r=
>equired first flight at Minden and we were especially time squeezed
>because=
> there were two of us who'd traveled long distance to get to
Minden to
>pick=
> up gliders and we needed to share one set of probes between two
gliders
>(m=
>y JS3 arrived without probes); I was nominated to go first being
the
>borrow=
>er in this instance. =20
>
>Of course, that's all just sort of excuses. None of that should really
>have=
> been a problem. I was properly briefed on the dive brake detents
by a
>know=
>ledgeable instructor and signed off accordingly. That little
difference
>in=
> the dive brake control design, though, just wasn't sufficiently
engrained
>=
>in this pilot's brain quite yet.
>
>It's unusual to accidentally land out on your maiden flight with a
brand
>ne=
>w airplane. I'm feeling like a dodo for doing so and sad to have
hurt my
>n=
>ew bird.
>
>Another big thank you to Mike and Tim and to Jim Lee for helping
with my
>re=
>trieve in that nasty sage brush. =20
>
>As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open
dive
>bra=
>kes is really a good idea. I'll think about that some more. I may
decide
>t=
>o remove the detents. I suspect that there are other variations of
the
>pro=
>blem that I just had. It would be especially embarrassing if
something
>lik=
>e this happened to me again.
>
>
Steve,
This post took a lot of courage to write. Thank you for your brutally
honest analysis. Hopefully, the post will have been worth it, if it
prevents just one other new JS-3 pilot from making the same error
in the future. Best wishes for quick repairs.
RO
> Steve,
>
> This post took a lot of courage to write. Thank you for your brutally
> honest analysis. Hopefully, the post will have been worth it, if it
> prevents just one other new JS-3 pilot from making the same error
> in the future. Best wishes for quick repairs.
>
> RO
I agree. For all of our talk about sharing mistakes with our peers, from experience I know it's tough to 'fess up. Stuff happens. New situations present themselves, even if you've been flying for 50+ years. And if the latter is true, you're older and perhaps not quite as quick to assess and take the proper action. Kudos for the detailed account, which could save someone else from a similar or even more dangerous situation.
Chip Bearden
JB
JS[_5_]
April 16th 19, 06:21 PM
Thanks for that detail, Steve.
What happened seems to me typical of a safety device causing problems that we frequently see these days. For example, banging your head more often while wearing a hard hat (safety helmet), since it limits peripheral vision while making you taller.
I once aborted an ASH26E takeoff because it wasn't climbing.
Looking at the wing showed some orange things.
"Hmmm, what idiot left them open? Not much runway left, think I'll stop."
JJ, doing an engine run-up requires wheel brake, back stick and throttle, three hands? Perhaps this is one reason for the detents.
Jim
Wyll Surf Air
April 16th 19, 06:45 PM
"After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position. "
My question is why was there need to put the dive brakes away in the first place? From my understanding and initial training, the ideal way to fly a pattern is with the dive brakes halfway deployed. Obviously, there will be adjustments to the dive brakes to account for lift, sink, wind.... but at least partial dive brakes should be used throughout the pattern as to make the glide angle in the pattern steep enough to account for the previously mentioned factors. If this is the case then why was there need to put away the brakes on downwind?
Wyll Surf Air
April 16th 19, 06:49 PM
"After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position. "
My question is why was there need to put the dive brakes away in the first place? From my understanding and initial training, the ideal way to fly a pattern is with the dive brakes halfway deployed. Obviously, there will be adjustments to the dive brakes to account for lift, sink, wind.... but at least partial dive brakes should be used throughout the pattern as to make the glide angle in the pattern steep enough to account for the previously mentioned factors. If this is the case then why was there need to put away the brakes on downwind? Is this differences in training, lack of foresight, or just habit?
Not trying to critique the pilot just trying to understand the scenario so I can avoid doing a similar thing.
Ernst
April 16th 19, 08:53 PM
On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 11:27:40 PM UTC-5, Steve Koerner wrote:
> As a postscript, I'm not so sure that having detent stops for open dive brakes is really a good idea. I'll think about that some more. I may decide to remove the detents. I suspect that there are other variations of the problem that I just had. It would be especially embarrassing if something like this happened to me again.
Thanks, Steve, for your post.
Keep the detents.
I assume this is the Piggott hook that the other thread is discussing.
One day you will be distracted from your routine and you'll take off with the spoilers closed, but not locked, like that 20B that ended in the same Sage brush.
Ernst
(DG-800 with Piggott hook)
Jim,
So, spoiler detent’s were added in order to set the brakes because the pilot needed both hands elsewhere during run up! Then the detent’s resulted in unwanted spoilers on final? How about figuring out another way to set that wheel brakes? I’ve been watching Air Disasters on TV and can’t believe all the crashes caused by some computer geek adding some unnecessary feature. They covered an accident the other night where the copilot accidentally hit the Go-Around button and ended up crashing on the runway! Go-Around Button? The computer geek decided a pilot needed help shoving in the power and pulling the nose up? They crashed a 747 at SFO because of auto throttle didn’t shove in the needed power because the ILS wasn’t working Probably invented by the same Go-Around geek previously mentioned. Let’s not even mention the 737 fly by wire fiasco! I’m to the point that I wouldn’t get on a bird that doesn’t have the stick and rudder connected directly to the controls! I saw this crap coming 50 years ago in the F-111. If the bomb-aim’er made a cross-hair correction, the computer would only accept half his correction! The operator was only one input along with inertial, Doppler, etc. Now we have progressed to the point the operator may have no input at all. The computer thinks were stalling and by god the nose is getting shoved over, period!
Good to get that off my chest, I feel much better now!
JJ
Peter Deane[_2_]
April 16th 19, 09:28 PM
JJ - as explained to me by Uys, the idea of the spoiler detent is so that you can secure spoilers open on the landing roll so you dont have to let spoilers close while changing to negative flaps with the same hand and potentially ballooning.
They arent really intended for 'select and leave' in the air - which I would not recommend anyway. The spoilers are adjustable in the normal way, the pilot has the option of setting them in a detente or not.
Just wanted to clear up this little red herring on how they are intended to be used, and how they actually work.
I did not experience any issue with the spoiler detent use, and flew my test flight pattern with spoilers adjusted in the normal way.
2T
Dave Nadler
April 16th 19, 09:42 PM
On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 4:28:36 PM UTC-4, Peter Deane wrote:
> JJ - as explained to me by Uys, the idea of the spoiler detent is so that
> you can secure spoilers open on the landing roll so you dont have to let
> spoilers close while changing to negative flaps with the same hand and
> potentially ballooning.
Grrr... as I explained above...
Trust me JJ, it is a really helpful feature.
Paul Agnew
April 16th 19, 11:37 PM
That explains why you asked me to hold the spoilers extended after landing as we rolled out when I flew with you in your Arcus.
Paul A.
Tony[_5_]
April 16th 19, 11:50 PM
Ive been lucky enough to make four JS-3 flights now.
On my last flight I found after crossing the finish line and entering downwind to land that my right elbow had bumped the water dump valve and it had sprung closed. Having the airbrakes detent was darn convenient to hold the brakes in place momentarily so I could re-open the dump valve, all while keeping my right hand on the stick.
The flight manual suggested a medium flap setting on downwind and going to landing flap on final. Being able to hold the airbrakes in place while switching between airbrakes and flap control is nice.
I will also note that so far I have come no where close to using full airbrake on this glider. The airbrakes are quite powerful.
As a side note - so far I have only flown in 15 meter configuration
Sounds like what we really need is Auto Flaps, or Auto Spoiler that reads the VASI,s and adjusts the spoilers as required, then deploys up-flaps as soon the squat switch says your down. That way the pilot is free to pick lint balls out of his naval during approach!
:>) JJ
Tony[_5_]
April 17th 19, 12:50 AM
The duckhawk had that.
jfitch
April 17th 19, 02:52 AM
On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 4:16:55 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Sounds like what we really need is Auto Flaps, or Auto Spoiler that reads the VASI,s and adjusts the spoilers as required, then deploys up-flaps as soon the squat switch says your down. That way the pilot is free to pick lint balls out of his naval during approach!
> :>) JJ
Why not spoilers designed so that they just stay where you put them? I've only flown one glider that did that reliably, my PIK 20D. The spoilers did not snatch on opening, there was no friction or drag in the system, and they simply stayed where ever you left them. Is that a lost art? The PIK 20 isn't new tech, certainly. The only place where they wouldn't stay is full on, if you took your hand away they would drop to about 2/3.
Dave Nadler
April 17th 19, 03:56 AM
On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 6:37:51 PM UTC-4, Paul Agnew wrote:
> That explains why you asked me to hold the spoilers extended after landing
> as we rolled out when I flew with you in your Arcus.
Yup.
Mike the Strike
April 17th 19, 05:48 AM
I was lectured by an instructor years ago that accidents are more likely if you combine unusual activities, such as flying an unfamiliar glider at a field you’re also not familiar with. I very nearly had a similar landing to Steve’s a year ago - in an unfamiliar glider at a new field, although it was rotor that nearly got me rather than open brakes.
I also wonder if many of us use lower pattern altitudes than we should. Certainly for US pilots, likely trained on Gollywompers with their useless spoilers, low patterns seem the norm. I was trained (by Germans) to be at least 500 feet on base leg and there are those who advocate even more - say 700 feet. I know at our club that we’ve had more gliders hit the fence or bushes at the threshold than have ever overrun the other end.
Lately, I’ve been playing with the high approach - 700 feet followed by a descent at 70+ knots with full spoilers. This approach works well in most modern ships and gives you more height and energy to cope with problems in the pattern.
Anyway, hopefully Steve now has the right glider to crack that elusive Arizona 1000 km flight!
Mike
George Haeh
April 17th 19, 06:45 AM
For disabled pilots our club Grob has hand controls for the rudder and detents on the spoilers to keep them where wanted while the two available hands look after stick and rudder.
The detents remain even when the rudder hand control is removed.
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
April 20th 19, 01:02 AM
wrote on 4/16/2019 4:16 PM:
> Sounds like what we really need is Auto Flaps, or Auto Spoiler that reads the VASI,s and adjusts the spoilers as required, then deploys up-flaps as soon the squat switch says your down. That way the pilot is free to pick lint balls out of his naval during approach!
> :>) JJ
I always let go of the spoilers on my ASH 26 E after touching down to dump the
flaps, then move my hand back to the spoilers. I've never noticed spoilers
closing, and the handle seems to be where I left it. My ASW 20 C acted the same
way, so I thought all gliders were like that.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Dave Nadler
April 20th 19, 05:23 PM
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 8:02:17 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> ...I thought all gliders were like that.
Absolutely not...
waremark
April 21st 19, 12:44 AM
Why dump the flaps in the ASH 26 which raises the ailerons in landing flap to maintain aileron control until stopped? In my ASH 26 I always left the flaps in L until stopped whereas in my Arcus I change to negative to maintain aileron control until stopped. The spoilers lower when I let go.
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
April 23rd 19, 12:21 AM
waremark wrote on 4/20/2019 4:44 PM:
> Why dump the flaps in the ASH 26 which raises the ailerons in landing flap to maintain aileron control until stopped? In my ASH 26 I always left the flaps in L until stopped whereas in my Arcus I change to negative to maintain aileron control until stopped. The spoilers lower when I let go.
>
I've tried what you do, and don't like it as much as moving to flap 2. I want to
reduce of the wing lift (reduce gust sensitivity) and put weight on the tail
wheel (better steering in a cross wind). Aileron control is excellent in flap 2
(first negative flap setting), very good even in 3 (neutral).
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/Guide-to-transponders-in-sailplanes-2014A.pdf
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
April 23rd 19, 12:29 AM
Wyll Surf Air wrote on 4/16/2019 10:49 AM:
> "After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position. "
>
> My question is why was there need to put the dive brakes away in the first place? From my understanding and initial training, the ideal way to fly a pattern is with the dive brakes halfway deployed. Obviously, there will be adjustments to the dive brakes to account for lift, sink, wind.... but at least partial dive brakes should be used throughout the pattern as to make the glide angle in the pattern steep enough to account for the previously mentioned factors. If this is the case then why was there need to put away the brakes on downwind? Is this differences in training, lack of foresight, or just habit?
>
> Not trying to critique the pilot just trying to understand the scenario so I can avoid doing a similar thing.
I rarely use the brakes before I turn final. That way, my turns to base and final
are higher than using brakes all the way through the pattern. Perhaps you mean use
brakes when you past the end of the runway, a few seconds before turning base?
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/Guide-to-transponders-in-sailplanes-2014A.pdf
On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 1:49:53 PM UTC-4, Wyll Surf Air wrote:
> "After 16 years flying the ASW-27, muscle memory was involved. On downwind, the dive brakes were used to adjust appropriate pattern altitude starting from a high pattern entry from overhead, then somewhere on downwind the brakes were lastly put away. But, apparently not put away properly. The JS3 has several detent stops for holding the dive brake open at partial positions whereas the ASW-27 has only one detent at the closed and locked position. "
>
> My question is why was there need to put the dive brakes away in the first place? From my understanding and initial training, the ideal way to fly a pattern is with the dive brakes halfway deployed. Obviously, there will be adjustments to the dive brakes to account for lift, sink, wind.... but at least partial dive brakes should be used throughout the pattern as to make the glide angle in the pattern steep enough to account for the previously mentioned factors. If this is the case then why was there need to put away the brakes on downwind? Is this differences in training, lack of foresight, or just habit?
>
> Not trying to critique the pilot just trying to understand the scenario so I can avoid doing a similar thing.
The complication comes when you want to change flap settings and you have the brakes out. In many gliders, if you let go of the spoiler handle to change from thermal flap to landing flap, the airbrakes suck full open. If you don't notice this things start to go wrong quickly.
Some manuals say to select landing flap only when you have the field made so likely on final you might have to close the brakes and then select landing flap.
It is easy to run out of hands.
UH
Maybe the airbrake lever detents should be shaped so that unintentional extension is impossible, while closing may still be performed simply by pushing the lever forwards. Think saw-tooth dents in the appropriate direction.
If they're cut with this shape, I'd take a metal file to them.
Aldo Cernezzi
www.voloavela.it
Il giorno martedì 23 aprile 2019 14:06:14 UTC+2, ha scritto:
> Maybe the airbrake lever detents should be shaped so that unintentional extension is impossible, while closing may still be performed simply by pushing the lever forwards. Think saw-tooth dents in the appropriate direction.
>
> If they aren't cut with this shape, I'd take a metal file to them.
>
> Aldo Cernezzi
> www.voloavela.it
Maybe the airbrake lever detents should be shaped so that unintentional extension is impossible, while closing may still be performed simply by pushing the lever forwards. Think saw-tooth dents in the appropriate direction.
If they aren't cut with this shape, I'd take a metal file to them.
Aldo Cernezzi
www.voloavela.it
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.