Aarrgh! Not this subject again! Winter must be coming There have
been monsterous threads about this subject but a search sadly yielded
nada.

First, ZZ, what is the "additional risk" as compared to a departure,
other than the fact that the Landing On Tow ("LOT") is losing energy
(altitude + airspeed) and a takeoff is gaining energy? LOT is just
another phase of tow, a descending one, culminating in a touchdown.

Second, other than the incident JS mentions and the double failure Tom
Knauff alludes to, I am not aware of any dual failures. These
statistics do no support LOT's as preparation for such an event.
However, I DO believe they have value and are worth the perceived risk
in terms of confidence building and (heaven forbid) Fun and
Excitement. I think the military calls such events "motivational".
Skylark used to employ this event as a pre-solo wind-up for students.
A sortie consisted of a CFI demo'd touch-and-go followed by a student
touch-and-go and finally a student full stop. The post-flight grin
and swagger exhibited by the student was indeed worth it. Earned
Confidence is a Good Thing, as is Fun and Excitement.

Nothing special is required of the glider pilot and very little of the
Tuggie to LOT: After steering the flight to overhead the airport at
more than 1500 ft agl and after exchanging appropriate signals, the
glider pilot pulls full brakes (no wheel brakes!) and continues to fly
the standard high tow position. The Tuggie needs to keep the
formation in glide range of the field. Who touches down first is not
important. Just land your aircraft. The glider need only flair and
land as usual and just keep the rope taught on the ground using wheel
brake as the tug brakes to a stop. As conducted at Skylark, the
Tuggie maintained an approach of 65 kts for 2-33 and 70 kts for glass
and was shooting for 4-5 kt descent rate by adjusting power. Power
was smoothly and slowly reduced as the ground came up and the Tug
wheel-landed. Short of locking the brakes,wrecking the tug, and/or
loss of glider wheel brakes, it is highly unlikely that the glider
will overrun the Tug. If it occurs, the glider clears to the right
per standard procedure. If the approach becomes unacceptable, the
Tuggies applies full power to initiate the go around and the glider
puts the brakes away as the descent stops. If the glider puts the
brakes away at any point in the approach, the tuggie initiates a go-
around and transitions to a standard climb. I have never observed a
rejected approach.

100's (1000's?) of these have been flown at Skylark, many (most) with
pre-solo pilots flying. The only problem I observed in 20 years of
doing these was when the glider pilot decided to ignore the briefed
procedures and began modulating the dive brakes in a Blanik, thus
destabilizing the approach. Typical field length used was about 3000
ft (of 5K ft available), over a 30 ft (?) obstacle at 4200 ft msl.
Typical density altitudes are probably in the 5000 ft msl range.

I have also observed (as the Tuggie) intentional rope breaks ("IRB")
performed by experts and, as others have mentioned, it is also not a
big deal. I have also experienced attempts by Noobs that were
decidedly unpleasant, to the point of punching them off. My biggest
issue with IRB's is the difficulty in maintaining proficiency; how
many ropes / weak links is an operator going to allow each pilot to
break per year?

LOT's in summary:

* More dangerous than a departure tow? Maybe slightly more - mostly
due to a lack of practice and experience.

* Necessary preparation for a real emergency? Definitely not worth
it.

* Valuable for improving pilot skills and inspiring self-confidence?
Invaluable!

A good tool in the toolbox for cruise descents on X-C tows?
Invaluable!

* Fun and Exciting? Absolutely!