![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors)
on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the
semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark Fisher wrote:
What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? Gliders are usually certified in the utility category, to which JAR22 says: JAR 22.3 Sailplane categories (a) The Utility Category is limited to sailplanes intended for normal soaring flight. The following aerobatic manoeuvres may be permitted if demonstrated during type certification – (1) spins; (2) lazy eights, chandelles, stall turns and steep turns; (3) positive loops. Now as the K13 has been certified well before JAR, this doesn't answer your question. :-P Stefan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic
category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Double placarding is the way to go here. At next C
of A get the glider weighed and placarded for both semi-aerobatic and non-aerobatic cockpit loads. Wether it is aerobatic or not then depends on the weight of the pilots. Spinning is at 1G, so not necessarily aerobatic, but the recovery may well be - depending on how well it is executed; e.g. pulling G to prevent overspeed. Ray At 10:06 03 November 2005, Don Johnstone wrote: My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bert
With respect, your posting is pedantic and misses the point. Ray At 12:30 03 November 2005, Bert Willing wrote: The definition of aerobatics is not necessarily connected to g-loads. Intentional spins ARE aerobatic maneuvers. -- Bert Willing ASW20 'TW' 'Ray Hart' a écrit dans le message de news: ... Double placarding is the way to go here. At next C of A get the glider weighed and placarded for both semi-aerobatic and non-aerobatic cockpit loads. Wether it is aerobatic or not then depends on the weight of the pilots. Spinning is at 1G, so not necessarily aerobatic, but the recovery may well be - depending on how well it is executed; e.g. pulling G to prevent overspeed. Ray At 10:06 03 November 2005, Don Johnstone wrote: My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you refer to the initial question, it was about deliberately spinning the
glider under a non-aerobatic placard. And that's not possible per definition as a deliberate spin is an aerobatic maneuver. Why I was reacting to your post was your idea that because a spin happens at 1g, it might be non-aerobatic - which is strange, to put it mildly. That I may spin the glider under an aerobatic maneuver seems to be trivial to me, and in regard of the initial question, your posting was fairly pointless... -- Bert Willing ASW20 "TW" "Ray Hart" a écrit dans le message de news: ... Bert With respect, your posting is pedantic and misses the point. Ray At 12:30 03 November 2005, Bert Willing wrote: The definition of aerobatics is not necessarily connected to g-loads. Intentional spins ARE aerobatic maneuvers. -- Bert Willing ASW20 'TW' 'Ray Hart' a écrit dans le message de news: ... Double placarding is the way to go here. At next C of A get the glider weighed and placarded for both semi-aerobatic and non-aerobatic cockpit loads. Wether it is aerobatic or not then depends on the weight of the pilots. Spinning is at 1G, so not necessarily aerobatic, but the recovery may well be - depending on how well it is executed; e.g. pulling G to prevent overspeed. Ray At 10:06 03 November 2005, Don Johnstone wrote: My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Not sure you can do that Ray, the classification is
also on the CoA and I suspect 2 x CoA is not permitted. At 12:12 03 November 2005, Ray Hart wrote: Double placarding is the way to go here. At next C of A get the glider weighed and placarded for both semi-aerobatic and non-aerobatic cockpit loads. Wether it is aerobatic or not then depends on the weight of the pilots. Spinning is at 1G, so not necessarily aerobatic, but the recovery may well be - depending on how well it is executed; e.g. pulling G to prevent overspeed. Ray At 10:06 03 November 2005, Don Johnstone wrote: My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Don Johnstone
writes Not sure you can do that Ray, the classification is also on the CoA and I suspect 2 x CoA is not permitted. Hi Don, I'll have to check our CofA sheets but all of our K13s have dual placarding. I suspect that the semi-aerobatic limits are governed by all up weight and the max/min G loadings whilst the non-aerobatic ones are governed by the CofG limits. Thinking about this I can imagine a CofA that caters for both. As I said earlier, I'll have to check the paperwork. A job for the weekend. Robin At 12:12 03 November 2005, Ray Hart wrote: Double placarding is the way to go here. At next C of A get the glider weighed and placarded for both semi-aerobatic and non-aerobatic cockpit loads. Wether it is aerobatic or not then depends on the weight of the pilots. Spinning is at 1G, so not necessarily aerobatic, but the recovery may well be - depending on how well it is executed; e.g. pulling G to prevent overspeed. Ray At 10:06 03 November 2005, Don Johnstone wrote: My glider was originally certified in the semi aerobatic category. In order to allow an increased all up weight it has been made non-aerobatic and this is the most common reason for a change in category. While a semi aerobatic K13, all new K13s were in this category, can be spun intentionally. If it has been re classified non-aerobatic to increase the cockpit loads it cannot be deliberately spun. At 17:48 02 November 2005, Robin Birch wrote: In our club the answer in no. Spinning, loops and chandelles are in the semi-aerobatic category. If an aircraft is placarded non-aerobatic then it cannot deliberately undertake these. Robin In message , Mark Fisher writes What is the view (especially of instructors and inspectors) on spinning K13s within the non-aerobatic range of the placard? seems to be a matter of some disagreement. It depends I suppose on whether spinning is considered aerobatic. any views? thanks M -- Robin Birch -- Robin Birch |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | January 1st 05 07:29 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | November 1st 04 06:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | December 1st 03 06:27 AM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |