![]() |
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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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.... |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|