Radio advice - newbie

Soaring in the US is a bit different (more basic?) than in Europe. A
lot of gliding is done at commercial operations, which usually do not
bother to install radios (expense, battery maintenance, etc). Since
this kind of flying is "show up, fly for an hour, go home", there is
little sense of "ownership" in the gliders (which are often basic
gliders like 2-33s or 1-26s, or various Blaniks) so they are not taken
care of very well. There are exceptions, of course, usually where
higher performance gliders are available. As far as US clubs, they
also tend to be a lot more basic than European ones (sorry, I don't
have any experience with SA/Oz/NZ so won't comment on them), so while
radios are more common they are not universal. Private ships,
however, are almost all equipped with radios - required for contests,
anyway.

When I fly commercial rides at the local glider operation, I carry a
handheld, for all the obvious reasons mentioned by others, since only
two of the 10 gliders available for rent or rides has a working radio
- both single seaters. My own glider has a radio installed, as do all
those of my gliding friends.

Performance with a handheld is actually pretty good, especially from a
glass ship. In a metal trainer, it helps to have an outside antenna.
It always helps to hook up to a nice big battery. Then add a headset
and push to talk velcroed to the stick - more wires than an astronaut!
But better than no radio.

We don't cloud fly much here (I know of only one pilot who does - in
Florida), and controlled airspace is not really a problem - yet - so a
pilot can get by for a long time never having to talk on the radio;
and a lot do exactly that! I've even heard some express their opinion
that they don't have a radio because they think a radio is unsafe in a
glider - too distracting. As a result of lack of formal training in
their correct use, radios are not used very well - way too much
chatter and poor radio calls when needed (in the pattern, for
example). Of course, this is not only a glider problem - if anything
power pilots are worse!

Oddly, most US pilots do not feel the need for a radio when
aerotowing, but think it is necessary when winch launching - just the
opposite of my experience.

Cheers,

Kirk
66

Stefan wrote:
Mark James Boyd wrote:

I suspect gliding is much
more popular because petrol is so expensive and in some
countries one must get a scheduled "slot" to fly a plane.

I am deeply shocked to read this statement on r.a.s.! Soaring is popular
here because it's a challenge and it's fun, while flying straight and
level with the help of a fuel to noise converter is just plain boring.


Being cheaper and less hassle has nothing to do with it? C'mon...

I think here in the US lack of "hassle factor" is a big motivation.
Here, we've seen the ultralight and hang gliding community
boom while the glider population is decreasing. Some people
(including me and Dennis Wright, our SSA chief) think this is
because ultralights and hang gliders have practically a "0"
hassle factor (no checkride, no signoffs, no minimum distance
flown from people, no tail numbers, no radio skill, etc.).

http://www.nickselby.com/articles/av...flyeurope.html
seems to indicate petrol and rentals and taxes and
landing fees and in some cases (Germany) scheduled slots
are required for power pilots. I would expect that some
potential power pilots are glider pilots in Germany because of less
expense and hassle. A winch launch and then a free landing in
an open field sounds better than lots of $$$$ and scheduling.

Don't the flight levels start at 6000 in some places too?
Do you need radios for this?

You're confusing flight levels with controlled airspace. Maybe it's the
same in USA, but not here.

You are correct that I was mixing terminology. I should have
simply asked "is there some altitude above which radios are
required overseas?" and said "in the US, radios are only legally
required above FL180 (about 18,000 feet), and also
near busy airports (which are
sparse in many parts of soaring country)."

I think the definition of "controlled airspace" is best avoided,
since in the US it doesn't directly concern radios ("E" airspace,
for example).


Perhaps someone could tell us what radio requirements

All our glider have radio. Not because it's required, but because it's
a) convenient
b) safe (on tow as well as on approach)
c) allows team flying
d) is required for cloud flying

That it allows to enter controlled airspace is a nice side effect.


AHA! One huge difference is that cloud flying is more
common in some places internationally. It is quite uncommon
here in the US.

Because of safety and convenience and team flying, as well as
crew coordination and retrieves, I'd agree with the previous
post that 95% of private and X-country capable gliders have
radios installed.

I think the main reason they aren't in many low-performance
training gliders in the US is to keep them cheap, cheap, cheap.
If it's not REQUIRED, it's an avoidable expense...

Mark James Boyd wrote:

Being cheaper and less hassle has nothing to do with it? C'mon...
....
I would expect that some
potential power pilots are glider pilots in Germany because of less
expense and hassle. A winch launch and then a free landing in
an open field sounds better than lots of $$$$ and scheduling.

Actually, it's the other way round. Gliding is *much* more hassle than
flying noisemakers. Nevertheless, many pilots in our club have had a
power license, too. Most of them let it expire and fly gliders only,
despite the hassle. It's simply more fun.

You're correct in one point: Power flying is expensive in Europe, and
soaring is cheaper. But then, we don't want to occupy foreign countries
to secure a cheap oil supply, and Kyoto means something to us.

You are correct that I was mixing terminology. I should have
simply asked "is there some altitude above which radios are
required overseas?"

Depends on the country. In my region, ist's 10'000 ft AMSL over flat
land and 15'000 ft AMSL or 2000 ft AGL (whichever is higher) over the
mountains. This is enough except if you want to enter wave, which
doesn't happen too often.

I think the definition of "controlled airspace" is best avoided,
since in the US it doesn't directly concern radios ("E" airspace,
for example).

Got me!

Stefan

Mark James Boyd wrote:

I think here in the US lack of "hassle factor" is a big motivation.
Here, we've seen the ultralight and hang gliding community
boom while the glider population is decreasing. Some people
(including me and Dennis Wright, our SSA chief) think this is
because ultralights and hang gliders have practically a "0"
hassle factor (no checkride, no signoffs, no minimum distance
flown from people, no tail numbers, no radio skill, etc.).

It's an enduring myth among sailplane pilots that hang gliding has a low
hassle factor. I've talked to a number of former hang glider pilots who
are now sailplane pilots, and they say it is often the reverse. The
reasons will vary from place to place, but here are few from the last
one I talked to:

-get to hang glider site: no wind, no fly.
-ruin a car/truck every four years driving over logging roads to site
-every cross country flight is a retrieve
-glider depreciates quickly
-leave home early, get home after dinner, wife grumpy
-very tiring to fly

Now he's flying a Ka-6:
-leave home after lunch, home by dinner, wife ecstatic
-easy drive to airport on paved roads; car still good
-hugely better performance
-long cross-country flights end back at airport
-glider worth more now than when he bought it
-relaxing to fly

So, plenty of hassles, but different ones.

And, unfortunately, the hang gliding community, at least in the US, is
not growing either.
--
-----
change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Would someone please define cloud flying? I've seen it mentioned in passing
but in four books on gliding so far I have not seen a definition or
description.

Eric Greenwell wrote:

It's an enduring myth among sailplane pilots that hang gliding has a low
hassle factor. I've talked to a number of former hang glider pilots who
are now sailplane pilots, and they say it is often the reverse. The
reasons will vary from place to place, but here are few from the last
one I talked to:

-get to hang glider site: no wind, no fly.
-ruin a car/truck every four years driving over logging roads to site
-every cross country flight is a retrieve
-glider depreciates quickly
-leave home early, get home after dinner, wife grumpy
-very tiring to fly


One of my three partners in a plane got started flying in a hang
glider when he was 15. He bought it for $50. He'd haul it
up a hill and fly down a few feet off the ground. One day
his buddies egged him into taking it up a big hill with
wind going up it. He took a few steps, and bingo, he was up
for about a minute, and landed next to his
house. He took it up a big hang gliding hill one time
and the locals said "where's your battens?" He said
"what are those?" so they laughed him off the hill...

The same guy recently got me up in his ultralight. Incredible
view, super low stall speed, VERY few restrictions in part
103. We flew right over the beach and waved at people.
The engine was started with a tug of a rope.
To be legal to carry passengers, one must become
an ultralight "basic flight instructor," which
involves no $90 written test and no $350 FAA flight test.
The "test" is given by someone who is already a BFI, and
has also been doing it more than 6 months and also has a
8-hour seminar.

As I get older, the flight reviews, medicals, six approaches,
3 landings at night in a multi-engine taildragger, etc. seem
more and more of a hassle. As I glance at the glider PTS and notice
dozens of references including thousands of pages of detail,
it occurs to me that being able to explain the "mixing ratio"
may be required by my examiner, but certainly falls into
the category that I would consider "obscure." In essence
it is intimidating, even though it will be my 11th FAA
checkride.

I researched heavily to find two aero clubs in California with
a very low "hassle factor" and minimum expense. But flying
gliders and even very simple power planes is still more daunting
in terms of sheer mass of requirements than that little
Quicksilver Sprint MXII. And I have made great efforts to
recruit friends to soaring, with little success mostly due
to the "intimidation factor" of the ferocious checkride.

I was truly heartened to see Dennis Wright's column where
he echoed these same concerns (December "Soaring"). This is
why I hope Sport Pilot goes through. I'd like to see
something that makes piloting more available to the
folks who want to have fun.

In article ,
Roger Worden wrote:
Would someone please define cloud flying? I've seen it mentioned in passing
but in four books on gliding so far I have not seen a definition or
description.



I think it just means flying through clouds or fog. In the
US this is mostly (although not exactly) the same as flying
in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC).

Roger Worden wrote:

Would someone please define cloud flying?

Flying within a cloud. Allowed with gliders in some countries, forbidden
in others. If allowed, regulated differently in every country. More
popular in some countries than in others. Some pilots think it's fun,
some don't.

In the times of wood an fabric, the additional height was important to
enhance glide range. With today's material, this is very seldom an issue
anymore. Today it's mostly done just for the fun of it.

Stefan

I understand that in most European countries, glider flying in cloud is
prohibited (though occasionally done by some lawbreakers, I have heard).
I have seen references to it occasionally in the USA so presumably it is
legal there. In the UK it is permitted, outside controlled airspace.
Most often this means climbing not just up to the base of a cumulus
cloud which has been formed by a thermal, but continuing on into the
cloud to get higher. It is sometimes possible to achieve cross country
flights by this means which are difficult or impossible if each thermal
has to be left at or lower than cloud base.
Having climbed above cloudbase, if one comes out of the side of the
cloud, another may be in the way en route, and one option is then to fly
through it rather than deviate round it.

Wave flying is another scenario - cloud may form around the glider or in
front (up wind) of it and so flight through it becomes unavoidable.

Cloud flying is potentially dangerous and should only be attempted after
suitable training, and with appropriate instruments. It is said that the
inexperienced can lose attitude and control in as little as 45 seconds.
Those who have not experienced the disorientation do not believe it can
happen that quickly, and a few have carried their disbelief into
practice with fatal results. Loss of control almost always means
entering a spiral dive, pulling high g and gaining speed. In modern
gliders, acceleration can be very rapid, the brakes or spoilers are
often not speed-limiting, and the wings come off. The last fatal gliding
accident of this sort in the UK was to one 10,000-hour (IIRC) pilot with
some experience of cloud flying a few years ago - the barograph trace
showed the glider broke up at about 10,000 feet at high speed, in a
modified Slingsby Vega with new tips.

Chris N.

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:3fd82ec7$1@darkstar...

The same guy recently got me up in his ultralight. Incredible
view, super low stall speed, VERY few restrictions in part
103. We flew right over the beach and waved at people.
The engine was started with a tug of a rope.
To be legal to carry passengers, one must become
an ultralight "basic flight instructor," which
involves no $90 written test and no $350 FAA flight test.
The "test" is given by someone who is already a BFI, and
has also been doing it more than 6 months and also has a
8-hour seminar.

As I get older, the flight reviews, medicals, six approaches,
3 landings at night in a multi-engine taildragger, etc. seem
more and more of a hassle. As I glance at the glider PTS and notice
dozens of references including thousands of pages of detail,
it occurs to me that being able to explain the "mixing ratio"
may be required by my examiner, but certainly falls into
the category that I would consider "obscure." In essence
it is intimidating, even though it will be my 11th FAA
checkride.

Mark, your attitude scares me a bit. Sorry, but flying should be a
bit intimidating - it's just not safe otherwise. There is usually a
pretty damn good reason (read - people got killed) for most of the
requirements, if you look at them carefully enough.

The whole ultralight scene totally scares me. Not that the majority
of ultralight pilots don't fly relatively safely, but the attitude
that "I can just jump into it and fly around, just like an ATV with
wings" leads to some really scary flying - and some sad, stupid,
unnecessary deaths, like we just had out at our glider field a few
weeks ago.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of useless regulation - what I
believe is needed (in all flying activities) is a lot of good training
and knowledge about what can kill you. Thats what all the check rides
are about - and without them anyone is just playing russian roulette
with wings.

Hassle factor? Name one really worthwhile activity that doesn't
require lots of time, dedication, money, sweat, studying, etc. That's
what makes it worthwhile! Who do you think gets more out of a glider
flight, the guy who shows up at 9 am, rigs his ship, washes every bit
of it (even a 1-26!), takes the lowest tow possible, flies regardless
of the conditions (as long as it's safe) as long as he can, then puts
his ship away and hangs around BS-ing with the locals watching the sun
set - or the guy who only comes out to the field on a perfect day,
reserves a plane from a commercial operator, takes a high tow, flies
exactly 1.0 locally, lands, pays his bill, then leaves? When flight
currency requirements start becoming hard to maintain, it's a good
sign to stop pretending to be current in that activity and stick to
something simpler. Think about it - a lot of times the instructor
giving the checkride has less time and experience than the pilot
getting the check - so teach him a thing or two!

Bah Humbug (It's that season again - havn't flown in a couple of
weeks)

Kirk
66