Glider crow-hops:

On Friday, August 31, 2012 8:50:56 AM UTC-6, Waveguru wrote:
Bill D says "There is exactly zero chance of the pilot getting hurt and virtually no chance of dinging the glider."



Really? This statement is scary and absurd.



Can you tell us where and when this is going to take place?



I would really like to hear from your instructor here in this thread.

This is a bad idea and I find it a little hard to believe that it is condoned by an instructor and club or commercial operation.



Boggs

It would happen where there is nothing to hit on a level surface. It there are obstacles, don't do it.

On Friday, August 31, 2012 11:02:18 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
...And my final comment on this...



We can try all day to interpret what the FAA would say, but I'll bet your

insurance company will declare you uninsured the second your wheel leaves

the ground unless you have a ground launch endorsement.





"Waveguru" wrote in message

...

Bill D says "There is exactly zero chance of the pilot getting hurt and

virtually no chance of dinging the glider."



Really? This statement is scary and absurd.



Can you tell us where and when this is going to take place?



I would really like to hear from your instructor here in this thread.

This is a bad idea and I find it a little hard to believe that it is

condoned by an instructor and club or commercial operation.



Boggs

BS. Insurance companies don't enforce FAR's. Call your agent and get a conformation of that.

He had the presence of mind to readjust them while holding position at 2' AGL and land the plane.

He did WHAT?! At the first sign of a problem, you release. You DO NOT try to fix a problem while on tow.

On Friday, August 31, 2012 7:38:35 AM UTC-6, Chris Nicholas wrote:
I was going to stay out of this one, but want to add this after all.



In the UK, instructors are trained to teach winch launching and coping with launch failures, at “high”, “medium” and “low” (50 feet or lower) heights. The latter are to be done as demos only, not allowing student pilots to do them in practice – they too often result in damage which the P1 is unable to correct in time if done wromg.



On the instructors courses, the low failure demo tuition is done at the end of the week – so that resulting damage does not stop the rest of the course. And this is with experienced pilots at the controls, just one teaching the other how to teach and how to cope.



We have a tried and tested, universally practiced way to do conversions to new types, used and approved by virtually all experienced instructors and training organizations.



There is also a general guideline which I believe all should practice – do a risk analysis, and don’t have too many new things at one time, and never more than one major new thing at a time.





Here we have a low gliding hours pilot with several things new to him, going to teach himself, by a method he thinks better thsn what almost everyone else uses. If he goes ahead, I hope he does not damage his new toy, but if he does, don’t anyone be surprised.



I second the posts above – working backwards from the accident report, it would have been obvious that it was too likely.



In the USA, do insurers have a concept of contributory negligence which can impact upon thje pay out in the event of a claim? It has been raised on occasion over here, when people who the insurers thought should know better took a risk that they knew or had been warned about about.





Chris N.

Yes, I know exactly how winch launch is taught in the UK. Failing to properly train your pilots in low failures is one reason why you have one of the worst accident records in the world. I watched one of your pilots destroy a glider and put himself in the hospital because he didn't have a clue how to handle a real low failure. My students do it every time without the slightest problem.

UK training methods have improved in the last few years but you have a long way to go.

Everyone else in the world successfully trains their pilots in low failures.. You might want to ask them how they do it.

On Friday, August 31, 2012 7:47:33 AM UTC-6, Tony V wrote:
On 8/31/2012 9:38 AM, Chris Nicholas wrote:

I was going to stay out of this one, but want to add this after all.



In the UK, instructors are trained to teach winch launching and coping with launch failures, at “high”, “medium” and “low” (50 feet or lower) heights. The latter are to be done as demos only, not allowing student pilots to do them in practice – they too often result in damage which the P1 is unable to correct in time if done wromg.



On the instructors courses, the low failure demo tuition is done at the end of the week – so that resulting damage does not stop the rest of the course. And this is with experienced pilots at the controls, just one teaching the other how to teach and how to cope.



We have a tried and tested, universally practiced way to do conversions to new types, used and approved by virtually all experienced instructors and training organizations.





The difference is the pitch attitude. In the above, the nose even at 50

ft is significantly elevated. In a 'crow hop' it (more or less) stays level.



Tony "6N"

EXACTLY! The glider never gets airborne more than a few inches and never gains enough energy to get higher. Even a "balloon" on landing has far more energy.

On Thursday, August 30, 2012 7:40:39 PM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:


John, I have deep respect for your views on many subjects, but here you are just plain wrong. *All the "issues" you raise above are precisely why this first 'flight' should be a "crow hop". *There is exactly zero chance of the pilot getting hurt and virtually no chance of dinging the glider. *But, there is an excellent chance of uncovering problems which could prove fatal if an aero tow is attempted.



Despite it being done tens of thousands of time in the whole history of gliding, I don't think there is a single incidence of pilot injury from a minimum energy "crow hop". *I have it on excellent authority that no ground launch sign off is needed for a "crow hop" since it really isn't a launch of any kind - just the glider equivalent of taxi tests.



What I find revealing in the hand wringing is an apparent terror of takeoff rolls and landings rolls which is all a "crow hop" is. Maybe you folks need more practice. *Go do some "crow hops" and get back to us.



I have no problem with "crow hops" per se. I'm just applying the

principle of "do one new thing per flight." Add up the number of

"firsts" on this proposed flight. You need two hands.



John Cochrane

With respect, the only new thing is the glider and it's only new to this pilot. The takeoff roll, float, touch down and landing roll is old hat to this pilot - he's done it a hundred times. The only difference is there isn't a flight at altitude in the middle.

Is this a "test flight" requiring a "test pilot"? No. What test pilots do is to teach themselves how to fly a new aircraft, then carefully measure engineering details of the flight dynamics. The engineering details are known so this is just a pilot teaching himself to fly a new glider - something we have all done every time we fly a new single place glider.

The hand wringing and outrage expressed in this thread is interesting to an old instructor. In a "Freudian slip" sort of way it exposes a hidden terror in the posters minds. That fear comes out loud and clear in the posts. They are terrified of takeoff and landings. The cure is "crow hops".

Here's how I would do it. Go somewhere with vast space. A 250' wide concrete runway would do - a dry lake is better. The space is for the pilots peace of mind, it's not required for safety. I'd use whatever 2-seater is available but it's better if he hasn't flown it before. With the "crow hop" newbie in front and me in back I'd say, "do a crow hop" with no further explanation.

The tow car with a nice long rope would accelerate at about the same rate as a tow plane. The pilot will balance the wings with ailerons and steer with rudder just as he has done hundreds of time before. Just as the glider reached liftoff airspeed, I'd pull the release. The glider will simply roll straight ahead and stop just the pilot has done hundreds of times. Next time, I'd let it lift off a few inches before pulling the release. In the few seconds the glider is airborne, the pilot will get a feel for how the glider behaves in ground effect before touching down and rolling to a stop. After a dozen or so repeats, takeoffs and landings will hold no fear.

So, what could go wrong? Could the pilot PIO? Yes, if he "pumps the stick" but that should have been worked out of him long ago by an alert instructor. If it hasn't, the worst will be a few low-energy bounces which will quickly cure him. There isn't enough energy to support a destructive PIO. Could he ground loop? Yes, but that could happen on an aero tow too. The energy is so low, no damage is likely. Could the tow car driver slam on the brakes, put it in reverse and accelerate back toward the glider? Sure. We could also be hit by lightning.

So, that's the downside. What's the gain? Beyond removing the fear, the pilot learns the glider responds to control inputs normally, how it steers while on it's wheel and how easy it is to keep straight and level while rolling. Now, those are things he doesn't have to worry about on the first real flight at altitude. If a new to the pilot glider was used, we both know he can handle a single seater.

If you think about it, this is an essential skill for all of us. What if a tow plane aborts takeoff and stops on the runway? What if the rope breaks or you get an uncommanded release? I've had that happen twice and it's happened several time to others locally in the last few years. I had to fly around the tug at 1' AGL.

Now, if you actually do a auto tow launch to hundreds of feet, that's a different thing. You will need specific training and a logbook endorsement for that. If the glider only reaches a few inches of height, you don't. The FAA has several times issued circulars that "taxi tests" which involve a "hop", intentional or otherwise, which doesn't involve the aircraft leaving the runway environs is not considered a "flight".

I'm wondering why J-soar asked in the first place. It's clear he had his mind made up, and is content (maybe even pleased) to go ahead with what has been roundly denounced by some of the top pilots/instructors in the country.. Great way to get attention, though...

Jack Wyman
2000 accident-free hours
Diamond #610

As the pilot is experienced enough and aircraft suitable, as the post below
says - then just take a launch to 3000' and enjoy it!

or


Find an instructor and experienced pilot in this type and go with their
training!

This "crow-hop" crap was OK before we invented 2 seaters.

Tom




With respect, the only new thing is the glider and it's only new to this
pi=
lot. The takeoff roll, float, touch down and landing roll is old hat to
th=
is pilot - he's done it a hundred times. The only difference is there
isn'=
t a flight at altitude in the middle.

Is this a "test flight" requiring a "test pilot"? No. What test pilots
do=
is to teach themselves how to fly a new aircraft, then carefully measure
e=
ngineering details of the flight dynamics. The engineering details are
kno=
wn so this is just a pilot teaching himself to fly a new glider -
something=
we have all done every time we fly a new single place glider.

The hand wringing and outrage expressed in this thread is interesting to
an=
old instructor. In a "Freudian slip" sort of way it exposes a hidden
terr=
or in the posters minds. That fear comes out loud and clear in the
posts.
=
They are terrified of takeoff and landings. The cure is "crow hops".

Here's how I would do it. Go somewhere with vast space. A 250' wide
concr=
ete runway would do - a dry lake is better. The space is for the pilots
pe=
ace of mind, it's not required for safety. I'd use whatever 2-seater is
ava=
ilable but it's better if he hasn't flown it before. With the "crow hop"
n=
ewbie in front and me in back I'd say, "do a crow hop" with no further
expl=
anation.

The tow car with a nice long rope would accelerate at about the same rate
a=
s a tow plane. The pilot will balance the wings with ailerons and steer
wi=
th rudder just as he has done hundreds of time before. Just as the
glider
=
reached liftoff airspeed, I'd pull the release. The glider will simply
rol=
l straight ahead and stop just the pilot has done hundreds of times.
Next
=
time, I'd let it lift off a few inches before pulling the release. In
the
=
few seconds the glider is airborne, the pilot will get a feel for how the
g=
lider behaves in ground effect before touching down and rolling to a
stop.
=
After a dozen or so repeats, takeoffs and landings will hold no fear.=20

So, what could go wrong? Could the pilot PIO? Yes, if he "pumps the
stick=
" but that should have been worked out of him long ago by an alert
instruct=
or. If it hasn't, the worst will be a few low-energy bounces which will
qu=
ickly cure him. There isn't enough energy to support a destructive PIO.
C=
ould he ground loop? Yes, but that could happen on an aero tow too. The
e=
nergy is so low, no damage is likely. Could the tow car driver slam on
the=
brakes, put it in reverse and accelerate back toward the glider? Sure.
W=
e could also be hit by lightning.

So, that's the downside. What's the gain? Beyond removing the fear, the
p=
ilot learns the glider responds to control inputs normally, how it steers
w=
hile on it's wheel and how easy it is to keep straight and level while
roll=
ing. Now, those are things he doesn't have to worry about on the first
rea=
l flight at altitude. If a new to the pilot glider was used, we both
know
=
he can handle a single seater.

If you think about it, this is an essential skill for all of us. What if
a=
tow plane aborts takeoff and stops on the runway? What if the rope
breaks=
or you get an uncommanded release? I've had that happen twice and it's
ha=
ppened several time to others locally in the last few years. I had to
fly
=
around the tug at 1' AGL.

Now, if you actually do a auto tow launch to hundreds of feet, that's a
dif=
ferent thing. You will need specific training and a logbook endorsement
fo=
r that. If the glider only reaches a few inches of height, you don't.
The=
FAA has several times issued circulars that "taxi tests" which involve a
"=
hop", intentional or otherwise, which doesn't involve the aircraft
leaving
=
the runway environs is not considered a "flight".

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:18:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill D
wrote:


Here's how I would do it. Go somewhere with vast space. A 250' wide concrete runway would do - a dry lake is better.

From my German point of view I'm amazed - we don't have such vast
runways, apart from some famous places like Frankfurth Rhein/Main
airport which are unfortunately reserved for Boeing and Airbus...

But I'm really amazed that someone really proposes to use such a huge
airfield just to do the first single-seater flight on a glider that is
really easy to fly. Kind of over-kill in my opinion.


So, that's the downside. What's the gain? Beyond removing the fear, the pilot learns the glider responds to control inputs normally,
how it steers while on it's wheel

Please excuse me if I laugh. This glider in question will be airborne
after ten seconds at maximum - it's hardly necessary to learn how it
steers on its wheel.


I'd like tomention something else:
To me, this pilot in question is extremely scared. So scared that he
does not even dare to make a simple aoerotow on a glider that is
really easy to fly, but instead tries to find any excuse to avoid a
"real" flight.

I strongly doubt that this pilot is able to handle the combination of
new glider and new launch method, let alone stress if something
unexpected happens.
A combination of an unexperienced, scared pilot and new, untrained
procedures is a dangerous thing.

In my opinion some more training (in another single-seater?) is
necessary - experience helps to get rid of fears.

Andreas

Fly a strange glider without a CFI signoff and see how far you get with the
insurance if you damage it. There's no FAR requiring a CFI signoff to fly a
new (to you) glider. At least my insurer required a signoff even after 40
years of flying and 61 different aircraft types in my logbook.

Go ahead and break your neck. I'm done with know-it-alls.


"Bill D" wrote in message
...
On Friday, August 31, 2012 11:02:18 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
...And my final comment on this...



We can try all day to interpret what the FAA would say, but I'll bet your

insurance company will declare you uninsured the second your wheel leaves

the ground unless you have a ground launch endorsement.





"Waveguru" wrote in message

...

Bill D says "There is exactly zero chance of the pilot getting hurt and

virtually no chance of dinging the glider."



Really? This statement is scary and absurd.



Can you tell us where and when this is going to take place?



I would really like to hear from your instructor here in this thread.

This is a bad idea and I find it a little hard to believe that it is

condoned by an instructor and club or commercial operation.



Boggs

BS. Insurance companies don't enforce FAR's. Call your agent and get a
conformation of that.