They call it the impossible turn.

writes:

A take off is a take off.

So why is someone with only a license to fly an airplane not allowed to take
off in a helicopter?

So by your logic if the engine at the end of the rope quites, there is
no problem because it isn't directly bolted to the glider?

There is no engine at the end of the rope; there's another aircraft at the end
of the rope.

The recovery technique for a glider is different from that for a powered
airplane. It's as simple as that. For powered airplanes, trying to turn around
and go back to the airport after a total power loss on takeoff is a really,
really bad idea.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

A take off is a take off.

So why is someone with only a license to fly an airplane not allowed to take
off in a helicopter?

Non sequitur.

Your claim was that gliders don't take off.

Obviously they do.

So by your logic if the engine at the end of the rope quites, there is
no problem because it isn't directly bolted to the glider?

There is no engine at the end of the rope; there's another aircraft at the end
of the rope.

The recovery technique for a glider is different from that for a powered
airplane. It's as simple as that.

OK, let's analyze both situations:

In a powered aircraft, the engine fails, you establish best glide and
look for a place to land.

In a glider, the tow engine fails, you release the tow rope, establish best
glide and look for a place to land.

Yep, totally different.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Feb 15, 9:30*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
A take off is a take off.

So why is someone with only a license to fly an airplane not allowed to take
off in a helicopter?

Because you have to learn to fly a helicopter and get a rating to fly
a helicopter.

So by your logic if the engine at the end of the rope quites, there is
no problem because it isn't directly bolted to the glider?

There is no engine at the end of the rope; there's another aircraft at the end
of the rope.


He's never heard of winch launches, Bungee launches or motorised
sailplanes..

writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

A take off is a take off.

So why is someone with only a license to fly an airplane not allowed to take
off in a helicopter?

Non sequitur.

On the contrary, it illustrates the fact that a takeoff is not a takeoff. A
takeoff in a helicopter is very different from that in an airplane, which is
one reason why a license to fly the latter is not a license to fly the former.

In a powered aircraft, the engine fails, you establish best glide and
look for a place to land.

In a glider, the tow engine fails, you release the tow rope, establish best
glide and look for a place to land.

Yep, totally different.

Look at the best glide performance for the two aircraft and you'll see why.

I'm not familiar with best practices for glides, but I'd expect an attempt to
turn around to be a bad idea for them as well. It's certainly a bad idea for
a powered airplane.

george writes:

Because you have to learn to fly a helicopter and get a rating to fly
a helicopter.

But if a takeoff were a takeoff, that wouldn't be true.

Crash Lander writes:

If a "normally" poowered a/c was not designed to fly without power, it
would drop like a stone when the engine is cut.

Why? The same aerodynamics that help it to fly with power help it to glide
without power.

The only difference is that a glider is usually much lighter, and the
wings longer. The glide ration, due to these differences is different
to a powered a/c. The principles are the same.

The difference in glide ratio is pretty important.

I imagine that trying to turn around in a glider isn't particularly smart,
either, just as it is extremely unwise in a powered airplane. But I don't know
much about gliders.

If a powered a/c loses power on take off, it lacks sufficient forward
motion and altitude to maintain flight. When a glider loses power (it's
tow plane), on take off, it lacks sufficient forward motion and altitude
to maintain flight.
Same same.

In that case, the glider pilot should behave like the pilot of the powered
aircraft, and look for a place to land ahead of him, instead of trying to turn
around.

I imagine that trying to turn around in a glider isn't particularly smart,
either,

It's SOP in gliders and regularly trained.

In that case, the glider pilot should behave like the pilot of the powered
aircraft, and look for a place to land ahead of him, instead of trying to turn
around.

BS.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

A take off is a take off.

So why is someone with only a license to fly an airplane not allowed to take
off in a helicopter?

Non sequitur.

On the contrary, it illustrates the fact that a takeoff is not a takeoff. A
takeoff in a helicopter is very different from that in an airplane, which is
one reason why a license to fly the latter is not a license to fly the former.

Babbling nonsense:

"Takeoff is the phase of flight in which an aircraft goes through a
transition from moving along the ground (taxiing) to flying in the air,
usually starting on a runway."


In a powered aircraft, the engine fails, you establish best glide and
look for a place to land.

In a glider, the tow engine fails, you release the tow rope, establish best
glide and look for a place to land.

Yep, totally different.

Look at the best glide performance for the two aircraft and you'll see why.

Your statement was the recovery action was different when in fact, other
than having to release the tow rope, it is identical.

The recovery ACTIONS taken have nothing to do with relative glide performance.

Whatever the aircraft is, and whatever the best glide speed is, that is the
first action, i.e. establish best glide speed.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
george writes:

Because you have to learn to fly a helicopter and get a rating to fly
a helicopter.

But if a takeoff were a takeoff, that wouldn't be true.

So what is you definition of the word "takeoff".

For the sane world it is "the phase of flight in which an aircraft goes
through a transition from moving along the ground (taxiing) to flying in
the air, usually starting on a runway."

A takeoff is a takeoff by any sort of aircraft and it doesn't matter to
the definition of the word whether the aircraft is an airplane, helicopter,
blimp, balloon, or rocket.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
I'm not familiar with best practices for glides,

Indeed.

but I'd expect an
attempt to turn around to be a bad idea for them as well.

You admit your opinion is uninformed, yet you post it anyway. When
uninformed, the rational thing to do is to either ask what the best
practices are or research them, not invent assertions and then draw
conclusions from said assertions.

For those interested, here is an interesting sampling of videos of low
altitude 180 degree returns to the takeoff airfield:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMTqOkmn2Oo
(Note the 200 ft callout at :16 and the oblique angle approach beginning
at :38.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7VPC-whu0U
(Same oblique angle appears beginning at 1:46.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHcgextOUlg
(Pretty straightforward.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAeuGRnnN6I
("Where is he!? Hello!?")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8FP_MIB7gw
(Real rope break during winch launch - OK, this is really an abbreviated
360 circuit and not a 180 turnback.)

It's certainly a bad idea for a powered airplane.

Elsewhere you wrote "I suggest that you and other readers do research
rather than listen to me...." to which I would heartily agree.