Flat Spin

And having flown both, I can say they were pretty unimpressive
machines.
BTW Jon, you must have a fair amount of faith in French
engineering to fly your ASW20f at 130kts 6inches above
an undulating field while waving at the club safety
officer! ;-}
Rob
PS I've forgotten, was that YOUR Peugeot that mated
with a tree at the end of the field at NYM?

At 17:54 06 February 2004, Jon Meyer wrote:

Sorry my mistake, got confused by the fact that the
Alliance 34 is made by Pegase (a copy of the SF34).

I know all about the quality of french construction
though, I fly an ASW20F and drive a Peugeot......neither
is as well made as their german equivalents :-)

Jon Meyer wrote:

Sorry my mistake, got confused by the fact that the
Alliance 34 is made by Pegase (a copy of the SF34).

I know all about the quality of french construction
though, I fly an ASW20F and drive a Peugeot......neither
is as well made as their german equivalents :-)


For the ASW20F i cannot comment, i have seen some which were in apparent good
state. Anyways, at the time Centrair had little experience of building
gliders, and the ASW20 were built under German license. After that they did
the Pegase, which is, in my opinion, a great success. The wings were designed
by the French office Onera, and this is a glider which has basically the same
performances as the German LS4, is more fun or less fun than the LS4 according
to personal taste, but was surely much cheaper.
As far as cars are concerned, Peugeot cannot be compared fairly with Mercedes
and BMW which are in a completly different category for a lot of reasons.
First and foremost, prices are in a completly different range, second these German
cars are propulsions while Peugeot are tractions, meaning that they don't
address the same problems. The aim of Peugeot is to produce cars that people
can afford (with European salaries), are comfortable and secure (good secure
dynamical qualities). With some bad faith i could say exactly the opposite of
the above German ones. Now compare Peugeot cars with VWs or Opel cars, which
are in the same category, and deciding the best is very debatable. To say the
truth, all the European constructors buy parts in the same pool (Bosch being a
well known example), use same technics, etc. Frequently the so called German
car or French car is built in Spain or whatever. What is obviously true is
that German firms do considerably better research and work in the motor
department. Clearly Porsche, BMW, and Mercedes develop fantastic motors, Japan
firms do the same, and French firms don't. I suppose that the strict speed
limitations in France explain a lot about that, but this is sad nonetheless.



--
Michel Talon

wrote:

Jon Meyer wrote:

The thought had occured to me Kevin, but I suspect
that a flat spin puts very little strain on the airframe
compared with other manouvres.....provided it doesnt
continue all the way to ground level that is.


I think that thing was just never glued together properly
at the back end, considering the fact that after the
accident you mention, they found that none of the frames
in the tail section were bonded to the fuselage skins.
French engineering at its best!
Considering the way that thing was built I think all
of us who flew it should just be glad that it didnt
break when we were flying it and that, when it did
break, nobody was hurt.


By the way, could you explain us what French engeneering has to do with the
Puch or the SF34 ? I have seen particularly badly engeneered French gliders,
notably the Bijave and the Javelot, but here i am really wondering about
what glider you are speaking. Incidentally we have heard recently discussions
about poorly glued wings from the most prestigious German factory, while
this did not occur, up to my knowledge, with the *much* cheaper Pegase.

French engineering? Never heard of it. ;-)

Shawn

P.S. Those bad wings came out of a Czech factory. They were engineered
in Germany, not made there. IIRC the Pegase and ASW-20F were german
designs as well.

Shawn Curry wrote:
Shawn

P.S. Those bad wings came out of a Czech factory. They were engineered
in Germany, not made there. IIRC the Pegase and ASW-20F were german
designs as well.

Not the Pegase.

--
Michel Talon

Great information, Gus!

Many models of sailplane require holding opposite aileron to maintain
the spin, otherwise it transitions into a spiral dive. It is very
possible that Puchacz pilots are doing exactly this, then returning
the ailerons to neutral to perform a normal recovery after the spin
goes flat. Your suggestion, then, is to put the the stick into the
inside wing (raise the aileron on the higher drag wingtip) and pause
as a precursor to initiating normal spin recovery?

Another question for you...

Do your aerobatics texts discuss the suitability of different
types/models of aircraft for aerobatics? Are there models that are
suitably stressed, but not ideal because of control issues (too
little, too much...)?

(Gus Rasch) wrote in message . com...
(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message ...
I'm surprised this spin thread hasn't produced more discussion of the flat
spin. One poster told us about getting into a flat spin after several
revolutions of a "normal" spin" at Minden when the Puch went flat (nose on
horizon). The poster thought it was kind of thrilling, until he applied spin
recovery controls (opposite rudder & forward stick) The Puch continued to flat
spin for another 5 or 6 revolutions. This spin started at 12,000 feet. Had it
been initiated at a much lower altitude, we might be investigating yet another
Puch-in. Has anyone else had the Puch go into a flat spin?

Perhaps those who have are no longer with us?
JJ Sinclair



Group,

As a Pitts owner and pilot who flies a LOT of aerobatics I thought I
would chime in on a possible reason for the Puchs' delayed recovery
from the flat spin.

The quickest and most assured method of exiting a flat spin is to
first convert it to a conventional spin and then exit that spin mode.

In a Pitts you get the spin to go flat by adding opposite aileron.
Take away the the opposite aileron and it returns to a conventional
spin. The puch most likely flatens out the same way.

More than one Pitts pilot has pounded in while trying to exit a flat
spin before first converting it to a conventional spin. This delay in
recovery from a flat spin could find you establishing a new bottom to
the aerobatic box.

It is therefore imperative to not add opposite aileron while spinning
(in an attempt to pick up the low wing) or risk having it go flat. If
you do find yourself in a developed flat spin you need to confirm that
you have not added opposite aileron and/or add a little pro-spin
aileron to assist in returning the aircraft to a conventional spin and
then recover from that spin mode.

All that said, I must also add that I have never flown the Puch. All
the above is based on aerobatics in a Pitts. I am not a CFIG or the
current world aerobatic champ. This is information that my CFIG has
instilled in me and is supported by many books on aerobatics that I
have read. It has also been proven to myself time and time again in
practical application.

Anybody up for a discussion on inverted accelerated flat spins?!

Gus Rasch
Pitts S1S
N21JF

Don't know if it's the French per se. Maybe it's just socialism. I
remember the Peugot 404 my parents bought in 1965 or so. That car was
indestructible. Ran for 12 years without a single repair, other than
replacing parts of the muffler system that rusted out. The 504 they bought
in the late 70s couldn't get out if its own way - engine rebuild after
10,000 miles, electrics that would randomly short out, etc.

Flame shields set to max :-))




"Jon Meyer" wrote in message
...

Sorry my mistake, got confused by the fact that the
Alliance 34 is made by Pegase (a copy of the SF34).

I know all about the quality of french construction
though, I fly an ASW20F and drive a Peugeot......neither
is as well made as their german equivalents :-)

On 5 Feb 2004 18:57:40 -0800, (Gus Rasch)
wrote:

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message ...
I'm surprised this spin thread hasn't produced more discussion of the flat
spin. One poster told us about getting into a flat spin after several
revolutions of a "normal" spin" at Minden when the Puch went flat (nose on
horizon). The poster thought it was kind of thrilling, until he applied spin
recovery controls (opposite rudder & forward stick) The Puch continued to flat
spin for another 5 or 6 revolutions. This spin started at 12,000 feet. Had it
been initiated at a much lower altitude, we might be investigating yet another
Puch-in. Has anyone else had the Puch go into a flat spin?

Perhaps those who have are no longer with us?
JJ Sinclair



Group,

As a Pitts owner and pilot who flies a LOT of aerobatics I thought I
would chime in on a possible reason for the Puchs' delayed recovery
from the flat spin.

The quickest and most assured method of exiting a flat spin is to
first convert it to a conventional spin and then exit that spin mode.

In a Pitts you get the spin to go flat by adding opposite aileron.
Take away the the opposite aileron and it returns to a conventional
spin. The puch most likely flatens out the same way.

More than one Pitts pilot has pounded in while trying to exit a flat
spin before first converting it to a conventional spin. This delay in
recovery from a flat spin could find you establishing a new bottom to
the aerobatic box.

It is therefore imperative to not add opposite aileron while spinning
(in an attempt to pick up the low wing) or risk having it go flat. If
you do find yourself in a developed flat spin you need to confirm that
you have not added opposite aileron and/or add a little pro-spin
aileron to assist in returning the aircraft to a conventional spin and
then recover from that spin mode.

All that said, I must also add that I have never flown the Puch. All
the above is based on aerobatics in a Pitts. I am not a CFIG or the
current world aerobatic champ. This is information that my CFIG has
instilled in me and is supported by many books on aerobatics that I
have read. It has also been proven to myself time and time again in
practical application.

Anybody up for a discussion on inverted accelerated flat spins?!

Gus Rasch
Pitts S1S
N21JF


On my spin flight in the S2A we got to accelerated flat spins upright.
I thought that was thrilling enough.
Your point about the in and out spin aleron is well made and this is
something that you can demonstrate easily in a Pitts and which I had
never seen in a glider althoght knew about it.

Had an interesting discussion with that instructor yesterday about all
this spinning stuff. He has a lot of time in gliders too. We are both
of the opinion that full spin training is best done in powered
aircraft with professional instructor.

Mike Borgelt

Well, the airfoil of the Pégase is French, the rest is a copy of German
design...

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


a écrit dans le message de
...
Shawn Curry wrote:
Shawn

P.S. Those bad wings came out of a Czech factory. They were engineered
in Germany, not made there. IIRC the Pegase and ASW-20F were german
designs as well.

Not the Pegase.

--
Michel Talon

I have often wondered whether the Pegase airfoil is an entirely different
design to the ASW20, or whether it is basically a fixed flap version of the
ASW20 wing.

I understand that the LS8 wing is a fixed flap version of the LS6 wing,
and the LS8 does seem to work rather well.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.


"Bert Willing" wrote in
message ...

Well, the airfoil of the Pégase is French, the rest is a copy of German
design...

Bert Willing

Bert Willing wrote:
Well, the airfoil of the Pégase is French, the rest is a copy of German
design...


Of course, the rest is not "unrelated" to the ASW20 that Centrair used
to build under German licence :-) But i maintain that the design of the
wing is extremely important for a glider, and that in the case of the
Pegase, this design was original, and a great success. Until appearance
of the Discus and its quite novel wing, the Pegase was in par with other
similar gliders. If you want me to say that the different German firms
have produced the most beautiful and fine gliders of our epoch, this is
obviously true. They have failed however to keep the prices reasonable,
and this is, in my opinion an extremely grave failure, which is killing
the sport.

--

Michel TALON