Slip to landing on PPG practical test

Is it possible to stall the aircraft in a full slip? On the two aircraft I have
tried it (at height of corse) I ran out of back elevator before I was able to
stall it. ASK13 and ASK21

On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:55:45 -0800, "Gary Boggs"
wrote:

I had mine freeze shut also. It was raining lightly before we took off and
I then went to over 20K in our wave. I was at altitude for quite a long time
and discovered while descending that the spoilers on my Jantar 2A were
completely frozen shut. I tried everything I could to get them open without
success. In the manual it states that the 2A is not approved for slipping.
Our runway is 3000ft long at 600ft msl. Fortunately we usually have quite
a bit of wind here so that helps shorten the landing. I modified my pattern
and had no problems getting it stopped well before the end of the pavement
with the wheel brake.

Well done! I've a Jantar 2a and pulling this trick off at Aboyne
would be ... interesting. One time when the separate wheel brake is a
good idea.

If anyone is wondering why the Jantar 2A is not approved for slipping,
what seems to happen is that the elevator looses effectiveness -
presumably because it is blanked by the rudder. You start to feed in
aileron and opposite rudder, then find that you have the stick on the
front or back stop to try to control the attitude. Not something to
discover on the approach:-)

Chris

I've got one as well and I'm pretty sure that's the reason it's placarded
against ground launch.
Cheers!, Pete

"Chris Rowland" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:55:45 -0800, "Gary Boggs"
wrote:

I had mine freeze shut also. It was raining lightly before we took off
and
I then went to over 20K in our wave. I was at altitude for quite a long
time
and discovered while descending that the spoilers on my Jantar 2A were
completely frozen shut. I tried everything I could to get them open
without
success. In the manual it states that the 2A is not approved for
slipping.
Our runway is 3000ft long at 600ft msl. Fortunately we usually have
quite
a bit of wind here so that helps shorten the landing. I modified my
pattern
and had no problems getting it stopped well before the end of the
pavement
with the wheel brake.

Well done! I've a Jantar 2a and pulling this trick off at Aboyne
would be ... interesting. One time when the separate wheel brake is a
good idea.

If anyone is wondering why the Jantar 2A is not approved for slipping,
what seems to happen is that the elevator looses effectiveness -
presumably because it is blanked by the rudder. You start to feed in
aileron and opposite rudder, then find that you have the stick on the
front or back stop to try to control the attitude. Not something to
discover on the approach:-)

Chris

Bruce Greeff wrote in message ...
What I am disagreeing with is practising landing with no drag controls other
than side slip, and holding the slip into the flare. Knowing that you can do it
in an emergency is one thing, doing it as a matter of course is not.

So it was a nice sunny day with no lift here in CO, so I took another
pilot up in the L-13 for some fun. Temp was about 60F and wind down
the runway at around 10 mph. Our airport elevation is 7000' MSL.

Tried a few slips at altitude, and entering at a bit under 50 KIAS the
ship flew very nicely with full rudder and the low wing still well
above the horizon. Stalls were nonevents with a very noticeable
reduction in sound level before the 'break' which involved the nose
going straight forward and a slight drop. Overall, no big deal.

Entered downwind at around 600' and this was actually too low to fly
the pattern in a slip all the way. Used a slip on the turns to base
and final, then a slip the last 150' or so of altitude. Flared just
beyond the approach end, touched a bit farther than I would have with
spoilers and got stopped less than 500' beyond the threshold.

My friend then repeated the performance, again using less than 500' of
runway.

I then decided to turn final at a "normal" height and did some
slipping S-turns. Got to the same flare point as before but with
about 5 knots more airspeed, so flew along sideways as I began the
flare. DIdn't realize how low the tail was until it tapped the ground
and dropped us in a bit sideways. Side load was no worse than some of
my students trying a X-wind landing. We used about 1000' of runway
this time, but I never touched the wheel brake, either - as I was
aiming to stop where we did.

-Tom

Interesting. There seem to be a couple of significant differences in the
weather conditions between your flights and mine - I wonder how much they
contribute to the drag of the slip and the subsequent float distance. First,
I had zero wind, and in my experience a 10 mph headwind makes a *big*
difference in the rollout distance, and probably cuts short the float as
well. Second, our field elevation is 1500' MSL, so there's a 5500'
difference in the density.

"Tom Serkowski" wrote in message
om...

So it was a nice sunny day with no lift here in CO, so I took another
pilot up in the L-13 for some fun. Temp was about 60F and wind down
the runway at around 10 mph. Our airport elevation is 7000' MSL.

Tried a few slips at altitude, and entering at a bit under 50 KIAS the
ship flew very nicely with full rudder and the low wing still well
above the horizon. Stalls were nonevents with a very noticeable
reduction in sound level before the 'break' which involved the nose
going straight forward and a slight drop. Overall, no big deal.

Entered downwind at around 600' and this was actually too low to fly
the pattern in a slip all the way. Used a slip on the turns to base
and final, then a slip the last 150' or so of altitude. Flared just
beyond the approach end, touched a bit farther than I would have with
spoilers and got stopped less than 500' beyond the threshold.

My friend then repeated the performance, again using less than 500' of
runway.

I then decided to turn final at a "normal" height and did some
slipping S-turns. Got to the same flare point as before but with
about 5 knots more airspeed, so flew along sideways as I began the
flare. DIdn't realize how low the tail was until it tapped the ground
and dropped us in a bit sideways. Side load was no worse than some of
my students trying a X-wind landing. We used about 1000' of runway
this time, but I never touched the wheel brake, either - as I was
aiming to stop where we did.

-Tom

Agreed. Just stating the theory in response to a question. Works fine
for chubby gliders. In glass I try to match speeds, then crack the
brakes a little as the rope stretches to keep from being accelerated
and starting a new cycle of slack.

"Gary Boggs" wrote in message ...
Why not dive to match speed of the tug while remaining off to the side so
you will still get the dampening of the yawing effect?

When the slack in the rope is very large, the speed of the glider can get
well below the speed of the tug if you're not careful, resulting in a very
hard jerk when it comes tight. I prefer a combination of these two
techniques if the slack is extreme.


"Todd Pattist" wrote in message
...
CV wrote:

You didn't want to have your nose
pointed at the towplane tail when the rope came tight so yaw
cushioned things

Hmmm. I don't follow this.

Here is the situation : you are offset from the towplane and
flying coordinated with your fuselage parallel to the tug -
the tow hook is attached ahead of the glider's CG. When the
rope comes tight, the nose of the glider will quickly yaw to
point towards the tug. This yawing action cushions some of
the shock on the rope and decreases the likelihood of it
breaking. If during the dive to accelerate you end up with
the nose of the glider pointed directly at the tail of the
tug, there will be no yawing action and the maximum force on
the rope will be higher.
Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

Bruce,

I do not think there have been any fatal accidents in the U.K. where a spin
was deliberately entered below 1,000 ft. If you know different, could you
please tell us about it.

I know of one fatal accident where a spin was deliberately started at about
1,400 ft., this was during instructor training and it is known that recovery
was started too low.

The report on the accident last January where both pilots were killed has
not yet been published. However, it is known that the spin was started
above 1,000 ft.

In practice, some clubs and some instructors never did this low spin entry
exercise; the wording in the BGA Instructors' Manual meant that in fact it
was optional, since it was open to any instructor to judge that not all the
caveats were met.

The relevant wording was:
"As this training progresses, it is necessary to introduce _brief_ spins
where the ground is noticeably close. This is to ensure that the trainee
will take the correct recovery action even when the nose is down and the
ground approaching. A very experienced instructor flying a docile two
seater in ideal conditions may be prepared to initiate a _brief_ spin from
800'. A less docile two seater with a less experienced instructor, or less
than ideal conditions, should raise the minimum height considerably."

Unfortunately, there have been many fatalities in the U.K. from an
inadvertent stall/spin entered below 1,000 ft. The belief was that the low
height spin entry exercise, done correctly under the right conditions (type
of glider, C. of G. position, weather etc. conditions, experience skill and
currency of instructor) would help to reduce the number of these accidents.

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


"Bruce Greeff" wrote in message
...

snip

Just because it was standard procedure some years ago, with a glider that
had design faults with inadequate drag controls does not mean it should
still be standard practice. The discussion about spin demonstration in
the circuit is an example. Eventually the BGA dropped this after a
number of fatal accidents. Why do people have to die demonstrating
something that is marginally useful, and has so low probability of
happening, relative to the probability of injury demonstrating it?

Imagine a fighter pilot having to demonstrate a successful ejection at
each flight review. Same question, why on earth would you expect that?