New trainer from SZD Bielsko

can establish itself into a non-recoverable spin.

below an altitude of 100m no spin is rocoverable.

Mat

"Roy Bourgeois" wrote in message
...

On a slightly different tack, if a club mandates solo in old, cheap
equipment, that says they don't trust the new member students or their
instructors. If a club can't trust its instructors, it has a far worse
problem than the training gliders.

Bill Daniels
Bill - You point to SSB as an example of the kind of club you want - but
they do exactly what I am talking about which is to use their 505 for
advanced training and do training and first solos in the old G103. (my son
Dan is the maintenance chief for that G103) Same with
Sugarbush, Franconia, GBSC and virtually every club that has a high
performance and a low performance 2 seater.

You argue that better equipment attracts new members and you are right. I
argue that lower cost attracts youth into the sport - and I am right.
It's
all in how you value things. I've been in gliding for 33 years hand seen
this debate for most of them (I have been director of 6 clubs, member of
10, past SSA Director, etc.). I have learned that there are 2 types of
students: Those who have time but not money and those who have money but
little time. You run very different clubs (with very different equipment)
depending upon which constituency you serve. But - if you take the big
picture, you don't denigrate one club model compared to another.

Roy

Roy, I think we agree across the board. The SSB Grob Twin II is a fine
trainer that attracts both youth and more afluent members. BTW, if you look
hard at training costs, it isn't the glider that costs so much, it's launch
costs. I've long been on record favoring winches for the majorityof
training flights.

It's the kind of decrepit trainer that was recently removed from Boulder
Airport by another club that I was writing about. It's those things that
drive clubs to extinction.

Bill Daniels

trainer that attracts both youth and more afluent members. BTW, if you look
hard at training costs, it isn't the glider that costs so much, it's launch
costs.

In my (very limited) experience, fleet costs affect joining fee and
annual fees. Those can be a significant part of total flying costs for
a young person.

Bartek

On 22 Jun, 15:23, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On 22 Jun 2007 13:28:04 GMT, Al Eddie

wrote:
non-recoverable spin

Define.

And before you do, read the accident reports...!

In Germany there were at least wo spin-related accidents during winch
launches, in both cases instructors on board. Iirc no survivors.

How many gliders can recover from a spin which starts on the winch
launch? I really don't think the Puchacz can be blamed in such cases.

Ian

On 22 Jun, 16:43, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 09:05:05 -0600, "Bill Daniels"

bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
So, don't assume that a glider has bad spin behavior just because they've
been spun in by instructors.

Given the fact that other gliders did not spin in during a winch
launch with an instructor in board, odds are that these accidents were
not completely the pilot's fault, don't you agree?

The Puchacz is not, alas, the only glider to have spun in off a winch
launch.

Mind you, I recall a site check at a Large UK Club in a winch launched
Puchacz. At the top of the launch the instructor kept telling me to
pull back more, even when pre-stall buffet could be felt. And that was
only two weeks after an AEI flight had spun in off the winch, fatally
for the pupil.

My conclusion: some instructors shouldn't be flying, and some clubs
shouldn't be operating.

Ian

Ian wrote:
On 22 Jun, 15:23, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On 22 Jun 2007 13:28:04 GMT, Al Eddie

wrote:
non-recoverable spin
Define.
And before you do, read the accident reports...!
In Germany there were at least wo spin-related accidents during winch
launches, in both cases instructors on board. Iirc no survivors.

How many gliders can recover from a spin which starts on the winch
launch? I really don't think the Puchacz can be blamed in such cases.

Ian


I know of at least one incident with a Ka7 or 8.

In this case the early solo pilot allowed the attitude to get too high and spun
while under power from the winch. He managed to recover and arrive in one piece
if a little shaken. I gather he was circa 800 feet when the aircraft departed
from controlled flight.

Score 1 for sheer luck...

On Jun 22, 4:08 am, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
Are you saying a K-21 or a DG 505 are not insurable for student pilots?

In the UK it's just about possible to insure a K21 for first solo
(premium is around one-seventh the value of the glider), but the cost
of insuring a 505, 1000 or Duo for the same is astronomical. Sure you
could do it but you'd never get the money back - no-one would pay the
incredible soaring fees needed. I think I know one 500 that's insured
for solos, but every other Janus, Duo or 1000 I've seen or flown was
Silver C minimum for P1. Even then the soaring fees were twice a K21.

I belong to the low money/high time group, and high-performance
gliders are the bane of my life. Our club offers winch launches at
half the price of others and that's mainly down to having a fleet of
K13s instead K21s. I could never have afforded to learn to fly
otherwise. Visiting other clubs with shiny fleets always hurts my
wallet.


Dan

At 20:36 22 June 2007, Bruce wrote:
Ian wrote:
On 22 Jun, 15:23, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On 22 Jun 2007 13:28:04 GMT, Al Eddie

wrote:
non-recoverable spin
Define.
And before you do, read the accident reports...!
In Germany there were at least wo spin-related accidents
during winch
launches, in both cases instructors on board. Iirc
no survivors.

How many gliders can recover from a spin which starts
on the winch


There is an awful lot of talk (most of it old arguments
BTW) about the SZD 50-3 on this thread, with as much
speculation as before. I would like to remind those
who can only site Puchaz horror stories, that we are
talking aoubt a completely new glider. It has a new
wing with a thinner profile/planform, lots of carbon,
interchangable 17.5-20m tips, a new tail on it, and
has a different layup schedule in the fuse, leaving
it with a +9 to -6 G-load rating. The 50-3 was desinged
in 78' I believe, the Perkoz in 91'. Do you really
think they were not able to anylize and address any
shorcomings in the Puchaz after all those years of
study and advances in technology?
Come on, it is a completely new aircraft; it just uses
some of the same molds and parts as the 50-3. I sure
wish I could have gotten that one for $15,000 a while
back.....

Paul Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 13:10:28 -0700, Ian
wrote:

How many gliders can recover from a spin which starts on the winch
launch? I really don't think the Puchacz can be blamed in such cases.

Sorry to repeat myself, but how many primary trainers really DO enter
an unintentional spin during a winch launch with an instructor on
board?

In my opinion a primary trainer (the one that is used for early solo
flights) cannot be spin-resistent enough.



Bye
Andreas

On Jun 23, 10:34 pm, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 13:10:28 -0700, Ian
wrote:

How many gliders can recover from a spin which starts on the winch
launch? I really don't think the Puchacz can be blamed in such cases.

Sorry to repeat myself, but how many primary trainers really DO enter
an unintentional spin during a winch launch with an instructor on
board?

Why do people think instructors are invulnerable? I know instructors
who've destroyed gliders.


In my opinion a primary trainer (the one that is used for early solo
flights) cannot be spin-resistent enough.

That was the rationale behind the K21, which was designed to German
requirements. Unfortunately all single seat gliders will spin, so
training solely on spin-resistant gliders is a receipe for disaster
and has no doubt cost lives. The Pooch is an excellent training glider
as it does what any single seater will do - spin if provoked.

Tales of "unrecoverable" spins in pooches are probably due to the idea
that the low tail can blank the rudder (actually it won't). In reality
a pooch will always recover with standard spin recovery technique. If
you claim otherwise, please provide a reference to an accident report
stating so.


Dan