If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
In article
, "bumper" wrote: Some aircraft designs, given the wrong set of circumstances, can exhibit unusual or divergent flight characteristics. They can enter a deep stall or flat spin from which recovery is impossible or difficult. Not sure if the Puchaz suffers from any of this, the accident numbers alone may make some wonder. There have got to be more Blaniks around than Pooks, and they also spin very enthusiastically and suddenly (but with the classic warnings) off a botched turn. But I haven't noticed them featuring in the accident statistics. -- Bruce |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Borgelt" wrote in message news On 25 Jan 2004 01:26:39 GMT, (Edward Downham) wrote: If I took charge of a gliding club using Puchacz(s) for basic training, the first thing I would do is pile them all in a heap in the corner of the field and set fire to them. This may come across as something of a controversial viewpoint. Let me explain. As far as I know, we are now into double figures (in the UK alone) in terms of fatalities when it comes to stall/spin accidents in the Puchacz. Compare this to gliders like the twin Grob and K-21: there are far greater numbers of them flying many times more hours with a much better record. Even older machines such as the K-13 stand out well in comparison. I really can't see the advantage of a training glider that spins so readily and kills you if you get the recovery (slightly) wrong. I think some of the instructing fraternity (in the UK) have become too focussed on spinning as an 'exercise' and not something to be avoided. I believe that if a significant group of pilots are having _inadvertent_ stall/spin incidents/accidents when they are flying solo, then there is something very very wrong with the most elementary training we are giving. I read and hear much concerning technical details of spinning, i.e. what glider X does after 5 turns with part aileron and that glider Y flicks when you yank and stamp on the controls. All fairly irrelevant. If you get to the point of having to do a full recovery one might question as to how you got there in the first place. If you are low down (especially in machines like the Puchacz), where most bad accidents occur, knowing how to recover from a spin is probably not going to be of much use. Indeed, it may help to make the subsequent impact unsurviveable. What we seem to be failing to do is to instill a basic awareness of what the glider is up to, and the _instinctive_ reactions required if the airframe stops responding to your commands. Mike Cuming wrote a seminal article in S&G, some years back, entiltled: "STOP PULLING THE STICK BACK!". This should be required reading for all pre-solo students. If you really want to show people full-blooded spins and recoveries, take them up to a safe height in an aerobatic power aircraft, certified for those kind of manoevres. You will be able to do much more for a lot less money. Frankly, I see little point in making pilots deliberately demonstrate their 'expertise' in abusing a glider to the point it autorotates, then attempting to do something about it. This is not the world aerobatic championships. I would much rather see immediate instinctive corrections to any possible loss of control. To the experienced pilots/instructors reading this: when was the last time you ended up (inadvertently) in a spin? Yes, you get wing drops in thermals etc. but do you sit there, doing nothing, until the ground and sky start going round very fast? No. I'm sure you don't, as you are alive to read this. What drove me to stay up at night to write this post was a feeling of anger/helplessness/sadness that yet more people have died in what I regard as a pointless exercise. I knew the P1 in the double-fatal crash this week but not his fifteen year old student. Safe flying to all of you. Thank you Edward. That is the best article on this issue I have ever seen. I agree 100% and particularly with the "do it in a power plane designed for this". I did this two years ago in a Pitts S2A with an experienced airshow pilot who is also an aerobatic instructor. We both wore parachutes, had a proper briefing and agreed to abandon ship if control not regained by 4000 feet AGL. All spins were begun from at least 9000 feet. I learned more about spinning in that hour than in my previous 35 years flying. Now for a solution to keep everyone happy - I believe we have the technology to build a realistic, close to full motion, spin simulator at an affordable price. This will allow through and complete exploration of the pre stall, stall and spin regime for training and combine this with one real full spin aircraft exercise at altitude with proper precautions and briefing. Lets do this and stop killing people in training exercises. We lost a couple of people in Australia a few years ago in a Blanik during an annual "spin check". The spin turned into a spiral and the aircraft broke up in the recovery. They weren't at high altitude nor wearing parachutes. Many experienced pilots I know flat out refuse to do full spins during annual checks as being an unnecessary risk. They will happily demonstrate stalls and incipient spins. Mike Borgelt I did an annual check of a ATP pilot who owns a glider. He had also been flying aerobatic aircraft such as the Citabria and PItts. The annual check was in a Blanik L-23. We decided on a two turn spin so that I could know when to expect a recovery attempt. At two turns, I saw the rear pedals shift to their anti-spin position but the stick remained aft of center and the L-23 continued to spin as if nothing had been done to stop it. I said, "two turns" to remind him of our bargain. Then the stick moved forward and the glider stopped rotating and entered the recovery dive. Asked about the delay in recovery, the pilot said that the standard recovery technique used in the powered aircraft he had been flying was just to reverse the rudder and to keep the stick aft of center. I pointed out that every glider I knew of required forward stick for a sure recovery. (We did several more spins until we both were comfortable with his spin recovery technique.) I think the take-home lesson is that airplanes can spin more benignly than gliders. Relying on spin training in airplanes is just not always appropriate and can leave the pilot with misconceptions about glider spin recovery. I think that, if you fly gliders that will spin, it is wise to experience the spin recovery at least once and preferably more often than that. That said, there is nothing wrong with basic training that emphasizes recognition of an incipient spin over spin recovery. Recognition that a spin is imminent, and knowledge of the technique to prevent it, will save more lives than expert spin recovery. So, is spin training dangerous? Yes, but much less dangerous than not doing spin training. The path from novice to expert is sometimes fraught with peril but remaining a novice is more dangerous still. The Puch, Blanik, and Lark spin more like the glass gliders most of us fly. As such, they are excellent trainers. Just choose an instructor that is very experienced with them. Bill Daniels Bill Daniels |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Vaughn" wrote in message ...
"F1y1n" wrote in message om... I once asked an instructor to demonstrate a spin in a two-seat aircraft I was transitioning into. Did you have chutes? In the US, the only time you are allowed to spin dual without chutes is when you are working on a rating that requires spin training. If you were asking the CFI to spin without chutes (just a wild guess), he was 100% correct to turn you down. I would too. Unless you are already CFIG, you are always 'working on a rating' when flying dual with a (current) CFIG. No parachutes needed for spinning. And no, as I said, he did not turn me down because of the lack of a chute. I would also refuse to spin a student in a glider that I had not previously spun myself. This begs the question: Why the hell would you instruct in an aircraft you haven't spun yourself? Doing so would be foolish, IMHO. Like it or not; not in the US, spin training is not required for the commercial rating... ...but it is required for CFI. That does not make every CFI a qualified acro jock. If you read the FARs you will find that spin training is not acro. A spin is a well-behaved, predictable flight regime... Not necessarily true, not even true of all trainers. Some gliders have, (or at least are reputed to have) multiple spin modes. The spin rate, pitch angle, descent rate, and any pitch oscillation amplitude and frequency does depend on the CG and gross weight, sure, but a spin within the CG in an approved glider with a standard airworthiness certificate is always benign can be recovered using the documented procedures. As I said: 'well-behaved' and 'predictable'. Not all aircraft have perfect rigging, and a certain percentage have accumulated repairs and/or mods over years of operation that change the distribution of mass about the various axis and have an unknown effect on spin behavior. Any mods that effect the CG require a new weight & balance. See my comment above re safe flight within CG. You'd be suicidal flying a glider with an unkown spin behavior. Instructing in one would be border-line criminal. My point is: a spin is not some black magic. Learn it, and instruct it. If you are afraid of spinning you shouldn't be flying, much less teaching. Just two weeks ago, I found myself practicing stalls in a 152 that I wouldn't spin in a bet. It had a dent in the leading edge of one wing and had a nasty wing drop at every stall, but otherwise performed well. Most 150s and 152s I have flown drop a wing at stall, as do many older gliders. Does this make them unsafe to spin? Emphatically no! They will spin happily in either direction. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"F1y1n" wrote in message snip amplitude and frequency does depend on the CG and gross weight, sure, but a spin within the CG in an approved glider with a standard airworthiness certificate is always benign can be recovered using the documented procedures. As I said: 'well-behaved' and 'predictable'. Up to the two turn JAR 22 test standard for modern gliders. Beyond that, you are a test pilot. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
If all you are planning to fly is well behaved and you are a cautious
pilot who never competes, or flies till fatigue set in that is fine. Conversely a lot of the aircraft out there, and particularly the glass single seaters will depart into a spin with little warning in the right circumstances. Recovery attitude is often nearly vertical and the entry violent. This is especially true of high performance single seaters with high wingloadings. (lots of water in the wings) We are also in part of the world that preaches spin identification and avoidance. I fly a 33 year old glass plane (Standard Cirrus) that has delightful handling and is relatively easy to fly, up to a point. Beyond that point the alacrity with which she drops a wing prompted me to go out and get some real spin training, so at least I have a chance. Maybe I am just a mediocre pilot, but I am not sure I will not cross the line some day. Even in a docile K13 the first couple were disorienting and I recovered more because of the K13's behavior than correct procedure - and I did this post solo. Now I am a lot more relaxed in situations where it is possible I might spin inadvertently like turbulent thermals. Bruce Arnold Pieper wrote: That full-blown glider pilots would question the need for spin training is unbelievable. But all the oppinions I read on this tread just shows how much ignorance there is on the subject, it's really sad. What nobody seems to realize is that the Puchacz is used more extensively in SNIP |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Chris,
No, I don't think you have to spin below 1500agl, I don't agree with that practice. By "doing it time and again until the student realizes...." I just meant practicing spins repeatedly during the training syllabus, not just once for demonstration. "Chris OCallaghan" wrote in message om... A year or two ago, there were people suggesting that low spins, say below 1500 agl, were an important training exercise since they let the student experience the shock of a canopy full of earth coming on quickly. By having experienced this, the pilot would be able to react more quickly to the accidental stall/spin in the pattern and thus effect a faster, safer recovery. Are you saying that you agree with this, that you practice it, and that it has become common practice in the UK? (You note that you start your training at 3000 agl, then imply that once the student is acclimated, you bring the entry altitude down.) |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Read the previous treads.
The Puchacz is used for low altitude spin training more than anything else because it is that well trusted. Being subject to that more than other/older designs, it is just more exposed. Where people don't spin gliders at low altitudes, the Puchacz has as clean (or cleaner) a record as any other training glider. If you don't know what's going on, check the www.ssa.org website, click on Magazines, then on "Dick Johnson" and find his flight evaluation of the Puchacz and the specific "spin characteristics evaluation" of the Puchacz, in which Dick gives the Puchacz a clean bill of health. "bumper" wrote in message ... Some aircraft designs, given the wrong set of circumstances, can exhibit unusual or divergent flight characteristics. They can enter a deep stall or flat spin from which recovery is impossible or difficult. Not sure if the Puchaz suffers from any of this, the accident numbers alone may make some wonder. Being your basic coward, I wouldn't spin one without knowing for sure what's going on . . . and I'll admit I don't. -- bumper ZZ (reverse all after @) "Dare to be different . . . circle in sink." "Dave Martin" wrote in message ... Why is it when there is a fatality we set off on a chest beating exercise? The poor old Puchacz. It is built to do a job, which it does excellently. It can be used effectively to teach all aspects of the glider pilots training syllabus without adding weights, spin whiskers or other fancy gismos. It does not have to be provoked into performing some of the exercises, it does them as it should, correctly and on command. Yes it spins. It is designed to do that! OK it suffers from some of its build quality. It gives plenty of warning of the approaching stall, it also gives plenty of warning that it is about to spin. It can be flown very badly on or about the stall and provided the pilot is aware of the circumstance merely regaining flying speed generally solves the problems. Capable instructors can teach the whole range of stalling and further stalling exercises. Unfortunately it allows those not familiar with it into some dangerous areas Like all gliders, instructors should be taught what the glider is capable of, its qualities and how to get the best out of the glider. I have been teaching on Puchacz gliders for over 10 years and the more I fly them the more I realise what a superb training tool they are. Other two seaters do some jobs better, but overall the Puchacz is perhaps best all round training glider in production today. It is a training tool and should be used as such. Having said that it is not a glider to get complacent with. Like many gliders even those with alleged docile characteristics if flown badly it will bite the unwary. Dave |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
We get more heavy landing accidents in training than
in post solo flying, so by that argument we shouldn't be teaching people to land either! At 18:12 23 January 2004, Jj Sinclair wrote: It's winter, I'm bored and I haven't started any good controversies (this year) so here goes: In the early 50's the USAF had a policy to give jump training to all aircrew personnel. They soon learned that they were getting twice the injuries in training that they were experiencing in real bail-outs. They decided to stop the actual jump training and just give PLF and kit deployment, etc training. So, JJ asks, In light of recent events that show its been reining Puchaz's, Do we really want to teach full blown spins? Isn't spin entry and immediate recovery, all we should be doing? JJ Sinclair |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Inspiration by friends - mutal interest and motivation to get the PPL | Gary G | Piloting | 1 | October 29th 04 09:19 PM |
Baby Bush will be Closing Airports in California to VFR Flight Again | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 119 | March 13th 04 02:56 AM |
Some Fiction For Interest | Badwater Bill | Rotorcraft | 8 | March 6th 04 03:45 AM |
Spinning Horizon | Mike Adams | Owning | 8 | December 26th 03 01:35 AM |