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 |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 19, 1:35*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Sep 19, 9:30*am, Don Johnstone wrote : I did exactly that when teaching students to land a G103 except I would push down on the tail so that they could see the picture in front of them. The correct attitude is that where the main wheel and tailwheel touch the ground at the same time. The glider should then be kept running on the main and tailwheel for as long as possible, directional control is lost when the glider goes nosewheel down. What is interesting is when you compare 4 different gliders: *With a 2-33 (nosedragger), you have to pull the nose up until the tail touches, then lower it until it's at the correct landing attitude (you establish the range of available touchdown angle of attack). *With a Blanik (taildragger), you have to raise the tail a little bit to show the desired touchdown angle. *With a K-21 (nosedragger), you pull the nose up until the tail is on the ground, and finally, with a DG-1000 (taildragger), you just level the wings. Again, it's the gear configuration that is important, and why it's important is something the student needs to understand. Cheers Kirk OK.....But the same BASIC technique works for all these gliders............LOW ENERGY LANDING....... Cookie |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 19, 5:57*pm, Berry wrote:
In article , " wrote: I see many pilots do what I call "landing in a pile".....they touch down, and immediately let the stick go forward........jamming the nose wheel (or skid) onto the ground..........some even push the stick forward!!! *WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!!!!............ With a nose dragger glider, the nose wheel is NOT a "landing gear", it is merely for ground handling and slow taxi....SAME for the skid on a nose dragger glider.........it is not a "landing" skid, it is just to support the glider when stationary or during the very beginning of the take off roll, and the very end of the landing roll. *Same for the nose wheel on a tri gear airplane........... Bad habits come easily.......in our repair shop, we have had a rash of airplane repairs where the tricycle gear airplane was landed nose wheel first.......(or bounced into a nose first landing) resulting in flatened front wheel, bent landing gear, bent firewall, and sometimes prop strike and engine rebuild.........I see "wheel barrow " landings at our field all the time......BAD TECHNIQUE!!!!! Airplanes, gliders, nose dragger, tri gear, tail dragger, all should be landed nose up, tail down. *Landing loads taken by the main gear, and pitch control maintained throughout the ground roll....... So don't blame the 2-33...... Cookie On one of my wife's 2-33 instruction flights: The instructor wanted to land and stop quickly so he would not have to push the glider too far back to the takeoff point. He jammed the skid onto the paved runway at touchdown. The friction heated the metal skid to incandescence and caught the wooden skid underneath on fire!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - LOL..........just because he has the certificate..........doesn't mean much.......... Cookie |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 20/09/2010 15:57, Bruce Hoult wrote:
Incidentally, someone landed their Cirrus on a suburban street here on Sunday morning. They reportedly deliberately used the poles on either side of a pedestrian crossing to slow down. I believe my instructors mentioned tree trunks in this context, but whatever... http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/glid...-alive-3785681 http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4144...g-and-a-prayer http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10674749 I love tvnz's careful description: "The plane landed beside St Patrick's School on Tongariro Street, at the bus stop, near a give way sign." He appears to have knocked over the No Parking sign. That won't stop him getting booked, though. It's clearly not parked legally! GC |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
The 2-33 will withstand less than perfect landings by beginners because it is designed to do so as a TRAINER. *We are *all allowed to make mistakes.........The idea is for the student / instructor to work out all these problems early in the program. Once consistant good landings are made in the 2-33 the pilot can then easily adapt to any glider. *If poor landing technique is tolerated in the 2-33 then the less forgiving gliders will show this defeciency. But this is all the more arguement for the 2-33 as a trainer, and not using Grob or ASK as a trainer....... Cookie First, I don't see any "argument" there for using the 2-33 as a trainer. The 2-33 flies differently than just about anything else out there. Beyond basic stick and rudder skills, it doesn't prepare the pilot to fly anything else. The rest of the world seems to be able to use more modern gliders safely and efficiently without regular damage - they also seem to produce better pilots, at least from world championship results. Teaching low energy landings in a 2-33 can be a bit of a trick. Because the tail is so high relative to the main wheel there is a tendency to go "ground seeking" with the tail leading to the glider stalling before the anything touches down and a nice heavy thud. Hence, very few true low energy landings are taught in a 2-33 (somewhere in the low 30's vs. right around 40). This also doesn't prepare for proper 2-points - the angle of attack to 2-point being much lower in a ASK-21 or similar. Another thread states the 2-33 works fine because eventually *some* go on to fly glass, *few* go on to fly X-C, and *fewer* fly a contest. Again this does not address whether the 2-33 properly prepares pilots for the types of gliders they will likely be flying - even the author admits that they must first "transition" (translation: retrain) to the ASK-21. This whole process could just be skipped without the potential for developing all the sloppy habits that almost come from pilots trained in 2-33's. The only "argument" in this either thread is based on price point. And I won't argue with that one. |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
OK.....But the same BASIC technique works for all these gliders............LOW ENERGY LANDING....... Cookie A proper low energy landing involves a two point (or arguably tail first) touchdown. You cannot teach this in a 2-33. The euro's laugh at us because a not insignificant amount of owners of the newest glass ships still can't do a proper low energy landing. If you feel the need to comment so strongly to this thread you may wish to reveal your real identity. Otherwise we'll have to assume you are Lennie the Lurker (and if you don't know who this is, you haven't been in soaring, or at least on RAS, long enough to comment on these issues) |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
than a couple of inches low.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - yes....agreed......After I gave some thought to my post, I realized I should have included that .......... But not in a 2-33 as a tail first laniding in a 2-33 is in my opinion under the category of too slow.........this is due to the shape of the 33's belly and tail.......(bulbous belly and high tail). Cookie You are being ironic I hope. How can a glider touchdown be "Too slow"? We are not talking about a tail down attitude at height but rather to arrive at the point where the main wheel and tailwheel touch the ground together, (a couple of millimetres either way is acceptable) in effect the stalling angle is reached just before the glider contacts the ground giving the minimum touchdown velocity with a minimum ground run. If you do not understand why this could be important then perhaps your intention was not irony. |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Kevin Christner wrote:
A proper low energy landing involves a two point (or arguably tail first) touchdown. You cannot teach this in a 2-33. The euro's laugh at us because a not insignificant amount of owners of the newest glass ships still can't do a proper low energy landing. I followed this discussion for a while now and frankly, I don't understand all the fuss. I have never been shown any paritcular landing attitude, because this would be meaningless as every glider is different. I've just been told to flare that beast, and keep it flying as long as possible until it ceases to fly. Ths means increasing the angle of attack as the speed decays until the glider falls out of the air. Properly built gliders will do so in a two point attitude, some more accurate, some less accurate. That's all I've been taught and that's how I've been doing it for years. Frankly, I couldn't even tell you the landing attitude. |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Sep 20, 11:38*pm, Martin Gregorie
wrote: On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:57:15 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote: Incidentally, someone landed their Cirrus on a suburban street here on Sunday morning. They reportedly deliberately used the poles on either side of a pedestrian crossing to slow down. I believe my instructors mentioned tree trunks in this context, but whatever... My cousin, who lives in Waikanae, said it was a turbulent, gusty day but none of the reports mention the weather. How would you rate it? The entire country was covered by a massive storm centered to the south of the South Island with strong westerly conditions covering the whole 2000 km (north/south) of the country. If you could get high somewhere it could well have been a record-setting day. Some supermarkets and a stadium in Southland collapsed due to the weight of snow on them. Around Auckland and Hamilton trees were coming down and houses losing roofs and a lot of people lost electricity. In the middle of the North Island there were a lot of slips on to roads. It wasn't so bad around Wellington and was, fundamentally, a fine day, but windy. I wasn't at the club but I'd expect that it was probably gusting over 30 knots. Those are mostly fairly benign conditions at Paraparaumu with smooth air coming off the ocean and on to the hills 3 or 4 km inland, and the sea cliffs further south. The only real problem is Kapiti Island, 5 km offshore, which produces wave which can either reinforce the ridge lift or else dump on to it, and can also generate a fair bit of rotor in semi-random places. Even when the wave/rotor is dumping on to the ridge, you can generally at least keep as high as the ridge, as in this video I shot on my phone last December: http://youtu.be/aLCSpVL35Tk The ridge is at 1000-1200 ft and I could manage 1800 ft or so. I could stay up but I couldn't get high enough to go anywhere. Then you've got to make it 3 km back to the field (near the sea, towards the right hand end of the island in this video) which is not very far, even in sink. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
wrote in message ... snip OK.....But the same BASIC technique works for all these gliders............LOW ENERGY LANDING....... This is a fascinating and slightly scary discussion. I was taught in the UK the BGA way, and the only kind of landing I have been taught is the fully-held off one - ultimately the glider mushes onto the ground. Flying on is not considered good as it's all too easy to end up airborne again if there are lumps and bumps, and the average grass strip or field usually has plenty of those. Landing in less than 200m is not hard in just about any glass ship so long as approach speed control was good and there was at least 1/2 airbrake used. The touchdown is either main wheel and tail wheel/skid at the same time or tail slightly first. Then it's right back with the stick (which is just about where it will be if the landing was really held off) to help keep the ship on the ground, and also to keep the tail wheel/skid planted as long as possible on things like K21s to aid directional stability if there is a cross-wind. Is this what US folks mean by a low-energy landing? If not, what is meant? |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 9/20/2010 11:02 AM, Surfer! wrote:
wrote in message ... snip OK.....But the same BASIC technique works for all these gliders............LOW ENERGY LANDING....... This is a fascinating and slightly scary discussion. I was taught in the UK the BGA way, and the only kind of landing I have been taught is the fully-held off one - ultimately the glider mushes onto the ground. Descriptive details snipped Is this what US folks mean by a low-energy landing? If not, what is meant? What you've described is *my* (U.S.) idea of a low-energy landing. As to much of this discussion, kids can you say, "Nuance is difficult to describe in short paragraphs!" :-) My own take is: KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid). The principles *are* simple...the devil's in the descriptive details. I'm sure someone will correct me if I've overlooked an oddball-configured glider somewhere, but 'the vast majority of gliders' (including 2-33s, even those withOUT spring tailwheels) will perform nice, low-energy touchdowns if successfully landed about an inch in the air...meaning that if they quit flying 'way up there', nothing's going to get hurt or broken from the fall. Actual fuselage attitude falls out in the wash... True for nose-draggers and taildraggers. Guessing wildly - and not excusing failure to practice low-energy technique when conditions permit - perhaps one reason some western U.S. glider pilots rationalize skill in performing low-energy landings isn't 'crucial' is because it's the norm in these parts for strong, gusting (often, cross)winds to be present unless landing near dusk, away from any thunderstorms. One's view of the desirability of a fully held-off landing (especially on paved runways) probably varies inversely proportionally with the strength of the gusting crosswind! My personal record for touchdown speed was a 65+ knot, wheeled-on touchdown (75+ knot final to maintain a 'reasonable crab angle') in a direct crosswind of 25-35 knots onto the only (narrow, sans-lights) pavement around - it was that or hassle with an OFL and a post-sundown retrieve in the same winds (from a distant T-storm)...15-meter, flapped, no-spoilers ship. About 20-feet of lateral downwind displacement occurred in the roll-out, despite (post-touchdown) full downwind rudder, a negative-flap-planted tail wheel, maximum wheel braking and (eventually) an intentionally dragging downwind tip. A held-off landing under the circumstances wasn't seriously considered. Bob W. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club Class Gliders | Sam Giltner[_1_] | Soaring | 4 | December 3rd 08 03:28 AM |
Basic Training Gliders | Derek Copeland | Soaring | 35 | December 26th 05 02:19 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Soaring club close to NYC, with high-performance gliders | City Dweller | Soaring | 9 | September 29th 05 11:55 AM |