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
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
From an economical point of view: the ASK 21 is the only
twoseater glassfibre glider certified for 18,000 hours, not just 12,000 like most... |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 06:54:11 -0700, krasw wrote:
On Friday, 24 April 2020 20:11:54 UTC+3, Martin Gregorie wrote: So, on the whole I prefer trainers to be more unforgiving than the ASK-21 or the G-103. Personally, I like the Puchacz a lot - its much more pleasant to fly solo than either an ASK-21 or a G103. But, all I really was saying that thinking an ASK-21 won't spin is an attitude that may catch you out one day. Its manual also says it won't spin inverted but there are or were test pilots at Edwards who showed that to be wrong. I have been flying ASK 21s for 25 years first as a student and then as a flight instructor. I have never witnessed or heard anyone spinning 21, unless equipped with spin kit which we have. I would rate it as spin proof as anything can be. Statistics agree with this. Well, now you know that its possible to spin it without the kit: my club has never had a tail-weight kit and doesn't now despite owning two ASK-21s. We still have our Puchacz and for spin training or a spin refresher. That is what I'd expect to do annual spin checks in. I'm looking forward to doing just that as soon as we can fly again. I didn't say spinning an ASK-21 without weights is easy, just that it can be done if both pilots are medium to light weight. I had a trial flight at Blue Ridge Soaring (16 Oct 1999). The CFIG was large, I'm not. Anyhow, he attempted to demonstrate a spin in their ASK-21, the first glass glider I'd even seen, and could not get it to spin, *but* (1) he was heavy and (2) he tried to provoke a spin while flying quite a bit faster than stall speed. All his attempts seemed to start to spin, but became the beginning of a spiral dive after around half a turn and were promptly rolled level and recovered. But read the Edwards report to get a professional opinion about it. Their view is that an ASK-21 will spin (upright AND inverted) and stall but that the POH was inadequate and incorrect. Presumably the POH has been amended for the ASK-21B. You referring to Puchacz as forgiving trainer. Wrong. I said its nicer to fly solo than an ASK-21, not that it is forgiving. You certainly won't find me flying one slowly below 1000 ft. Please don't misquote me again. Are you aware that over 10% of Puchacz fleet has been spinned accidentally to ground? This is absolutely appalling statistic. I don't know whether the 10% figure is right, but I am well aware that quite a lot of them have been crashed. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The original FM was updated in 1991 to reflect the new information from the Edwards spinning flight test evaluation https://www.alexander-schleicher.de/...TM23_US_HB.pdf :-) Colin |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
In 1992 the K21 had a TN for service life extension issued that started with inspections at 3000 and 6000 hrs followed with inspection again at 7000 hrs and at thousand hour intervals to a total of 12000 hrs. As a result of those inspections there was an updated TN in 2003 that had 3 stages. The 1st stage had inspections at 3000 hrs, 6000 hrs and an increase to fly to 9000 hrs subject to manufacturer approval The 2nd stage involved inspection at 9000 hrs to gain approval to fly to 12000 hrs The 3rd stage then requires further inspection along with the total aerobatic hours being 12.5% or less of the airframes hours for Schleicher to decide on releasing the glider for service up to 15000 hrs. At 15000 hrs the inspection is repeated and the glider may be approved for an extension to 18000 hrs. All in all not a trivial thing and shows the importance of accurate flight time recording. As more time in service is gained with all types of gliders, not just the K21, further life increases among all types can be expected which is a good thing As a matter of interest, what sort of hours are clubs out there putting on their trainers? :-) Colin |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
You referring to Puchacz as forgiving trainer. It is more pleasant to fly but not forgiving at all. Are you aware that over 10% of Puchacz fleet has been spinned accidentally to ground? This is absolutely appalling statistic. Don't forget that the Puchacz can be flown without the rudder. Several years ago the AGCSC Puchacz landed at Warner Springs without the rudder and without the pilots (?) noticing. The rudder was never found. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
On Monday, 27 April 2020 05:03:30 UTC+3, Steve Bralla wrote:
You referring to Puchacz as forgiving trainer. It is more pleasant to fly but not forgiving at all. Are you aware that over 10% of Puchacz fleet has been spinned accidentally to ground? This is absolutely appalling statistic. Don't forget that the Puchacz can be flown without the rudder. Several years ago the AGCSC Puchacz landed at Warner Springs without the rudder and without the pilots (?) noticing. The rudder was never found. I certainly know that rudder can fall off during ground roll. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
On 24/04/2020 22:15, Martin Gregorie wrote:
the only thing I wasn't keen on was getting into and out of it - not quite as bad as an ASH-25, but close. However, entry and egress from the 1001 looks to be a lot easier with its having a nose-wheel and being much closer to the floor. There has always been different undercarriage options. Just that most earlier models were aimed at cross-country and went for the high main wheel option. The default for the 1001-Club version is the one with the nose wheel which is more appropriate for a trainer. -- Nick Hill |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
I'd like to know how a new club only three years old convinced the IRS to agree to allowing it to be a 501-C3? I know of several much older clubs that were recently denied this classification.
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
You almost have to apply under a new name, alot of paperwork and some things you have to prove annually.
Prescott Area Soaring 501(c)3 CH |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Our New Club Ship Becoming Reality
The "average" application takes around 4mo to be approved; with outliers a bit beyond 1yr, depending on how it was set up. There are many different types of 501(c)(x) non-profits, some social clubs go for the 501(c)(7). Regardless, the IRS does permit a retroactive status to funds taken in when the entity was first established (depending on rules). Caution; the type of 501(c) dictates how assets are distributed after dissolution of the organization (e.g., must be donated to an "in-kind" entity vs individuals.
On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 9:00:42 AM UTC-5, John DeRosa OHM Ω http://aviation.derosaweb.net wrote: I'd like to know how a new club only three years old convinced the IRS to agree to allowing it to be a 501-C3? I know of several much older clubs that were recently denied this classification. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Most Competitive Club Class Ship | [email protected] | Soaring | 22 | April 5th 20 11:28 AM |
T6 Formation flight with Ship to Ship and ATC COMS - Video | [email protected] | Piloting | 5 | September 10th 09 06:09 PM |
OT T6 Formation flight with Ship to Ship and ATC COMS - Video | A Lieberma[_2_] | Owning | 0 | September 10th 09 12:47 AM |
OT - T6 Formation flight with Ship to Ship and ATC COMS - Video | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | September 10th 09 12:47 AM |
Which Two Place Club Ship? | ContestID67 | Soaring | 25 | September 26th 06 05:50 PM |