A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

spins and vintage gliders



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 6th 04, 01:45 AM
John Firth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default spins and vintage gliders



In the early 60 s , a kind member at MASA more or less gave me carte
blanche to fly his unmodifed LK 10 when ever I wanted; as I was BGA
trained and spin aware, I expored it's stall behavior; it dropped a wing
so viciously that I did not let it autorotate. It had Clark Y section
and no washout as I recall. Did a few croscountries in it including running
a cold front squall line with resultant outlanding.
I thought it a reasonably well harmonised glider with very modest performance.
it would be interesting to revisit some of these early impressions.

John Firth

+
It would be hard to put reliable data together, but I suspect there are
other glider types whose numbers have been depleted by fatal spins to an
even larger percentage than the Puchacz. The 2-32 and LK-10 come to

mind.
I seem to recall it being said that 75% of the LK-10's original numbers

were
lost in spins that killed the pilot. I also remember the IDENTICAL
discussion about the LK-10 as we are having about the Owl.

Rather than blame the glider, I would point the finger at training that
doesn't equip pilots with the skills needed to fly these gliders.

Bill Daniels



I have quite a few hours in a flat topped LK-10. It was the second
glider type I flew and the first I flew in a contest. Yes, there were
concerns about the LK-10 spinning/recovery. It was never deliberately
spun and I think all were so concerned nobody ever even let it get to
the incipient stage.
I think it met its end on an outlanding, something to do with a fence
and a ditch, no injuries, not worth repairing.

As the LK-10 was designed as a military training glider in wartime I
can believe it may have had less than ideal flight characteristics
and it may well have killed many inexperienced, hastily trained
cadets. This may be regarded as acceptable by the military in wartime.

Is this acceptable for civilians in peacetime?

I just re-read the chapter by Leighton Collins at the back of "Stick
and Rudder". It is called "The Dangers of the Air". Highly relevant to
these spin threads and training. It was written in 1946 and we seem to
have learned little.

Given that the dangers of spinning from a failed launch, on base or
final, from low thermalling or in a gaggle are all well known and
understood and we all agree that this shouldn't be done ever then the
problem becomes not spin recovery but absolute prevention of
unintentional spins.

Most pilots seem to manage this at least with most modern gliders.
What is it about either some gliders or the training that results in
some not "getting it"?

Mike Borgelt


Interesting. There aren't many of us left who flew the LK-10. Did you fly
one in OZ or in the US? My primary trainer was a "double-bubble" flat
topped LK-10. N22U once graced the cover of the cross country chapter of
the SSA soaring handbook.

I once heard Jack Laister tell that the LK-10 was itself a modification of
his "Yankee Doodle" single place competition glider designed while he was a
teenager. The US military asked him to design a two-place trainer in the
early 1940's. Jack said he just straightened out the gull wings and
stretched the fuselage behind the wing to make room for a rear cockpit and
the Yankee Doodle became the military LK-10 or TG-4.

I spun both N22U and another LK-10 still in the original configuration.
Both left no doubt that mis-handling them would kill. I sometimes had the
hair-raising feeling that the glider was actively trying to kill me. That
experience left me with a wariness of low and slow flying that is still with
me. I'd like to see that wariness passed along to a new generation of
pilots. I think it saved my life on several occasions and might save some
of theirs too.

Bill Daniels



--


What is the meaning of life? Life is trial by computer
  #2  
Old February 6th 04, 09:47 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Firth wrote:

so viciously that I did not let it autorotate. It had Clark Y section
and no washout as I recall.


The Baby Ace has a clark Y with no washout, little dihedral,
and a similar viscious wing drop.

The elevator is so heavy, and C.G. set up so well, that it
doesn't really stall well unless loaded real aft.

This is another example of an aircraft that would likely spin
radically, but is designed to avoid this by making it hard
for the pilot to inadvertently stall...
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Antique & Vintage Aircraft Gauges TBBlakeley Restoration 2 October 1st 12 06:48 AM
FS: Antique & Vintage Aircraft Gauges, etc TBBlakeley Aviation Marketplace 0 October 16th 03 01:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.