Windrose Crash
Matthew Redsell
recommend that no one build and fly one.
It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong thermals.
As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
on. On the attempt of recovery from the spin in the ensuing spiral dive
I noticed the elevator not responding. This has happened once before...
but I recovered form that! This got too out of hand so I bailed out.....
but not without a lot of difficulty. This was the first real test of the
emergency canopy release..... it worked but not as Ii had thought it
would. The canopy stayed on until I kicked it off... possibly held by
the side latches.
The next episode was science fiction..... I free feel then pulled the
chute but the glider recovered and did a long series of loops right
above me and to the side within 20 -50 feet. I was really pulling those
shroud lines to avoid hitting it..... and I really felt helpless!
I landed before the glider which was deteremined to get me..... I
literally jumed out of the chute once on the ground and ran..... it was
right above me...... it then pitched over to follow me in the direction
I chose to run.......finally it went nose in not 30 feet from me.
Amazingly the Yaesu hand held radio was working.... I pushed my had in
the rubble looking for it... finally finding it and broadcasting that I
had survived!
I'm really lucky to be alive..... and a number of people got it on
video....
So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
fly. This makes me quite sad since I liked it quite a lot.
--
Mat Redsell CFIG <mar...@continuo.com>
Marske Flying Wings 740-375-8080
Marske Flying wings <http://www.continuo.com/marske>
Windrose Website: <http://www.continuo.com/windrose/windrose.htm>
Matthew Redsell
recommend that no one build and fly one.
It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong thermals.
As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which because of the slow speed
put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair about of flaps
on. On the attempt of recovery from the spin in the ensuing spiral dive
I noticed the elevator not responding. This has happened once before...
but I recovered form that! This got too out of hand so I bailed out.....
but not without a lot of difficulty. This was the first real test of the
emergency canopy release..... it worked but not as Ii had thought it
would. The canopy stayed on until I kicked it off... possibly held by
the side latches.
The next episode was science fiction..... I free feel then pulled the
chute but the glider recovered and did a long series of loops right
above me and to the side within 20 -50 feet. I was really pulling those
shroud lines to avoid hitting it..... and I really felt helpless!
I landed before the glider which was determined to get me..... I
literally jumped out of the chute once on the ground and ran..... it was
Marc Whisman
elevator to not respond when you've had a chance to analyze the
situation better.
regards
-Marc
Matthew Redsell
flying a little slower than usual and I believe that I entered a spin
even with quite a few degrees of flap setting..... but again maybve my
airspeed had fallen off. I could feel the G forces and realized the
elevator was not responding. As I had stated this was the second time
that happened. The rudder input did not seem to have any effect either.
I felt my airspeed was building quickly and rather than try hang on I
elected to jump... and even the emergency canopy release worked!
Although I did kick it a bit when I forgot to open the side latches....
but they where designed to also let go with pressure.
And of course the greatest insult to see it doing loops right above me
as though utterly under control......as if to say "I can fly quite well
without you"! There are a few videos of the entire happening but I
haven't seen them.
Mark Hoffman
Thank God you're okay! Your decision to bail was the correct one, in my
opinion. Good going!
I can understand your current distress after such a harrowing experience.
But perhaps declaring all Windrose's as unsafe based on your experience
with one example, at least at this point, is premature.
Stall/spin incidents have happened in all sorts of gliders, including the
Monarch. I am aware of the fatal in the Logan Windrose after a self-launch
power failure at 450' AGL. But that incident could be totally unrelated.
To be fair to the Maupins, perhaps we need additional information.
Has anyone else heard of or experienced unusual behavior of a Windrose as
described by Mat?
Mat, in the spiral dive were you able to first roll out of the bank? If
so, then I presume it was at that point you were unable to ease out of the
dive with the elevator?
Anyway, sorry to hear of the incident, but extremely happy to hear you're
all right.
-Doug
Wayne Paul
Mark Hoffman wrote in message <3996CDF4...@oakland-info.com>...
>Has anyone else heard of or experienced unusual behavior of a Windrose as
>described by Mat?
>
A lot of plans have been sold; however, how many have been built? A search
of the Landings data base only finds 8 aircraft with a model name of
"Windrose".
The search results are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N124SFAircraft Serial Number : 286
Aircraft Manufacturer : ROBERTS PAUL M
Model : WINDROSEAircraft Year :
Owner Name : ROBERTS PAUL M
Owner Address : 1320 36TH STREET
PARKERSBURG, WV, 26104
Registration Date : 26-May-1994
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Not Specified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N25060Aircraft Serial Number : 001
Aircraft Manufacturer : MCCLINTOCK WARREN J
Model : WINDROSE 15 M
Aircraft Year :
Owner Name : MCCLINTOCK WARREN J
Owner Address : 5027 N MILDRED ST
TACOMA, WA, 98407-1354
Registration Date : 27-Mar-2000
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Not Specified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N3256PAircraft Serial Number : 1
Aircraft Manufacturer : MAUPIN JAMES H
Model : WINDROSEEngine Manufacturer :
CUYUNA
Model : ALL MDLS A/B
Aircraft Year : 1984
Owner Name : MAUPIN JAMES H
Owner Address : 26338 ZEPHYR
HARBOR CITY, CA, 90710
Registration Date : 22-Oct-1986
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Experimental
Approved Operations : Amateur Built
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N400MSAircraft Serial Number : 20
Aircraft Manufacturer : OTIS ROBERT R
Model : WINDROSEAircraft Year :
1990
Owner Name : OTIS ROBERT R
Owner Address : 3200 IOWA AVE SE
CEDAR RAPIDS, IA, 52403
Registration Date : 10-Sep-1990
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Experimental
Approved Operations : Amateur Built
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N91WRAircraft Serial Number : 180
Aircraft Manufacturer : WALKLING JOHN L
Model : WINDROSE
Engine Manufacturer : KAWASAKI
Model : ALL MDLS A/B
Aircraft Year : 1991
Owner Name : CONNER JERRY L
Owner Address : 800 SAGE LN
FALLON, NV, 89406
Registration Date : 16-Feb-1995
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Experimental
Approved Operations : Amateur Built
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N92WRAircraft Serial Number : 220-1
Aircraft Manufacturer : PARKER D / GROSS K
Model : WINDROSEAircraft Year :
1992
Owner Name : GROSS KEVIN J
Owner Address : PO BOX 756
SCOTTSBORO, AL, 35768
Registration Date : 15-Mar-1995
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Experimental
Approved Operations : Amateur Built
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N931GSAircraft Serial Number : 147
Aircraft Manufacturer : SADORUS GEORGE P
Model : WINDROSE II
Aircraft Year :
Owner Name : SADARVS GEORGE P
Owner Address : 3425 N WOODFORD ST
DECATUR, IL, 62526-2839
Registration Date : 23-Jul-1996
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Not Specified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
N-number : N95WBAircraft Serial Number :
WMB-97
Aircraft Manufacturer : BURGE W M JR
Model : WINDROSEAircraft Year :
Owner Name : BURGE WILLIAM M JR
Owner Address : 1804 MEADOW LANE ST
VICTORIA, TX, 77901
Registration Date : 05-Aug-1987
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Not Specified
Al
lack of a tail.
Matt please spare us your sales pitches on the Monarch.
Tailless designs have several major disadvantages when flying in country
like the Owns or any area of strong violent lift.
Please do not try and pitch (excuse the pun) Tailless aircraft as safer then
regular sailplanes. Fact is they are not..
> I really do think that this glider is unsafe and I have never met this
> in all of the hundreds of tests I have done in a Monarch. This is a very
> good argument for the flying wing...... there is no tail to stall and it
> will always pitch up under speed.
>
> thanks -mat
Bill Daniels
have several major disadvantages when flying in country
> like the Owns or any area of strong violent lift.
> Please do not try and pitch (excuse the pun) Tailless aircraft as safer
then
> regular sailplanes. Fact is they are not..
Al, your statement above is BS.
I have flown tailless gliders in California and Nevada's worst thermals and
wave rotors. They are certainly no worse and possibly better than
conventional designs in heavy turbulence. I do know from careful flight
tests the Marske Pioneer 1A would absorb less G loading from turbulence than
similar wing loading conventional gliders flying in formation at high speed.
The Monarch is a nifty glider for working microlift and certainly doesn't
need a bailout to sell it. Your suggestion to that effect is way out of
line.
I don't know what Mat encountered in the Windrose - I'm willing to wait for
the analysis of the videos. Mat's statement to the effect that the Windrose
is unsafe seems premature but understandable given the cercumstances.
I'm glad he's safe.
Bill Daniels
Al
are Hang glider pilots who have suffered tumbles at the hands of powerfull
thermals. Several of them record holders in hang gliding, they have vowed
never to fly one again.
Relfex trailing edges are no substute a tailplane I suggest your statement
is BS Bill.
As far as Matts bailout I a glad that he effectivly and correctly diagnosed
the situation in the Windrose and jumped.
I am even more pleased that he survived the jump and arrival under round
chute.
Fact::- tailless aircraft are not as safe as regular designs in strong
conditions.
Bill Daniels <wdan...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:uPIl5.1145$3b6.2...@news.uswest.net...
Armand A. Medeiros
I hate to say it o'l buddy, but aren't you being a bit callous? I know you
have strong feelings towards certain things but we could at least give this
dude a break for having an opinion like everyone else. It doesn't matter if
he is trying to push something. It DOES matter that he is passing on good
information about an accident. Thankfully, he is still with us to do so.
Chill buddy...it's okay...
Also, has anyone considered that the wing loading (Total Weight) may be a
more significant factor? It's rather hard to blow a brick around compared to
a feather....
JMHO
Armand
"Al" <acro...@www.silentflight.com> wrote in message
news:spek1i1...@news.supernews.com...
> Tell this to Hang Glider pilots who have been tumbled in strong lift due
to
> lack of a tail.
> Matt please spare us your sales pitches on the Monarch.
>
> Tailless designs have several major disadvantages when flying in country
> like the Owns or any area of strong violent lift.
> Please do not try and pitch (excuse the pun) Tailless aircraft as safer
then
> regular sailplanes. Fact is they are not..
>
Allison Scott
Matthew...I'm happy to hear you are all right. I am curious, however,
about some of your terms.
Matthew Redsell wrote:
>
> As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
> put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
> on. On the attempt of recovery from the spin in the ensuing spiral dive
> I noticed the elevator not responding.
A proper spin recovery does not result in an "ensuing spiral dive". Some
aircraft do like to come out the stalled condition and continue into a
spiral dive. If you are in a spiral dive the elevator will seem
ineffective...that's why we are taught to roll the wings level first...then
EASE out of the dive. I don't have any experience in flapped sailplanes,
but I have experienced the effects of too much flap in Cessnas at 40 degrees
flap before they were modded. This problem happened at low speed though. I
find it a little hard to believe this could happen at high speed with the
wings level.
> but the glider recovered and did a long series of loops right
> above me and to the side within 20 -50 feet. I was really pulling those
> shroud lines to avoid hitting it..... and I really felt helpless!
A series of LOOPS?? Interesting..
> So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
> fly. This makes me quite sad since I liked it quite a lot.
I think we need to have a closer look at this incident before a blanket
statement like that is made.
Matthew Redsell
about 55- 60 mph. with out warning I was over on my back, into a spin
and then in a very steep spiral dive as witnessed by an experienced
glider pilot directly above me. The elevator did not respond....I tried
it twice.... pushed it forward to try unstall it but nothing. the pilto
above said the speed build up was incredible and the rudder was in
flutter causing the whole fuselage to act like a minnow swimming. He
said it took about 5 seconds for all of this to take place before I was
out.
that I landed in a small bean field and not the railway tracks, road or
factories was a miracle.
Matthew Redsell
> > As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
> > put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
> > on. On the attempt of recovery from the spin in the ensuing spiral dive
> > I noticed the elevator not responding.
>
> A proper spin recovery does not result in an "ensuing spiral dive". Some
> aircraft do like to come out the stalled condition and continue into a
> spiral dive. If you are in a spiral dive the elevator will seem
> ineffective...that's why we are taught to roll the wings level first...then
> EASE out of the dive. I don't have any experience in flapped sailplanes,
> but I have experienced the effects of too much flap in Cessnas at 40 degrees
> flap before they were modded. This problem happened at low speed though. I
> find it a little hard to believe this could happen at high speed with the
> wings level.
The forces where so great I could not get orientated so I elected to eject. I
had recoved once before in a similar occurance about a year ago..
>
>
> > but the glider recovered and did a long series of loops right
> > above me and to the side within 20 -50 feet. I was really pulling those
> > shroud lines to avoid hitting it..... and I really felt helpless!
>
> A series of LOOPS?? Interesting..
>
> > So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
> > fly. This makes me quite sad since I liked it quite a lot.
>
> I think we need to have a closer look at this incident before a blanket
> statement like that is made.
No, After this experience I know the glider is unsafe to fly. I fly almost every
day in many ships, I'm an instructor and commerical pilot.
Mike Willey
An incredible story carried forward on the newsgroup almost in
real time.. This format proves one thing... Everyone has an
opinion..
Glad you got out to tell your story and maybe we will learn
something from it in time..
Keep Soaring..
Mike
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Walt Konecny
1. Glad you survived.
2.What is the seat weight limit of that particular Windrose, how much do you
and parachute weigh, where was the CG?
3. Enough already with the peddling of "virtues of tailless flight".
wk
Brad
What a fright! I'm so glad to hear you made it out, and safely to the
ground. Will stay tuned to this thread to see what developes.
Also, I plan on coming to Marion to vist you and the factory next week,
that still OK?
Brad
In article <399626A4...@sprintmail.com>,
Marc Whisman <mar...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
> Wow Mat, glad you got out OK. Please tell us what you think cause the
> elevator to not respond when you've had a chance to analyze the
> situation better.
>
> regards
>
> -Marc
>
> Matthew Redsell wrote:
> >
> > I would like all aviators to know about my Windrose crash today. And
I
> > recommend that no one build and fly one.
> >
> > It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong
thermals.
> > As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which because of the slow
speed
> > put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair about of
flaps
> > on. On the attempt of recovery from the spin in the ensuing spiral
dive
> > I noticed the elevator not responding. This has happened once
before...
> > but I recovered form that! This got too out of hand so I bailed
out.....
> > but not without a lot of difficulty. This was the first real test of
the
> > emergency canopy release..... it worked but not as Ii had thought it
> > would. The canopy stayed on until I kicked it off... possibly held
by
> > the side latches.
> >
> > The next episode was science fiction..... I free feel then pulled
the
> > chute but the glider recovered and did a long series of loops right
> > above me and to the side within 20 -50 feet. I was really pulling
those
> > shroud lines to avoid hitting it..... and I really felt helpless!
> >
> > I landed before the glider which was determined to get me..... I
> > literally jumped out of the chute once on the ground and ran..... it
was
> > right above me...... it then pitched over to follow me in the
direction
> > I chose to run.......finally it went nose in not 30 feet from me.
> >
> > Amazingly the Yaesu hand held radio was working.... I pushed my had
in
> > the rubble looking for it... finally finding it and broadcasting
that I
> > had survived!
> >
> > I'm really lucky to be alive..... and a number of people got it on
> > video....
> >
> > So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe
to
> > fly. This makes me quite sad since I liked it quite a lot.
> > --
> > Mat Redsell CFIG <mar...@continuo.com>
> > Marske Flying Wings 740-375-8080
> > Marske Flying wings <http://www.continuo.com/marske>
> > Windrose Website: <http://www.continuo.com/windrose/windrose.htm>
>
--
Brad
Dicksortie
Had you stopped rotation with the rudder before you attempted to use the
elevator to pull out?
Dick
Eric Greenwell
I'm glad you are here to tell us about it, but you made one very
striking remark...
In article <39960C6A...@gte.net>, mar...@gte.net says...
> It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong thermals.
> As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
> put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
> on.
What does the manual say about flap position, spinning, and spin
recovery? I ask because a flapped glider is almost always more easily
spun, and more difficult to recover, with positive flap settings. The
manuals for the two flapped gliders I am most familiar with, the ASH
26 E and the ASW 20, both recommend moving the flaps to a negative
position to speed up spin recovery. During my spin practicing with
these aircraft, this would almost invariably stop the spin with no
other action. Attempts to spin with negative flaps were unsuccessful.
If the effect of flap position on the Windrose's spinning isn't known,
this should be investigated so pilots can use the proper spin
recovery, which might include taking the flaps out of the positive
setting.
The looping after you exited isn't surprising, as the CG would be well
aft of the correct position.
> So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
> fly.
Before we say this, we should find out a few things:
-Was this Windrose built to Windrose specifications, or did it have
some modifications that could have contributed to the control
problems?
-Was this Windrose in airworthy condition, or was there some
structural or control system problem?
-Have there been other Windroses that exhibited similar behaviour?
-
--
Remove REMOVE from my e-mail address to reply
Eric Greenwell
SAM
> --sniped
> The forces where so great I could not get orientated so I elected to eject. I
> had recoved once before in a similar occurance about a year ago..
>
--snipped
>
> No, After this experience I know the glider is unsafe to fly. I fly almost every
> day in many ships, I'm an instructor and commerical pilot.
This is the third time you have related in your messages on this
newsgroup, about
the crash, that this type of flying peculiarity happened once
before about a year
ago. There also has never been any reference to any investigation
by you or
remedial action taken after that incident. If none was undertaken
at that time,
it begs the question, why were you still flying it?
Like many others, I'm glad you survived however.
sam
Matthew Redsell
Al, I fly both types of gliders and my interest in the Marske designs is
not in financial gain.
I know from experience... and I have even flown hang gliders in
California the east coast and Venezuala! Tthe Monarch is not meant for
the worst thermals..... but I have flown in them just to find out... and
the result is that they are safe! Does your wing have a 15 G spar?
That I am promoting a good safe, conviently launched, fun glider,
economically feasible should interest a number of people.
What basis do you say that Marske flying wings are not safe? Jim Marske
has flown in california with his old XM1 for many flights... and that
was 30 years ago with a wood spar.
Please let me know of your recnet experience in flying wings. -mat
Matthew Redsell
You are definitely wrong... first consider that the Marske Designs are
not swept back and none have ever tumbled!
Please back up your opinions with facts ..... what experience do you
have flying them?
As to the windrose, there are some definite quirks. I have many
eyewitnesses... one an experienced pilot about 500 ft above me.
He says I dropped a wing, flipped over on my back and went into a very
steep spiral dive! This was not the first time. I had a forward CG and
the velocity was so great that the mass balanced rudder fluttered and
nothing I did with the controls would tame the beast. My first
experience I was able to push the elevator forward and reattach the air
flow... this time it was impossible.
Would you like visit Marion, just as Karl Striedieck did and try for
yourself?
Matthew Redsell
had ballasted it with 10 lbs more at the seat. I will again look at my
figures and see if we can get any ideas.
I have flow aft CG gliders and really notice this.... the windrose was
not one of them.
Al
As far as me flying a flying wing design, the only ones I have flown are RC
ones. they had the glide angle of a well heaved house brick but were good
fun to ridge fly on the south downs of England 15 years ago.
I can recount the story of a buddy of mine who whilst flying on a regualr
day lost all pitch control in his standard class flying wing (no names
mentioned) as he entered a thermal, it scared the living crap out of him as
he hoped the little elevator that plane had would start to bite. It took
150Ft for it to recover which whilst being terrifying at 10,000ft could be
fatal at 150ft!!. This was a swept forward design too.
I wont get drawn into your arguements of flying wings are superior etc....
just show me the 60:1 flying wing and I might consider it.
But I want a written garuntee it wont pitch over in turbulence.
That said glad your still around and kicking to tell us about your Windrose
exploits.
Matthew Redsell <mar...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:399886CE...@gte.net...
> To: "Al" <acro...@www.silentflight.com>
>
> Al, I fly both types of gliders and my interest in the Marske designs is
> not in financial gain.
Matthew Redsell
Dicksortie wrote:
There was no response on the rudder as it was in severe flutter. The entire
fuselage was moving like a snake as reported by the eyewitness. the forces
in the fuselage where too great to really understand what was happening and
my mind was made up to jump! this whole eppisode took about 5 seconds from
the wing up to deployment at a speed far in excess of red line.
Matthew Redsell
Eric Greenwell wrote:
> I'm glad you are here to tell us about it, but you made one very
> striking remark...
>
> In article <39960C6A...@gte.net>, mar...@gte.net says...
> > It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong thermals.
> > As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
> > put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
> > on.
>
> What does the manual say about flap position, spinning, and spin
> recovery? I ask because a flapped glider is almost always more easily
> spun, and more difficult to recover, with positive flap settings. The
> manuals for the two flapped gliders I am most familiar with, the ASH
> 26 E and the ASW 20, both recommend moving the flaps to a negative
> position to speed up spin recovery. During my spin practicing with
> these aircraft, this would almost invariably stop the spin with no
> other action. Attempts to spin with negative flaps were unsuccessful.
>
> If the effect of flap position on the Windrose's spinning isn't known,
> this should be investigated so pilots can use the proper spin
> recovery, which might include taking the flaps out of the positive
> setting.
This glider does not have ailerons and the washout is aerodynamic therfore I
assume that with the flaps on I have more aerodynamic washout unless of course
I have that flaperon up in a banked turn.
>
>
> The looping after you exited isn't surprising, as the CG would be well
> aft of the correct position.
>
> > So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
> > fly.
>
> Before we say this, we should find out a few things:
>
> -Was this Windrose built to Windrose specifications, or did it have
> some modifications that could have contributed to the control
> problems?
- I am sure this windrose was the best build with no modifications; see my
windrose site.
>
>
> -Was this Windrose in airworthy condition, or was there some
> structural or control system problem? I am constantly tending my gliders. I
> did take a small amount of trim tab off the rear of the elevator before the
> flight since I had to hold so much pressure to keep level flight on a
> previous flight.
>
> -Have there been other Windroses that exhibited similar behaviour?
I experienced this behaviour before on one other flight.. I attributed it to
my inexperince with the glider. Kevin Gross also experienced it but recovered.
I do not believe his glider is still flying.
> Eric Greenwell
Jeff Bilyeu
it.
I figured why start some flames when the guy is thankful he is alive.
Then I see AL went ahead and posted his opinion, I have to say I agree with
AL
Call the Windrose unsafe, and then try to sell the Marske wing.
Hey I'm not making judgements about either plane, but I am saying, I think I
will definetly
stay with planes that have designers and companys with more than 20 years of
experience
and to argue otherwise is foolish. While I'm very happy Mr Redskell is
alive, I question
everything that was said and happened, especially when you see what appears
an agenda
I beleive when your in the incident you see things
from your perspective, which ain't necessarilly the way it happened.
Jeff
Martin
>
> Would you like visit Marion, just as Karl Striedieck did and try for
> yourself?
>
And I am still waiting for the European tour. Or are you anticipating some
certification problems in Europe?
Martin
Martin
Eric Greenwell <REMOVEeg...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:8n9leh$2g6u$2...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
>
> What does the manual say about flap position, spinning, and spin
> recovery? I ask because a flapped glider is almost always more easily
> spun, and more difficult to recover, with positive flap settings. The
> manuals for the two flapped gliders I am most familiar with, the ASH
> 26 E and the ASW 20, both recommend moving the flaps to a negative
> position to speed up spin recovery. During my spin practicing with
> these aircraft, this would almost invariably stop the spin with no
> other action. Attempts to spin with negative flaps were unsuccessful.
>
I don't think that you can compare Schleicher products with a ship that will
never be certified in most European countries.
Martin
Matthew Redsell
Its amazing how many diverse ideas come from this news group. I
appreciate the many responses and suggestions I have received. That I
have deliberately engineered this to happen is rather foolish.
The entire event had a experienced eyewitness right above me and I am
relating my experiences with his visual reference and want to make
others aware of a very bad characteristic of the Windrose.
I would like to stress that this was not a Marske Design. Jim Marske has
had over 50 years of designing aircraft and in the year I have worked
with Jim I have really learnt a lot about the entire field. And I still
say that the safest wing you can design is around a Marske flying Wing.
I invite all to coem and see for yourself.
-mat
Marc Whisman
>
> The entire event had a experienced eyewitness right above me and I am
> relating my experiences with his visual reference and want to make
> others aware of a very bad characteristic of the Windrose.
Hi Matt. From reading your post it seems that the problem you feel
you experienced was the loss of elevator authority. To what do you
attribute this loss of control on the Windrose? Do you think that the
rudder could have been blanking the elevator do to it's size/shape?
regards
-Marc
Armand A. Medeiros
> And I still say that the safest wing you can design is around a Marske
flying Wing.
> I invite all to coem and see for yourself.
>
> -mat
>
Maybe you should go work for Group Genesis???
Glad you are alive though... 8-)
Armand
John Cochrane
>
The windrose website makes very interesting reading for those of you following
this thread, and, like me, interested in the lessons of any crash. "Overwhelming"
aileron pressure, changes in the aileron bellcrank setup and rudder control
configuration, changing the profile of the outer wing, addition of turbulators on
the upper wing surface, tip stalls and difficult spin recovery on previous flights
are all mentioned. It certainly raises my appreciation for what home-builders go
through, where "design" ends and "construction" begins, and for what us
buy-and-fly types get in return for all those Deutchmarks.
John Cochrane
Eric Greenwell
> This glider does not have ailerons and the washout is aerodynamic therfore I
> assume that with the flaps on I have more aerodynamic washout unless of course
> I have that flaperon up in a banked turn.
I've never heard or read that positive flaperon (or flaps and ailerons
that move together with the flap lever) settings increases washout, so
I very much doubt it. In any case, a positive setting produces an
airfoil with a sharper stall behavior compared to a negative (reflexed
upward) setting, and one that stalls at a lower angle of attack. This
is why moving the flap setting to a less positive setting will stop a
spin more quickly.
Since no one is going to thermal with negative flaps, the above is a
bit academic. The important thing for Windrose pilots is to know the
stall/spin behavior and, I suggest, the effect of reducing the
positive flap setting as an aid to recovery in a spin.
Any pilot that thinks a glider is more spin or stall resistant with a
more positive flap setting should re-read those portions in the
manual, and try some stalls from normal thermalling turns with the
different settings.
A few gliders do attempt to compensate for the changing stall
behaviour of the airfoil by not deflecting the ailerons down quite as
far as the flaps move (this increases the washout), and these may not
get noticeably worse at more positive settings. Even a standard class
glider can produce more washout while thermalling, if the ailerons are
designed to move up a little as the stick is pulled back, as I believe
my Ka-6E did.
Richard R Ilfeld
<john.stop.s...@anderson.ucla.edu> wrote:
Mat's Windrose website.
Does not necessarily represent all builders. Some have made
different reports, though the sample is very small.
Agree - homebuilding is a hard way to go. This would seem to be the
first Culver design not to fly well, if reports pan out.
I'm not maintaining a web site at the moment, but have a builders
progress log I've shared with a few interested parties.
Let me hope that all available materials, including videotape if any,
third party reports if any, and a thorough post-crash anaysis is made
available to other builders. I'd prefer to make my own judgements as
to airworthiness, perhaps incorporating serious operating limitations
into my ship, and all known information into my test flight program.
For example, if the "flutter" only occurred above Vne (I thought I
read this), then an operating limitation might do well.
I am putting an engine in my Windrose, to build a self-launch with
expected "trainer" performance as a sailplane. I was not ever seeking
a competition glider; I'd a bought one! Thus prudent operating
limitations may not be onerous.
Since I'd arrive first at the scene of any accident, and have no
desire to jump, I'd sure ground my ship if it didn't pass muster;
wouldn't be the first time.
So the more opinion, analysis, and information the better -- and
thanks to all who have responded thoughtfully to this point.
rri
Tim and Camille McNamara
Very glad matthew is around to relay his adventure.
I am in no position to speculate since I was not in the Glider however I
noticed on Matt's Windrose site that there were several instances of
changing bellcranks (aileron I believe) and talk of joggles needing to be
fixed at the tip. Also I read that he thought that he needed to sand the tip
airfoil to either sharpen or lessen the nose radius. If he did indeed do
these things then it is not a plans built ship (or it started out as a
modified sailplane and he was attempting to make it conform to the plans).
These factors may have nothing to do with the incident but then again one
can't be so cavelier in ruling them out either. Perhaps it might be better
of Matt to issue a notice (which he has) to any Windrose pilots or builders
that he believes that there may be a serious control problem and that it
should be thoroughly investigated. A blanket statement regarding the
airworthiness of a design when such an investigation has not been completed
is very hard to undo if it later turns out that the combination of changing
the bellcrank ratio and modifying the tip was the culprit (or something else
that applied to that particular sailplane only ). In fairness to Matt I am
sure I would have much the same reaction if it were I in the same situation
(assuming I could think clearly enough to bail out!). Tim Mc
Eric Greenwell <REMOVEeg...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:8n9leh$2g6u$2...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
>
> striking remark...
>
> In article <39960C6A...@gte.net>, mar...@gte.net says...
> > It was a very strong thermal day and I was enjoying the strong thermals.
> > As I reached 3000 ft agl I hit a boomer which beause of the slow speed
> > put me in a spin. This surprised me since I had a fair abount of flaps
> > on.
>
> recovery? I ask because a flapped glider is almost always more easily
> spun, and more difficult to recover, with positive flap settings. The
> manuals for the two flapped gliders I am most familiar with, the ASH
> 26 E and the ASW 20, both recommend moving the flaps to a negative
> position to speed up spin recovery. During my spin practicing with
> these aircraft, this would almost invariably stop the spin with no
> other action. Attempts to spin with negative flaps were unsuccessful.
>
> this should be investigated so pilots can use the proper spin
> recovery, which might include taking the flaps out of the positive
> setting.
>
> aft of the correct position.
>
> > So I think we had better say the the windrose glider is very unsafe to
> > fly.
>
> Before we say this, we should find out a few things:
>
> -Was this Windrose built to Windrose specifications, or did it have
> some modifications that could have contributed to the control
> problems?
>
> structural or control system problem?
>
>
Fred Steadman
Marske designs, but can't help but feel that your quick branding of the
Windrose, a design that I've never heard a whisper of scandal about
before now, followed by sales dissertation, comes accross as a little
self serving.
--
Fred Steadman
Irving, Texas
Matthew Redsell wrote:
>
> The Maupin Windrose:
> Its amazing how many diverse ideas come from this news group. I
> appreciate the many responses and suggestions I have received. That I
> have deliberately engineered this to happen is rather foolish.
>
> The entire event had a experienced eyewitness right above me and I am
> relating my experiences with his visual reference and want to make
> others aware of a very bad characteristic of the Windrose.
>
> I would like to stress that this was not a Marske Design. Jim Marske has
> had over 50 years of designing aircraft and in the year I have worked
> with Jim I have really learnt a lot about the entire field. And I still
> say that the safest wing you can design is around a Marske flying Wing.
> I invite all to coem and see for yourself.
>
> -mat
>
Al
He said so '-)
Al
Fred Steadman <fst...@fastlane.net> wrote in message
news:40A14E29D1B7B99D.A8758BD8...@lp.airnews.net...
Steve Beaver
Firstly, In Eric Muller's revered text on Aerobatics, "Flight Unlimited", he
desrcibes how one of the factors that steered him towards developing his
well known spin recovery technique (also known as the Muller-Beggs system in
the USA), was the fact that in many of the cases he studied in which the
pilot bailed out of an aircraft in an "irecoverable spin", the aircraft was
later seen flying quite normally all by itself sometimes even doing
aerobatics, this even though the lack of a pilot usually moved the CG
rearwards. He also learned that in may casaes, as the pilot exited the
aircraft, the stick moved aft and in-spin as it was released.
I'm also remided of how, particularly in aviation, strong opinions can be
based very little objective fact.
Years ago, when I lived in England, I owned an SHK1, the open class version
of the Standard Austria more familiar in the US. I flew it a lot and spun it
very frequently. Without going back an pouring over dusty logbooks, I'd say
more than 100 times.
When I moved to the US and told people I used to have an SHK, they were
generaly horified. "Wouldn't get me in one of those thing", they would say.
"Get one in a spin and they don't recover". So-and-so tesed one once and had
to bail out.
The point is, no two aircraft are the same, even factory produced aircraft
of the same model, so to condemn a whole genre of gliders based on the one
example you built yourself and modified yourself and flew yourself seems to
me to be unreasonable.
Finally, you would be astounded at the number of aerobatic pilots I fly with
(that's part of what I do for a living) who can perform perfect competion
spins on demand but when a spin is entered acidentaly, go to pieces.
Steve
Steve Beaver
portion of the wing equiped with flaps is increased with respect to that
portion of the wing not so equipped. On an aircraft with flaps on the
inboard section of the wing, that means that the outer sections of the wings
are flying at a lower angle of attack than the (flapped) inner section,
thereby providing washout. This is one reason that in aircraft (powered and
non-powered) with tapered wings, it is wise to use landing flaps in the
pattern. Of course if an aircraft is equipped with ailerons that droop the
same amount as the flaps, this will not be the case.
Steve
Richard R Ilfeld
In a later modification, the orgigina designer provided
a method of using the ailerons as flaperons. They are
located on the inner half span of the wings.
rri
Doug Hoffman
>When the flaps are deployed (downwards, or +ve) the angle of attack of that
>portion of the wing equiped with flaps is increased with respect to that
>portion of the wing not so equipped. On an aircraft with flaps on the
>inboard section of the wing, that means that the outer sections of the wings
>are flying at a lower angle of attack than the (flapped) inner section,
>thereby providing washout. This is one reason that in aircraft (powered and
>non-powered) with tapered wings, it is wise to use landing flaps in the
>pattern.
Dick Schreder, long time proponent of large span landing flaps, says
that a further feature that you get with the trailing edge flap when
you put the flap down is that the decalage angle between the wing
and the horizontal tail is increased. This tends to increase the
longitudinal stability. In most of the HP's, when you are making
an approach with the flaps down, you can let go of the stick and
be very stable.
-Doug
AZSKYBUM
is no record in the NTSB or FAA accident site about your accident. Did you
forget to call them? As a manufacturer I would think that your PMI might be
interested, inquiring minds want to know!
Curtis