Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
A Kid Flying a Duckhawk?
2,582 views
Skip to first unread message
usnightl...@gmail.com
Oct 30, 2013, 12:23:41 AM10/30/13
to
Having fun in the DuckHawk 15m sailplane
By: Daniel Sazhin
In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown Airport, the culmination of which was having the opportunity to fly Windward Performance's new DuckHawk. I had just flown the club Grob Twin Astir with my brother, promptly falling out and not exactly having one of my best landings in it. It seems that Bill Thar did not see it and upon greeting him, he offered me to fly the DuckHawk! I was flabbergasted and immediately agreed. The glider was already assembled, so Bill promptly introduced me to the cockpit and gave the pre-flight briefing. We pushed the glider out to the line, which was easy because at its 440 LBS empty weight it is just like pushing my club's 1-26E around!
While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before, my many years of flying the Condor Soaring Simulator have allowed me to be familiar with most of the composite sailplanes in the field. I did not feel nervous about being able to control the plane and I was excited to try it out. The first takeoff was very easy and the DuckHawk had great control authority and responsiveness. There was no need for any of the takeoff tricks found on some other sailplanes such as negative flap settings prior to takeoff or open spoilers for increased aileron effectiveness. The visibility was great and it was easy to stay behind the tow plane because the DuckHawk didn’t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing I was unable to find much lift except for one light thermal which amounted to zero-sink for a while. Pulling into that thermal, it was quite a fantastic sensation bringing the flaps to 10-15 degrees and feeling the glider “grip” the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots and provides the pilot with a lot of feedback from the air. What was definitely noticeable was that the glider does everything you want it to. There is no feeling of “fighting the glider” like in some other gliders I had flown. The DuckHawk handled great at the low speed end and the controls were not twitchy, but yet very responsive. I liked the fact that there is no elevator trim; instead wherever one places the stick, it stays in that position. The electric flaps are easily controlled in manual mode using a switch on the stick. The flaps move at a brisk rate, but there is no tendency for the glider to “drop” such as when the flaps are moved between notches in other gliders. This DuckHawk is fitted with a prototype automatic flap control system but it was not used on this flight. I returned to the field put the flaps down and opened the spoilers to land just like you do in other gliders and the nice thing was to put the gear down I just moved the gated switch and out came the gear. Everything went easily on landing and the floating piston oleo shock is wonderful as there is no bounce and it does its job very nicely and the wheel brake is very effective.
One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when the ridge was working and had the opportunity to experience this glider's excellent cross country capability. Since there were thermals present as well, I had more time to fly the plane and it was a good opportunity to do some stalls and get a feel for the plane throughout more of its envelope. The stalls were benign and had very little tendency to drop a wing. The DuckHawk is much like a chameleon in the way it can be thermalled. For instance, at 50 knots it requires very little control in maneuvering in a thermal and climbs very well with little effort. However, unlike other sailplanes, this glider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive “drag bucket” and as a result, it can be thermalled even down to 40 knots without a significant sink rate penalty. It was quite interesting that the pilot is given quite the latitude in how one wants to go about thermalling, which bodes well for different conditions and pilot styles. Prior to the flight, Bill Thar also told me that I should consider bringing the glider up to its 160 knots maneuvering speed, which I did after thermalling it for a while. I dived away and got up to around 155 knots and then pulled up, heading like a rocket toward the stratosphere. That pull-up was such a rush that I decided I just had to do it again going the other way! One must also consider that this was even done under convective conditions in the vicinity of a ridge, not in smooth air. However, the DuckHawk was absolutely solid and it felt absolutely safe bringing it to a speed that is over the VNE of most other sailplanes around. The plane was flown dry with a light total flying weight around 620 LBS and when I got onto the ridge, I immediately noticed that even for its light weight it did not get particularly kicked around by the dynamic air. Unlike my trusty metal steed (1-26), the DuckHawk seemed to “plow” through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge transitions were quite easy and I flew over 400 km with an average speed of 105 mph on the ridge, without doing any turns other than doing some more thermalling practice at the end of “our” mountain. The glider was flown with the prototype automatic/manual flap control system and I think that this will be an exciting system for the future of the plane as the automatic mode smoothly adjusts the flaps throughout their range and gives you the optimum flap setting all of the time. The fast roll rate is conducive to rolling in and out very quickly with little adverse yaw. As far as all of the other features of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer’s website. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with as little high performance glider time as myself would be able to transition so easily to a world-class racing machine. Windward Performance's DuckHawk was an absolute delight to fly and it would be an honor to fly it again.
By: Daniel Sazhin
In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown Airport, the culmination of which was having the opportunity to fly Windward Performance's new DuckHawk. I had just flown the club Grob Twin Astir with my brother, promptly falling out and not exactly having one of my best landings in it. It seems that Bill Thar did not see it and upon greeting him, he offered me to fly the DuckHawk! I was flabbergasted and immediately agreed. The glider was already assembled, so Bill promptly introduced me to the cockpit and gave the pre-flight briefing. We pushed the glider out to the line, which was easy because at its 440 LBS empty weight it is just like pushing my club's 1-26E around!
While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before, my many years of flying the Condor Soaring Simulator have allowed me to be familiar with most of the composite sailplanes in the field. I did not feel nervous about being able to control the plane and I was excited to try it out. The first takeoff was very easy and the DuckHawk had great control authority and responsiveness. There was no need for any of the takeoff tricks found on some other sailplanes such as negative flap settings prior to takeoff or open spoilers for increased aileron effectiveness. The visibility was great and it was easy to stay behind the tow plane because the DuckHawk didn’t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing I was unable to find much lift except for one light thermal which amounted to zero-sink for a while. Pulling into that thermal, it was quite a fantastic sensation bringing the flaps to 10-15 degrees and feeling the glider “grip” the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots and provides the pilot with a lot of feedback from the air. What was definitely noticeable was that the glider does everything you want it to. There is no feeling of “fighting the glider” like in some other gliders I had flown. The DuckHawk handled great at the low speed end and the controls were not twitchy, but yet very responsive. I liked the fact that there is no elevator trim; instead wherever one places the stick, it stays in that position. The electric flaps are easily controlled in manual mode using a switch on the stick. The flaps move at a brisk rate, but there is no tendency for the glider to “drop” such as when the flaps are moved between notches in other gliders. This DuckHawk is fitted with a prototype automatic flap control system but it was not used on this flight. I returned to the field put the flaps down and opened the spoilers to land just like you do in other gliders and the nice thing was to put the gear down I just moved the gated switch and out came the gear. Everything went easily on landing and the floating piston oleo shock is wonderful as there is no bounce and it does its job very nicely and the wheel brake is very effective.
One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when the ridge was working and had the opportunity to experience this glider's excellent cross country capability. Since there were thermals present as well, I had more time to fly the plane and it was a good opportunity to do some stalls and get a feel for the plane throughout more of its envelope. The stalls were benign and had very little tendency to drop a wing. The DuckHawk is much like a chameleon in the way it can be thermalled. For instance, at 50 knots it requires very little control in maneuvering in a thermal and climbs very well with little effort. However, unlike other sailplanes, this glider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive “drag bucket” and as a result, it can be thermalled even down to 40 knots without a significant sink rate penalty. It was quite interesting that the pilot is given quite the latitude in how one wants to go about thermalling, which bodes well for different conditions and pilot styles. Prior to the flight, Bill Thar also told me that I should consider bringing the glider up to its 160 knots maneuvering speed, which I did after thermalling it for a while. I dived away and got up to around 155 knots and then pulled up, heading like a rocket toward the stratosphere. That pull-up was such a rush that I decided I just had to do it again going the other way! One must also consider that this was even done under convective conditions in the vicinity of a ridge, not in smooth air. However, the DuckHawk was absolutely solid and it felt absolutely safe bringing it to a speed that is over the VNE of most other sailplanes around. The plane was flown dry with a light total flying weight around 620 LBS and when I got onto the ridge, I immediately noticed that even for its light weight it did not get particularly kicked around by the dynamic air. Unlike my trusty metal steed (1-26), the DuckHawk seemed to “plow” through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge transitions were quite easy and I flew over 400 km with an average speed of 105 mph on the ridge, without doing any turns other than doing some more thermalling practice at the end of “our” mountain. The glider was flown with the prototype automatic/manual flap control system and I think that this will be an exciting system for the future of the plane as the automatic mode smoothly adjusts the flaps throughout their range and gives you the optimum flap setting all of the time. The fast roll rate is conducive to rolling in and out very quickly with little adverse yaw. As far as all of the other features of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer’s website. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with as little high performance glider time as myself would be able to transition so easily to a world-class racing machine. Windward Performance's DuckHawk was an absolute delight to fly and it would be an honor to fly it again.
Jim White
Oct 30, 2013, 5:23:40 AM10/30/13
to
Pity we cannot fly it in Europe!
At 04:23 30 October 2013, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote:
>Having fun in the DuckHawk 15m sailplane=20
>n=92t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing
I
>=
>ip=94 the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots
>an=
>no feeling of =93fighting the glider=94 like in some other gliders I had
>fl=
>the glider to =93drop=94 such as when the flaps are moved between notches
>i=
>ider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive =93drag
bucket=94
>=
>=94 through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge
>transit=
>ing practice at the end of =93our=94 mountain. The glider was flown with
>t=
>eatures of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer=92s
>website=
>.. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with
as
>=
At 04:23 30 October 2013, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote:
>Having fun in the DuckHawk 15m sailplane=20
>By: Daniel Sazhin
>
>In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown
Airport,
>=
>
>In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown
Airport,
>the culmination of which was having the opportunity to fly Windward
>Perform=
>ance's new DuckHawk. I had just flown the club Grob Twin Astir with my
>brot=
>her, promptly falling out and not exactly having one of my best landings
>in=
> it. It seems that Bill Thar did not see it and upon greeting him, he
>offer=
>ed me to fly the DuckHawk! I was flabbergasted and immediately agreed.
The
>=
The
>glider was already assembled, so Bill promptly introduced me to the
>cockpit=
> and gave the pre-flight briefing. We pushed the glider out to the line,
>wh=
>ich was easy because at its 440 LBS empty weight it is just like pushing
>my=
> club's 1-26E around!
>
>While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before,
>my=
>
>While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before,
> many years of flying the Condor Soaring Simulator have allowed me to be
>fa=
>miliar with most of the composite sailplanes in the field. I did not feel
>n=
>ervous about being able to control the plane and I was excited to try it
>ou=
>t. The first takeoff was very easy and the DuckHawk had great control
>autho=
>rity and responsiveness. There was no need for any of the takeoff tricks
>fo=
>und on some other sailplanes such as negative flap settings prior to
>takeof=
>f or open spoilers for increased aileron effectiveness. The visibility
was
>=
was
>great and it was easy to stay behind the tow plane because the DuckHawk
>did=
>n=92t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing
I
>=
>was unable to find much lift except for one light thermal which amounted
>to=
> zero-sink for a while. Pulling into that thermal, it was quite a
>fantastic=
> sensation bringing the flaps to 10-15 degrees and feeling the glider
>=93gr=
>ip=94 the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots
>an=
>d provides the pilot with a lot of feedback from the air. What was
>definite=
>ly noticeable was that the glider does everything you want it to. There
is
>=
is
>no feeling of =93fighting the glider=94 like in some other gliders I had
>fl=
>own. The DuckHawk handled great at the low speed end and the controls
were
>=
were
>not twitchy, but yet very responsive. I liked the fact that there is no
>ele=
>vator trim; instead wherever one places the stick, it stays in that
>positio=
>n. The electric flaps are easily controlled in manual mode using a switch
>o=
>n the stick. The flaps move at a brisk rate, but there is no tendency
for
>=
for
>the glider to =93drop=94 such as when the flaps are moved between notches
>i=
>n other gliders. This DuckHawk is fitted with a prototype automatic flap
>co=
>ntrol system but it was not used on this flight. I returned to the field
>pu=
>t the flaps down and opened the spoilers to land just like you do in
other
>=
other
>gliders and the nice thing was to put the gear down I just moved the
gated
>=
gated
>switch and out came the gear. Everything went easily on landing and the
>flo=
>ating piston oleo shock is wonderful as there is no bounce and it does
its
>=
its
>job very nicely and the wheel brake is very effective.
>
>One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when
>the=
>
>One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when
> ridge was working and had the opportunity to experience this glider's
>exce=
>llent cross country capability. Since there were thermals present as
well,
>=
well,
>I had more time to fly the plane and it was a good opportunity to do some
>s=
>talls and get a feel for the plane throughout more of its envelope. The
>sta=
>lls were benign and had very little tendency to drop a wing. The DuckHawk
>i=
>s much like a chameleon in the way it can be thermalled. For instance, at
>5=
>0 knots it requires very little control in maneuvering in a thermal and
>cli=
>mbs very well with little effort. However, unlike other sailplanes, this
>gl=
>ider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive =93drag
bucket=94
>=
>and as a result, it can be thermalled even down to 40 knots without a
>signi=
>ficant sink rate penalty. It was quite interesting that the pilot is
given
>=
given
>quite the latitude in how one wants to go about thermalling, which bodes
>we=
>ll for different conditions and pilot styles. Prior to the flight, Bill
>Tha=
>r also told me that I should consider bringing the glider up to its 160
>kno=
>ts maneuvering speed, which I did after thermalling it for a while. I
>dived=
> away and got up to around 155 knots and then pulled up, heading like a
>roc=
>ket toward the stratosphere. That pull-up was such a rush that I decided
I
>=
I
>just had to do it again going the other way! One must also consider that
>th=
>is was even done under convective conditions in the vicinity of a ridge,
>no=
>t in smooth air. However, the DuckHawk was absolutely solid and it felt
>abs=
>olutely safe bringing it to a speed that is over the VNE of most other
>sail=
>planes around. The plane was flown dry with a light total flying weight
>aro=
>und 620 LBS and when I got onto the ridge, I immediately noticed that
even
>=
even
>for its light weight it did not get particularly kicked around by the
>dynam=
>ic air. Unlike my trusty metal steed (1-26), the DuckHawk seemed to
>=93plow=
>=94 through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge
>transit=
>ions were quite easy and I flew over 400 km with an average speed of 105
>mp=
>h on the ridge, without doing any turns other than doing some more
>thermall=
>ing practice at the end of =93our=94 mountain. The glider was flown with
>t=
>he prototype automatic/manual flap control system and I think that this
>wil=
>l be an exciting system for the future of the plane as the automatic mode
>s=
>moothly adjusts the flaps throughout their range and gives you the
optimum
>=
optimum
>flap setting all of the time. The fast roll rate is conducive to rolling
>in=
> and out very quickly with little adverse yaw. As far as all of the other
>f=
>eatures of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer=92s
>website=
>.. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with
as
>=
>little high performance glider time as myself would be able to transition
>s=
>o easily to a world-class racing machine. Windward Performance's DuckHawk
>w=
Sean F (F2)
Oct 30, 2013, 10:25:59 AM10/30/13
to
Kudos to Bill Thar for giving Daniel such an amazing opportunity to fly perhaps "the" state of the art 15 meter glider! More of us should be sponsoring promising Jr. pilots in this way! What a refreshing thing to see in the USA!
cochra...@gmail.com
Oct 30, 2013, 11:25:51 AM10/30/13
to
Out of curiosity, how does one register a duckhawk? The webisite says "All models are sold as basic aircraft. No instruments. No Certificate of Airworthiness." It's not a homebuilt, it's not part 103, it's not imported exhibition and racing... How do you fly this thing legally?
John Cochrane
John Cochrane
Steve Leonard
Oct 30, 2013, 12:06:43 PM10/30/13
to
On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 10:25:51 AM UTC-5, cochra...@gmail.com wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how does one register a duckhawk? The webisite says "All models are sold as basic aircraft. No instruments. No Certificate of Airworthiness." It's not a homebuilt, it's not part 103, it's not imported exhibition and racing... How do you fly this thing legally? John Cochrane
Owner applies for Experimental airworthiness certificate. Recommend Exhibition and Air Racing. And you get limitations just like something that is imported and doesn't have a US Type Certificate. Hit the "EASY" Button.
> Out of curiosity, how does one register a duckhawk? The webisite says "All models are sold as basic aircraft. No instruments. No Certificate of Airworthiness." It's not a homebuilt, it's not part 103, it's not imported exhibition and racing... How do you fly this thing legally? John Cochrane
Steve Leonard
Frank Whiteley
Oct 30, 2013, 12:27:31 PM10/30/13
to
ueli....@gmail.com
Oct 31, 2013, 4:14:25 AM10/31/13
to
Wouldn't a pilot who has before only flown sluggish oldtimer gliders write the exact same review about every modern high performance glider?
Bob Cook
Oct 31, 2013, 8:05:49 AM10/31/13
to
Maybe "a pilot" would....but Daniel wouldn't.
Cookie
Bob Cook
Oct 31, 2013, 8:18:02 AM10/31/13
to
Maybe "a pilot" would....but Daniel wouldn't.
Cookie
At 08:14 31 October 2013, ueli....@gmail.com wrote:
Evan Ludeman
Oct 31, 2013, 8:56:12 AM10/31/13
to
On Thursday, October 31, 2013 4:14:25 AM UTC-4, ueli....@gmail.com wrote:
> Wouldn't a pilot who has before only flown sluggish oldtimer gliders write the exact same review about every modern high performance glider?
Of course, yes. It's been done many times.
> Wouldn't a pilot who has before only flown sluggish oldtimer gliders write the exact same review about every modern high performance glider?
T8
Evan Ludeman
Oct 31, 2013, 8:59:18 AM10/31/13
to
Bob Cook
Oct 31, 2013, 11:04:12 AM10/31/13
to
And except for the parts about:
No neg flaps on take off, no trim, electric flaps without notches,
automatic controlled flaps, electric landing gear retract/extend, very
light weight, very slow in thermals, 160 knot Va, very high Vne and 400 km
flight with 105 knot average speed on ridge....
Otherwise it was exactly like every other review of every other
sailplane...
Cookie
No neg flaps on take off, no trim, electric flaps without notches,
automatic controlled flaps, electric landing gear retract/extend, very
light weight, very slow in thermals, 160 knot Va, very high Vne and 400 km
flight with 105 knot average speed on ridge....
Otherwise it was exactly like every other review of every other
sailplane...
Cookie
Bob Cook
Oct 31, 2013, 11:05:29 AM10/31/13
to
And except for the parts about:
No neg flaps on take off, no trim, electric flaps without notches,
automatic controlled flaps, electric landing gear retract/extend, very
light weight, very slow in thermals, 160 knot Va, very high Vne and 400 km
flight with 105 knot average speed on ridge....
Otherwise it was exactly like every other review of every other
sailplane...
Cookie
No neg flaps on take off, no trim, electric flaps without notches,
automatic controlled flaps, electric landing gear retract/extend, very
light weight, very slow in thermals, 160 knot Va, very high Vne and 400 km
flight with 105 knot average speed on ridge....
Otherwise it was exactly like every other review of every other
sailplane...
Cookie
Soartech
Oct 31, 2013, 1:05:30 PM10/31/13
to
Bravo Cookie!
What an innovative sailplane! And it is made in the USA too!
The sport finally moves ahead. Thanks Duckhawk designers.
What an innovative sailplane! And it is made in the USA too!
The sport finally moves ahead. Thanks Duckhawk designers.
Brad
Oct 31, 2013, 1:12:20 PM10/31/13
to
Brad
Tetra-15/GK
usnightl...@gmail.com
Oct 31, 2013, 1:33:23 PM10/31/13
to
I think some people are losing sight of perhaps what I have tried to convey. There are many highly experienced pilots out there who can and will fly the Duckhawk and provide much more detailed explanations of the subtle differences between that they fly/have flown versus the Duckhawk. The general point was that someone with as LITTLE experience as myself (in fact having NEVER flown ANY high performance sailplanes prior) could easily handle this glider and in short order effectively fly it cross country. This is bearing in mind that this is one of the highest performing 15m gliders in existence, and in direct comparison to something like a Diana 2 which does not have a reputation for being so docile. Also, upon closer inspection, one would notice that I did not stress generalities... instead I focused on things that set this glider apart from others.
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
usnightl...@gmail.com
Oct 31, 2013, 1:41:10 PM10/31/13
to
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
Evan Ludeman
Oct 31, 2013, 2:41:29 PM10/31/13
to
Chuckle. No one who knows you is any more surprised that you can fly the DH and fly it hard and fly it well than that the sun rose in the East this morning.
Welcome to the world of extensive laminar flow.
We should go race on the ridge some time next Spring. Blairstown has been on my todo list for a while.
You wouldn't have had any reason to notice, but might be interested to know: my gear handle is on the left side (I like that), works almost as easy as a light switch. I took the trimmer out a couple years ago because it was just getting in my way and the ship flies better without it. What's (30 years) old, is new!
Let's save Condor for the annual January r.a.s. food fight.
best,
Evan / T8
Josh Fletcher
Oct 31, 2013, 10:15:14 AM10/31/13
to
If Daniel flys in RL as well as he does in Condor, which from his
podium's finishes in the 1-26, I am sure he does! I would say his write
up carries some weight and should not be brushed off as a guy who
doesn't know what he is talking about because he doesn't fly glass..
But this is from a power guy with a commercial glider rating and a HUGE
fan of Condor!!! Especially since it's the only glider flying I get to
do in a country that ends in STAN while at work!!
Great article DS, see you online!!!
Josh
CPI
--
Josh Fletcher
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Oct 31, 2013, 4:10:57 PM10/31/13
to
On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 11:25:51 AM UTC-4, cochra...@gmail.com wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how does one register a duckhawk? The webisite says "All models are sold as basic aircraft. No instruments. No Certificate of Airworthiness." It's not a homebuilt, it's not part 103, it's not imported exhibition and racing... How do you fly this thing legally? John Cochrane
It can be registered simply by having the required bill of sale and application for registration.
> Out of curiosity, how does one register a duckhawk? The webisite says "All models are sold as basic aircraft. No instruments. No Certificate of Airworthiness." It's not a homebuilt, it's not part 103, it's not imported exhibition and racing... How do you fly this thing legally? John Cochrane
What becomes a bit more complex is having the documentation to support the issuance of an airworthiness certificate and associated operating limitations.
Presumably it comes with a manufacturer provided flight manual and maintenance manual. Current Exhibition/Air Racing limitations require inclusion of who is responsible for maintaining the aircraft and many other portions extract information from the manufacturer's documents. When I have licenced glider Ex, the inspector has expected to see the manuals.
It would make me, as a potential buyer, unlikely to consider purchasing a Duckhawk if the manufacturer would not deliver it with an airworthiness certificate.
Another voice heard from
UH
jben...@metroaviation.com
Oct 31, 2013, 5:05:29 PM10/31/13
to
cochra...@gmail.com
Oct 31, 2013, 5:20:22 PM10/31/13
to
>
> Having been involved in the certification of many experimental aircraft as a DAR and personally involved in the helping of the certification of the Duckhawk the certification should have no bearing on the Airworthiness of an aircraft or in the decision to buy one.
As a good Libertarian I heartily agree about what should be, and what the FAA has done to aircraft development is a crime.
> Having been involved in the certification of many experimental aircraft as a DAR and personally involved in the helping of the certification of the Duckhawk the certification should have no bearing on the Airworthiness of an aircraft or in the decision to buy one.
The question I had is more about the legalities in the sadly over regulated world in which we operate, and I as a potential buyer would have to live in. You need a certificate of airworthiness, and the FAA needs to see mountains of paperwork before issuing one of those, experimental or not. You can't just nail 2 4x8s to a broom, call the FAA and ask for an experimental airworthiness certificate.
UH is interesting on the manuals required. Since they ask for detailed engineering studies for things like attaching a 30 year old tow hook to a 40 year old Cessna, and since they want detailed construction inspections of amateur built aircraft, I would have imagined some process goes in to getting exhibition and air racing certificates. I have read through enough of the FAA documents on this matter to know that they are giving experimental certificates to our imported gliders on the basis that these things are already certified in their countries. If you show up with 2 4 x 8s nailed to a broom, and a full list of "manufacturer" placards and flight manuals -- launch from barn roof no more than 10 feet AGL -- you get an experimental and air racing certificate? The FAA is incredibly picky these days about repair stations; they really don't care what a "manufacturer" looks like?
If their local FSDO is happy, does that mean mine is automatically happy? If there is a crash, do all the certificates disappear? If I buy one of these things what procedure do I have to go through to actually fly it?
These are just honest questions. I suppose the majority of pilots don't know anything about these issues -- we know how standard and experimental imported work, but not what happens if you drive out to the FSDO with something that, as far as they know, your buddies put together in their garage
John Cochrane
jben...@metroaviation.com
Oct 31, 2013, 6:24:43 PM10/31/13
to
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:23:41 PM UTC-7, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote:
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Oct 31, 2013, 7:02:34 PM10/31/13
to
On Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:24:43 PM UTC-4, jben...@metroaviation.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:23:41 PM UTC-7, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote: > Having fun in the DuckHawk 15m sailplane > > By: Daniel Sazhin > > > > In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown Airport, the culmination of which was having the opportunity to fly Windward Performance's new DuckHawk. I had just flown the club Grob Twin Astir with my brother, promptly falling out and not exactly having one of my best landings in it. It seems that Bill Thar did not see it and upon greeting him, he offered me to fly the DuckHawk! I was flabbergasted and immediately agreed. The glider was already assembled, so Bill promptly introduced me to the cockpit and gave the pre-flight briefing. We pushed the glider out to the line, which was easy because at its 440 LBS empty weight it is just like pushing my club's 1-26E around! > > > > While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before, my many years of flying the Condor Soaring Simulator have allowed me to be familiar with most of the composite sailplanes in the field. I did not feel nervous about being able to control the plane and I was excited to try it out. The first takeoff was very easy and the DuckHawk had great control authority and responsiveness. There was no need for any of the takeoff tricks found on some other sailplanes such as negative flap settings prior to takeoff or open spoilers for increased aileron effectiveness. The visibility was great and it was easy to stay behind the tow plane because the DuckHawk didn’t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing I was unable to find much lift except for one light thermal which amounted to zero-sink for a while. Pulling into that thermal, it was quite a fantastic sensation bringing the flaps to 10-15 degrees and feeling the glider “grip” the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots and provides the pilot with a lot of feedback from the air. What was definitely noticeable was that the glider does everything you want it to. There is no feeling of “fighting the glider” like in some other gliders I had flown. The DuckHawk handled great at the low speed end and the controls were not twitchy, but yet very responsive. I liked the fact that there is no elevator trim; instead wherever one places the stick, it stays in that position. The electric flaps are easily controlled in manual mode using a switch on the stick. The flaps move at a brisk rate, but there is no tendency for the glider to “drop” such as when the flaps are moved between notches in other gliders. This DuckHawk is fitted with a prototype automatic flap control system but it was not used on this flight. I returned to the field put the flaps down and opened the spoilers to land just like you do in other gliders and the nice thing was to put the gear down I just moved the gated switch and out came the gear. Everything went easily on landing and the floating piston oleo shock is wonderful as there is no bounce and it does its job very nicely and the wheel brake is very effective. > > > > One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when the ridge was working and had the opportunity to experience this glider's excellent cross country capability. Since there were thermals present as well, I had more time to fly the plane and it was a good opportunity to do some stalls and get a feel for the plane throughout more of its envelope. The stalls were benign and had very little tendency to drop a wing. The DuckHawk is much like a chameleon in the way it can be thermalled. For instance, at 50 knots it requires very little control in maneuvering in a thermal and climbs very well with little effort. However, unlike other sailplanes, this glider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive “drag bucket” and as a result, it can be thermalled even down to 40 knots without a significant sink rate penalty. It was quite interesting that the pilot is given quite the latitude in how one wants to go about thermalling, which bodes well for different conditions and pilot styles. Prior to the flight, Bill Thar also told me that I should consider bringing the glider up to its 160 knots maneuvering speed, which I did after thermalling it for a while. I dived away and got up to around 155 knots and then pulled up, heading like a rocket toward the stratosphere. That pull-up was such a rush that I decided I just had to do it again going the other way! One must also consider that this was even done under convective conditions in the vicinity of a ridge, not in smooth air. However, the DuckHawk was absolutely solid and it felt absolutely safe bringing it to a speed that is over the VNE of most other sailplanes around. The plane was flown dry with a light total flying weight around 620 LBS and when I got onto the ridge, I immediately noticed that even for its light weight it did not get particularly kicked around by the dynamic air. Unlike my trusty metal steed (1-26), the DuckHawk seemed to “plow” through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge transitions were quite easy and I flew over 400 km with an average speed of 105 mph on the ridge, without doing any turns other than doing some more thermalling practice at the end of “our” mountain. The glider was flown with the prototype automatic/manual flap control system and I think that this will be an exciting system for the future of the plane as the automatic mode smoothly adjusts the flaps throughout their range and gives you the optimum flap setting all of the time. The fast roll rate is conducive to rolling in and out very quickly with little adverse yaw. As far as all of the other features of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer’s website. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with as little high performance glider time as myself would be able to transition so easily to a world-class racing machine. Windward Performance's DuckHawk was an absolute delight to fly and it would be an honor to fly it again. The Duckhawk is issued a Experimental Air racing Airworthiness certificate at the time of completion. It is registered to Windward Performance, Windward is the builder, Windward makes all the arrangements with the FAA for certification, all you do is pick it up with your trailer. Windward sells the Duckhawk to you by way of a bill of sale and a change of registration, done. As far as who can maintain the Duckhawk, give it its annual, this can be done by any A+P, it need not be an IA. Windward is a manufacture and the Duckhawk is not built in a Barn, if you have any knowledge of composite construction and have been to the business and seen the product you will understand that it is not made of 2x4's and plywood. As far as what you imagine I can not say but in all my years working with the FAA in certification and as a DAR issuing experimental certificates I feel privileged to help in the Duckhawks program and advance American Sailplanes. Educate yourself and if you crash it is your own fault, it is not the fault of the sailplane. The advancement of general aviation and soaring can be found in the barns, garages, and small hangers and business, the history of soaring has its own roots in experimental aircraft, the BG12, HP18, Falcons, and others built by pilots and engineers who wanted a better sailplane and took it upon them selves to do it and help other believe that they to can soar from to an aircraft built in there garage. The reason the Duckhawk is here is only because someone never gave up on a dream, and I will tell you from experience he will never give up, it is people like this that make America what it is.
What you have stated differs from what they apparently say on their website.
> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:23:41 PM UTC-7, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote: > Having fun in the DuckHawk 15m sailplane > > By: Daniel Sazhin > > > > In early September, I had a fantastic day of flying at Blairstown Airport, the culmination of which was having the opportunity to fly Windward Performance's new DuckHawk. I had just flown the club Grob Twin Astir with my brother, promptly falling out and not exactly having one of my best landings in it. It seems that Bill Thar did not see it and upon greeting him, he offered me to fly the DuckHawk! I was flabbergasted and immediately agreed. The glider was already assembled, so Bill promptly introduced me to the cockpit and gave the pre-flight briefing. We pushed the glider out to the line, which was easy because at its 440 LBS empty weight it is just like pushing my club's 1-26E around! > > > > While I have not flown any high performance single-place gliders before, my many years of flying the Condor Soaring Simulator have allowed me to be familiar with most of the composite sailplanes in the field. I did not feel nervous about being able to control the plane and I was excited to try it out. The first takeoff was very easy and the DuckHawk had great control authority and responsiveness. There was no need for any of the takeoff tricks found on some other sailplanes such as negative flap settings prior to takeoff or open spoilers for increased aileron effectiveness. The visibility was great and it was easy to stay behind the tow plane because the DuckHawk didn’t get thrown around in the turbulence. Unfortunately, upon releasing I was unable to find much lift except for one light thermal which amounted to zero-sink for a while. Pulling into that thermal, it was quite a fantastic sensation bringing the flaps to 10-15 degrees and feeling the glider “grip” the air. The DuckHawk was able to slow down to a tad over 40 knots and provides the pilot with a lot of feedback from the air. What was definitely noticeable was that the glider does everything you want it to. There is no feeling of “fighting the glider” like in some other gliders I had flown. The DuckHawk handled great at the low speed end and the controls were not twitchy, but yet very responsive. I liked the fact that there is no elevator trim; instead wherever one places the stick, it stays in that position. The electric flaps are easily controlled in manual mode using a switch on the stick. The flaps move at a brisk rate, but there is no tendency for the glider to “drop” such as when the flaps are moved between notches in other gliders. This DuckHawk is fitted with a prototype automatic flap control system but it was not used on this flight. I returned to the field put the flaps down and opened the spoilers to land just like you do in other gliders and the nice thing was to put the gear down I just moved the gated switch and out came the gear. Everything went easily on landing and the floating piston oleo shock is wonderful as there is no bounce and it does its job very nicely and the wheel brake is very effective. > > > > One week later, I took the DuckHawk up for another flight on a day when the ridge was working and had the opportunity to experience this glider's excellent cross country capability. Since there were thermals present as well, I had more time to fly the plane and it was a good opportunity to do some stalls and get a feel for the plane throughout more of its envelope. The stalls were benign and had very little tendency to drop a wing. The DuckHawk is much like a chameleon in the way it can be thermalled. For instance, at 50 knots it requires very little control in maneuvering in a thermal and climbs very well with little effort. However, unlike other sailplanes, this glider really does not seem to have a narrow and sensitive “drag bucket” and as a result, it can be thermalled even down to 40 knots without a significant sink rate penalty. It was quite interesting that the pilot is given quite the latitude in how one wants to go about thermalling, which bodes well for different conditions and pilot styles. Prior to the flight, Bill Thar also told me that I should consider bringing the glider up to its 160 knots maneuvering speed, which I did after thermalling it for a while. I dived away and got up to around 155 knots and then pulled up, heading like a rocket toward the stratosphere. That pull-up was such a rush that I decided I just had to do it again going the other way! One must also consider that this was even done under convective conditions in the vicinity of a ridge, not in smooth air. However, the DuckHawk was absolutely solid and it felt absolutely safe bringing it to a speed that is over the VNE of most other sailplanes around. The plane was flown dry with a light total flying weight around 620 LBS and when I got onto the ridge, I immediately noticed that even for its light weight it did not get particularly kicked around by the dynamic air. Unlike my trusty metal steed (1-26), the DuckHawk seemed to “plow” through the air and handled beautifully on the ridge. The ridge transitions were quite easy and I flew over 400 km with an average speed of 105 mph on the ridge, without doing any turns other than doing some more thermalling practice at the end of “our” mountain. The glider was flown with the prototype automatic/manual flap control system and I think that this will be an exciting system for the future of the plane as the automatic mode smoothly adjusts the flaps throughout their range and gives you the optimum flap setting all of the time. The fast roll rate is conducive to rolling in and out very quickly with little adverse yaw. As far as all of the other features of the plane you can check them out on the manufacturer’s website. It is quite a testament to the design of the glider that someone with as little high performance glider time as myself would be able to transition so easily to a world-class racing machine. Windward Performance's DuckHawk was an absolute delight to fly and it would be an honor to fly it again. The Duckhawk is issued a Experimental Air racing Airworthiness certificate at the time of completion. It is registered to Windward Performance, Windward is the builder, Windward makes all the arrangements with the FAA for certification, all you do is pick it up with your trailer. Windward sells the Duckhawk to you by way of a bill of sale and a change of registration, done. As far as who can maintain the Duckhawk, give it its annual, this can be done by any A+P, it need not be an IA. Windward is a manufacture and the Duckhawk is not built in a Barn, if you have any knowledge of composite construction and have been to the business and seen the product you will understand that it is not made of 2x4's and plywood. As far as what you imagine I can not say but in all my years working with the FAA in certification and as a DAR issuing experimental certificates I feel privileged to help in the Duckhawks program and advance American Sailplanes. Educate yourself and if you crash it is your own fault, it is not the fault of the sailplane. The advancement of general aviation and soaring can be found in the barns, garages, and small hangers and business, the history of soaring has its own roots in experimental aircraft, the BG12, HP18, Falcons, and others built by pilots and engineers who wanted a better sailplane and took it upon them selves to do it and help other believe that they to can soar from to an aircraft built in there garage. The reason the Duckhawk is here is only because someone never gave up on a dream, and I will tell you from experience he will never give up, it is people like this that make America what it is.
It sounds like they are doing exactly what we would expect of them.
That is a good thing and I'm glad to hear it. I think they should maybe tune up the info on their site.
UH
cochra...@gmail.com
Nov 1, 2013, 8:22:03 AM11/1/13
to
That all makes perfect sense, and would be just how I would expect -- buy glider, it comes with airworthiness certificate, the manufacturer has dealt with the FAA. My curiosity was piqued by the statement on their website that it is delivered without airworthiness and wondering what it would take for me to drive up to the FSDO, new glider in tow and ask for an airworthiness certificate.
John Cochrane
John Cochrane
Luke Szczepaniak
Nov 1, 2013, 8:29:12 AM11/1/13
to
On 10/31/2013 5:20 PM, cochra...@gmail.com wrote:
> As a good Libertarian I heartily agree about what should be, and what the FAA has done to aircraft development is a crime.
>
> The question I had is more about the legalities in the sadly over regulated world in which we operate
Thanks for the morning chuckle BB, I'll have to remember this post next
> As a good Libertarian I heartily agree about what should be, and what the FAA has done to aircraft development is a crime.
>
> The question I had is more about the legalities in the sadly over regulated world in which we operate
time a SSA racing rules flame war comes up on RAS!
Cheers,
Luke
Dan Marotta
Nov 1, 2013, 11:18:32 AM11/1/13
to
I would absulutely LOVE to have one. There's just that thing about the
price. Sure, it's somewhat less expensive than the European competition,
but it's still quite a lot. Not saying it's not worth it.
Kudos to the designers and builders!
price. Sure, it's somewhat less expensive than the European competition,
but it's still quite a lot. Not saying it's not worth it.
Kudos to the designers and builders!
sfi...@xede.com
Nov 2, 2013, 8:27:32 AM11/2/13
to
Lol. Never thought of it that way.... Maybe that's a good point?
Ron Gleason
Nov 2, 2013, 10:11:12 AM11/2/13
to
Ron Gleason
Tom Claffey
Nov 4, 2013, 5:08:22 AM11/4/13
to
The Duckhawk is radical in some ways, not always a bad thing, not always
good.
As someone from outside the USA I could not care less whether it is from
there, Europe or Africa. If it is a better aircraft then I am interested,
IF certified.
I hope to see one in Poland this year, pity we couldn't see it in Uvalde.
An 18M version will sell more overseas than 15M. From what I have seen
sales do not seem to be big on the builders agenda?
Tom
PS: unlike some views, mine is that it came second in it's first comp, a
Canadian in an ASG29 won! (Regardless of the hype)
good.
As someone from outside the USA I could not care less whether it is from
there, Europe or Africa. If it is a better aircraft then I am interested,
IF certified.
I hope to see one in Poland this year, pity we couldn't see it in Uvalde.
An 18M version will sell more overseas than 15M. From what I have seen
sales do not seem to be big on the builders agenda?
Tom
PS: unlike some views, mine is that it came second in it's first comp, a
Canadian in an ASG29 won! (Regardless of the hype)
usnightl...@gmail.com
Nov 4, 2013, 9:44:01 AM11/4/13
to
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
Tony
Nov 4, 2013, 10:03:05 AM11/4/13
to
Excellent report Daniel, thanks for sharing
Dan Marotta
Nov 4, 2013, 10:06:08 AM11/4/13
to
Just curious; are there no experimental aircraft allowed in Europe or is it
just your preference for certificated aircraft?
"Tom Claffey" <to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:527773a7$0$1318$862e...@ngroups.net...
just your preference for certificated aircraft?
"Tom Claffey" <to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:527773a7$0$1318$862e...@ngroups.net...
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Nov 4, 2013, 10:32:52 AM11/4/13
to
On Monday, November 4, 2013 9:44:01 AM UTC-5, usnightl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, November 4, 2013 5:08:22 AM UTC-5, Tom Claffey wrote: > The Duckhawk is radical in some ways, not always a bad thing, not always > > good. > > As someone from outside the USA I could not care less whether it is from > > there, Europe or Africa. If it is a better aircraft then I am interested, > > IF certified. > > I hope to see one in Poland this year, pity we couldn't see it in Uvalde. > > An 18M version will sell more overseas than 15M. From what I have seen > > sales do not seem to be big on the builders agenda? > > Tom > > > > PS: unlike some views, mine is that it came second in it's first comp, a > > Canadian in an ASG29 won! (Regardless of the hype) > > > > > > > > At 14:11 02 November 2013, Ron Gleason wrote: > > >On Friday, 1 November 2013 09:18:32 UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote: > > >> I would absulutely LOVE to have one. There's just that thing about the > > > > >> > > >> price. Sure, it's somewhat less expensive than the European > > competition, > > > > > >> > > >> but it's still quite a lot. Not saying it's not worth it. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Kudos to the designers and builders! > > > > > >Bit off topic here but is it less expensive then European gliders? > > Anyone > > >know current cost of Ventus 2 or ASG 29 (in 15 meter config) or other 15 > > >meter gliders? We all understand the fluctuations in the euro but am > > >curious. > > > > > >Ron Gleason > > > Bear in mind that Chip Garner flew that glider having flown it only once prior... I think that's rather impressive he did as well as he did in it with so little experience. Regards, Daniel Sazhin
Chip's result was due to his outstanding skills as a pilot, especially in tricky changable weather like we had in that contest. He likely would have had the same result flying his Discus 2. That contest had nothing to do with sailplane performance and everything to do with pilot skills. Chip is also used to adjusting to borrowed gliders.
> On Monday, November 4, 2013 5:08:22 AM UTC-5, Tom Claffey wrote: > The Duckhawk is radical in some ways, not always a bad thing, not always > > good. > > As someone from outside the USA I could not care less whether it is from > > there, Europe or Africa. If it is a better aircraft then I am interested, > > IF certified. > > I hope to see one in Poland this year, pity we couldn't see it in Uvalde. > > An 18M version will sell more overseas than 15M. From what I have seen > > sales do not seem to be big on the builders agenda? > > Tom > > > > PS: unlike some views, mine is that it came second in it's first comp, a > > Canadian in an ASG29 won! (Regardless of the hype) > > > > > > > > At 14:11 02 November 2013, Ron Gleason wrote: > > >On Friday, 1 November 2013 09:18:32 UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote: > > >> I would absulutely LOVE to have one. There's just that thing about the > > > > >> > > >> price. Sure, it's somewhat less expensive than the European > > competition, > > > > > >> > > >> but it's still quite a lot. Not saying it's not worth it. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Kudos to the designers and builders! > > > > > >Bit off topic here but is it less expensive then European gliders? > > Anyone > > >know current cost of Ventus 2 or ASG 29 (in 15 meter config) or other 15 > > >meter gliders? We all understand the fluctuations in the euro but am > > >curious. > > > > > >Ron Gleason > > > Bear in mind that Chip Garner flew that glider having flown it only once prior... I think that's rather impressive he did as well as he did in it with so little experience. Regards, Daniel Sazhin
Just another point of view
UH
usnightl...@gmail.com
Nov 4, 2013, 11:21:02 AM11/4/13
to
Daniel
Evan Ludeman
Nov 4, 2013, 1:02:52 PM11/4/13
to
Greg Cole, 2012 Barnaby lecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln9fuR8uwIc
Discussion of DH starts about 17 minutes in.
Evan Ludeman / T8
Discussion of DH starts about 17 minutes in.
Evan Ludeman / T8
Don Johnstone
Nov 5, 2013, 5:04:40 AM11/5/13
to
At 15:06 04 November 2013, Dan Marotta wrote:
>Just curious; are there no experimental aircraft allowed in Europe or is
it
>
>just your preference for certificated aircraft?
>
>
No, we do not have a preference. What we do have is an organisation called
>Just curious; are there no experimental aircraft allowed in Europe or is
it
>
>just your preference for certificated aircraft?
>
>
EASA. The people at EASA are probably the most ignorant people on the
planet, they come from all the member states of the EU and mostly from the
airline/manufacturer industries and their aim seems to be to regulate
anyone, except airliners, out of the sky.
The only other thing against the Duckhawk is the name. Perhaps Hobby,
Peregrine or Osprey might have had a better ring to it.
If it swims like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck chances
are it is a duck.
ueli....@gmail.com
Nov 5, 2013, 5:41:51 AM11/5/13
to
Experimental aircraft exist in Europe, but they have to be at least 51% homebuilt.
Piotr Szafranski
Nov 5, 2013, 7:56:36 AM11/5/13
to
At Mountain Gliding School Żar here in Poland, where the low-energy procedure is a splashdown on the lake, flying something with a "Duck" in it's name would make one feel more comfortable I think... Great to hear the Duckhawk will be in Leszno next year!
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Nov 5, 2013, 8:17:36 AM11/5/13
to
On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 5:04:40 AM UTC-5, Don Johnstone wrote:
> At 15:06 04 November 2013, Dan Marotta wrote: >Just curious; are there no experimental aircraft allowed in Europe or is it > >just your preference for certificated aircraft? > > No, we do not have a preference. What we do have is an organisation called EASA. The people at EASA are probably the most ignorant people on the planet, they come from all the member states of the EU and mostly from the airline/manufacturer industries and their aim seems to be to regulate anyone, except airliners, out of the sky. The only other thing against the Duckhawk is the name. Perhaps Hobby, Peregrine or Osprey might have had a better ring to it. If it swims like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck chances are it is a duck.
Duckhawk is another name for the Perigrine Falcon.
> At 15:06 04 November 2013, Dan Marotta wrote: >Just curious; are there no experimental aircraft allowed in Europe or is it > >just your preference for certificated aircraft? > > No, we do not have a preference. What we do have is an organisation called EASA. The people at EASA are probably the most ignorant people on the planet, they come from all the member states of the EU and mostly from the airline/manufacturer industries and their aim seems to be to regulate anyone, except airliners, out of the sky. The only other thing against the Duckhawk is the name. Perhaps Hobby, Peregrine or Osprey might have had a better ring to it. If it swims like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck chances are it is a duck.
And it don't fly like no duck.
UH
cochra...@gmail.com
Nov 5, 2013, 8:58:07 AM11/5/13
to
>
>
> No, we do not have a preference. What we do have is an organisation called
> EASA. The people at EASA are probably the most ignorant people on the
> planet, they come from all the member states of the EU and mostly from the
> airline/manufacturer industries and their aim seems to be to regulate
> anyone, except airliners, out of the sky.
>
I gather US experimental and racing is not valid outside the US, hence the problem for flying it in 15 meter in Poland.
>
> No, we do not have a preference. What we do have is an organisation called
> EASA. The people at EASA are probably the most ignorant people on the
> planet, they come from all the member states of the EU and mostly from the
> airline/manufacturer industries and their aim seems to be to regulate
> anyone, except airliners, out of the sky.
>
How is the Diana 2 flying? It's some sort of "permit to fly" if I remember the IGC brouhaha over its status. Could a duckhawk be certified in Europe in the same way?
John Cochrane
Dan Marotta
Nov 5, 2013, 10:36:49 AM11/5/13
to
...But I think the Duckhawk eats ducks!
I understand your statements about EASA. We have the FAA, though we're
still fortunate to be able to build and fly whatever we can conceive of (for
now...).
"Don Johnstone" <gp3...@okbloggs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5278c525$1$1352$862e...@ngroups.net...
I understand your statements about EASA. We have the FAA, though we're
still fortunate to be able to build and fly whatever we can conceive of (for
now...).
"Don Johnstone" <gp3...@okbloggs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5278c525$1$1352$862e...@ngroups.net...
JS
Nov 5, 2013, 3:14:22 PM11/5/13
to
Daniel's first flight in the Duckhawk was great.
Jim
Jim
Morgan
Nov 8, 2013, 12:14:23 PM11/8/13
to
On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 12:14:22 PM UTC-8, JS wrote:
> Daniel's first flight in the Duckhawk was great.
>
> Jim
Agreed.
> Daniel's first flight in the Duckhawk was great.
>
> Jim
When I first read the report I admit that I felt he didn't have a basis for making the comparisons, but everyone with time in glass and Schweizers should understand the enthusiasm of someone flying a high quality, high performance ship for the first time. I felt the same about my ASW-20 after the first flight.
I visited the Windward Performance shop last month. The Duckhawk wing is a thing of beauty. Wade, one of their engineers, is a great ambassador for Windward and for soaring. Young, energetic and positive about soaring. Kind of like Daniel seems.
The technology on the Duckhawk is unfamiliar to most of us in gliders, but automatic flaps are probably a good thing. I know plenty of people that will admit to forgetting to switch settings and the continuously variable setting allows for some pretty serious optimization compare to my 20 knot brackets.
I would personally love to fly it. From the cockpit I wouldn't be able to see the tail anyway and my shallow preference for t-tails might be overcome by the qualities of the glider.
Morgan
Wallace Berry
Nov 8, 2013, 4:23:39 PM11/8/13
to
In article <5bcb0bbd-4800-4846...@googlegroups.com>,
You mean you don't ignore the detents and just move your flaps
continually through their range based on your speed and g load? That's
what I do in my Libelle. That gives me infinite ways to have the flaps
set wrong.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Morgan <mor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The technology on the Duckhawk is unfamiliar to most of us in gliders, but
> automatic flaps are probably a good thing. I know plenty of people that will
> admit to forgetting to switch settings and the continuously variable setting
> allows for some pretty serious optimization compare to my 20 knot brackets.
>
>
> Morgan
>
> The technology on the Duckhawk is unfamiliar to most of us in gliders, but
> automatic flaps are probably a good thing. I know plenty of people that will
> admit to forgetting to switch settings and the continuously variable setting
> allows for some pretty serious optimization compare to my 20 knot brackets.
>
>
You mean you don't ignore the detents and just move your flaps
continually through their range based on your speed and g load? That's
what I do in my Libelle. That gives me infinite ways to have the flaps
set wrong.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Wallace Berry
Nov 8, 2013, 4:26:12 PM11/8/13
to
> The technology on the Duckhawk is unfamiliar to most of us in gliders, but
> automatic flaps are probably a good thing. I know plenty of people that will
> admit to forgetting to switch settings and the continuously variable setting
> allows for some pretty serious optimization compare to my 20 knot brackets.
>
> Morgan
> automatic flaps are probably a good thing. I know plenty of people that will
> admit to forgetting to switch settings and the continuously variable setting
> allows for some pretty serious optimization compare to my 20 knot brackets.
>
I would dearly love to fly it as well.
A question: How does the automatic flap system in the Duckhawk know how
to position the flaps? Not just by airspeed I'd guess. Does the D'hawk
have an angle of attack sensing system? G-load?
usnightl...@gmail.com
Nov 8, 2013, 5:54:01 PM11/8/13
to
The computer currently senses airspeed and g-loading. According to Bill Thar, they are also thinking about developing an angle of attack sensor system for the flaps.
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
Regards,
Daniel Sazhin
Bob Whelan
Nov 8, 2013, 10:50:41 PM11/8/13
to
Regardless of one's view on whether or not they'd ever consider purchasing a
Duckhawk, this presentation is a superb introduction - should one be needed -
to Greg Cole and his immense contributions to soaring. Those who'd focus
exclusively on "FAI Classes" and "sales numbers" would be missing the larger
view of Greg being someone who - quietly, humbly and without self-promotion -
follows his own internal visions of what may be possible in the soaring world,
rather than visions of "incrementally improving conventional wisdom." U.S.
soaring benefits from both visions.
Bob W.
Wallace Berry
Nov 11, 2013, 10:00:40 AM11/11/13
to
In article <c1838642-dfed-41ea...@googlegroups.com>,
Thanks for the info, Daniel. The Duckhawk is one fascinating machine.
Cannot wait to see what else comes out of Greg Cole's shop.
Cannot wait to see what else comes out of Greg Cole's shop.
Soartech
Nov 11, 2013, 12:32:46 PM11/11/13
to
On Monday, November 4, 2013 1:02:52 PM UTC-5, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> Greg Cole, 2012 Barnaby lecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln9fuR8uwIc
>
> Discussion of DH starts about 17 minutes in.
I'll second that. This is a fascinating talk by a very smart and competent guy.
> Greg Cole, 2012 Barnaby lecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln9fuR8uwIc
>
> Discussion of DH starts about 17 minutes in.
Anyone interested in sailplanes should take a look.
0 new messages