Benefits of learning gliding as powered aircraft pilot?

[kilomike_19]

Hey !

I'd like to see your point of view about the benefits of learning to soar for a powered a/c pilot (let's see a CPL pilot). I know, it's very awesome to fly a glider and requires a lot of manual skills, but I'd like to go deeper into this question. Is it worth paying for another license?

Thanks guys !

[Cat Driver]

Yes.

[porcsord]

^What he said

I've got about 5k hours in powered aircraft and only a handful in a glider, and not only is the glider time WAY more enjoyable, you'll learn tons in doing it. Highly recommended.

[AirFrame]

Half a dozen flights in gliders with friends, and I learned a lot as well. Things I know I had been told in the past, but didn't believe until I had experienced it first-hand. Aerobatics in a glider are neat, you can stay upside down forever and the engine doesn't quit.

[SuperchargedRS]

As a ATPL, I can tell ya, glider hours are looked highly apon, and for good reason, all the best aviators have also been glider guys, that's telling you something.

[cgzro]

The more different types/experiences the better.

[xsbank]

It will teach you how to use a rudder! It's also a LOT of fun and will teach you some new skills.

Definitely.

[AuxBatOn]

I am not disagreeing with the opinions but I have yet to see why being a glider pilot is so great. Lots of opinions but little to back in up.

[Zaibatsu]

I am not disagreeing with the opinions but I have yet to see why being a glider pilot is so great. Lots of opinions but little to back in up.

+1

Kind of like taildraggers. The motivation is much more persuasive, but the tools are available in any powered aircraft to gain the skills. A powered aircraft doesn't have a lever that will massively change your glide ratio while affecting absolutely nothing else like a glider does. Nor does it give you the luxury of a vario to find and quantify lift.

Do it for the enjoyment, not to make you a better pilot.

[Rockie]

"Better" is a subjective assessment. Getting a glider licence is a new skill which is always good, but I don't see how it will make you a better A340 or CF-18 pilot. I can see how it would make you a better light GA pilot flying through the mountains though as it would make you more aware of how the air surrounding you moves.

[lownslow]

Every airplane responds to its environment a little bit differently. Diversifying your flight experience helps to illustrate what's common to aircraft and what's type-specific. Yes, you can learn those things without experience but until you've seen it first hand it's awfully had to understand it.

Fly different things. Lots of them.

[Cat Driver]

Kind of like taildraggers. The motivation is much more persuasive, but the tools are available in any powered aircraft to gain the skills.

So flying a taildragger does not make for a better hands and feet pilot?

Here is a easy test of that opinion.

Find the average PPL who learned on a nose wheel airplane at your airport and a PPL who learned on a taildragger.

With no instruction have the tail wheel pilot take the school C172 for a few circuits.

With no instruction have the nose wheel pilot take a taildragger for a few circuits.

Which one would be more likely to have problems controlling the airplane?

[AuxBatOn]

The only area tail draggers are more difficult to control is on the ground with no slipstream going over thr tail. Up and away, it is the exact same thing as a nosewheel aircraft. This is not extremely relevant for commercial ops.

[Rockie]

So flying a taildragger does not make for a better hands and feet pilot?

Flying a tail dragger is not the only thing that makes for good hands and feet believe it or not, and even more unbelievably good hands and feet do not necessarily make a person a good pilot. Lack of judgement and knowledge can erase the benefits of good hands and feet pretty quickly.

[Mach1]

Unless that glider has 2 engines, you just aren't safe.

Seriously though, looks like fun.

[Cat Driver]

Lack of judgement and knowledge can erase the benefits of good hands and feet pretty quickly.

Agreed.

However regardless of a pilots judgement and knowledge if said pilot is lacking in good hands and feet skills he/she can still wreck an airplane due to poor aircraft handling skills.

I come from a background that taught me that learning proper airplane handling skills is the foundation to progress with the rest of the learning process.

A good example of having good rudder skills is if you decide to learn to fly helicopters you will have a far easier time controlling yaw with your feet.

The same goes for learning to fly gyroplanes, which incidentally I found to be the best fun flying of all the types I got licensed for.

[Rockie]

However regardless of a pilots judgement and knowledge if said pilot is lacking in good hands and feet skills he/she can still wreck an airplane due to poor aircraft handling skills.

Yup. The same can be said for all three - skill, knowledge, judgement.

But would you rather rely on skill to overcome poor judgement, or good judgement to fly within your skill?

[Cat Driver]

But would you rather rely on skill to overcome poor judgement, or good judgement to fly within your skill?

I believe in being competent in all those areas of flying.

Maybe that is why I flew most everything out there for over thirty thousand hours and over fifty years with zero accidents, or violations of the rules.

Or was I just extra lucky?

[Rockie]

Not just lucky of course, but anybody who's been around as long as you have been can certainly remember instances where luck was the deciding factor. I can.

[Cat Driver]

Yes for sure there were moments where luck had to be involved in not killing myself.

However if you read the comments in blue under my posts you will get a better feel for why I made it through my career without wrecking things and am now looking forward to many years of happy retirement.

[Rockie]

I've read those comments hundreds of times. Words to live by - literally.

[cgzro]

[quote]The only area tail draggers are more difficult to control is on the ground with no slipstream going over thr tail. Up and away, it is the exact same thing as a nosewheel aircraft. This is not extremely relevant for commercial ops. [/quote]

The need to understand, control and exploit adverse yaw every flight seems to make a tail dragger pilot better in the slow flight regime and less likely to pick up a wing with an aileron. That likely does not matter in a computerised a/c.

As to gliders, Skully discussed this and credited those skills in helping judge the glide.

Anyway fly lots of different types and fly frequently so if your plane changes type on you in the air you have an added advantage:)

[AuxBatOn]

The need to understand, control and exploit adverse yaw every flight seems to make a tail dragger pilot better in the slow flight regime and less likely to pick up a wing with an aileron. That likely does not matter in a computerised a/c.

As to gliders, Skully discussed this and credited those skills in helping judge the glide.

Anyway fly lots of different types and fly frequently so if your plane changes type on you in the air you have an added advantage:)

Adverse yaw is not exclusive to tail dragger. In fact, it has nothing to do with where the wheels are. The only thing I find that's different is on landing, you need to make sure the fuselage is lined up with the runway, otherwise you'll have to make an immediate correction as soon as you touch down (if that's even controllable).

[cgzro]

I think its a question of currency. You cannot land a tail dragger in a cross wind successfully without use of adverse yaw to stay straight. That makes it instinctive. Same is true of gyroscopic/P factor since its more pronounced in a td. Its harder to maintain these instincts if the aircraft does not present them often so they get replaced with casual use of aileron at high AOA by almost every pilot because thats the predominant instinct especially under duress.

For computerized ac this is all irrelivant as the computers are much better at dealing with and hiding all the control interactions than a human (as long as they are working).

[AuxBatOn]

I don't think your definition of adversw yaw is quite correct. Adverse yaw is yaw due to lateral control deflection. In general, it is an indesired mode of the aircraft. Most advanced flight control systems and some even reversible ones have means of removing it (rudder to aileron interconnects, the down-going aileron not deflecting as much as the up-going aileron, etc). I only know of a handful of aircraft that use adverse yaw (but it is really apparent proverse yaw) at very high angles of attack to reduce the time it takes to reqch the steady state roll rate.

I think you mean dihedral effect or roll due to yawing moment.