Slingsby T61
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Crawley
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have many many hours in a T61 - to be sensible a second.....
Good points:
Two Seater
Simple Construction
Robust Gear (not the out riggers)
Simple Engine
No-brainer flying
Incrediably cheap to run
Bad points:
No-brainer flying
Uncomfortable if you are over 5ft6 and more than about 12 stone
Slow
Difficult to manoeuvre on the ground (under own power)
Outriggers not the best of things
Slow
Not great climb performance at MTOW
Poor glide performance
Cold
Slow (did i say it was slow?)
Painful handling when its really windy (need big arm muscles)
Slow
In summary i did an awful lot when i was learning as being a student, it was a very cheap pair of wings. As it is even now, if i just wanted something cheap for a quick potter around Sussex countryside (just keeping within rule 5) then its great if it doesn't cost much more than a round of drinks in the pub.
I've had lots of fun in one, and taken a few hosties from work in one for a cheap ride around. But I once took it to the PFA rally and it took me 2 DAYS (I'm not joking) to get there (across England). Plus the embarresment upon landing at Bembridge when the grass was un-usable. Having to hold all trafic in the circuit until i'd backtracked, switched off, got out, picked the tail up, turned it around, got back in, started up, taken off - not popular.
Unless you can fly one at cost, or you've been offered one very cheap and you only fly just locally outside the circuit on fair weather days, i say don't bother. Fly an RF4, or even better, an RF5.
... or a Piper Cub
FB
Good points:
Two Seater
Simple Construction
Robust Gear (not the out riggers)
Simple Engine
No-brainer flying
Incrediably cheap to run
Bad points:
No-brainer flying
Uncomfortable if you are over 5ft6 and more than about 12 stone
Slow
Difficult to manoeuvre on the ground (under own power)
Outriggers not the best of things
Slow
Not great climb performance at MTOW
Poor glide performance
Cold
Slow (did i say it was slow?)
Painful handling when its really windy (need big arm muscles)
Slow
In summary i did an awful lot when i was learning as being a student, it was a very cheap pair of wings. As it is even now, if i just wanted something cheap for a quick potter around Sussex countryside (just keeping within rule 5) then its great if it doesn't cost much more than a round of drinks in the pub.
I've had lots of fun in one, and taken a few hosties from work in one for a cheap ride around. But I once took it to the PFA rally and it took me 2 DAYS (I'm not joking) to get there (across England). Plus the embarresment upon landing at Bembridge when the grass was un-usable. Having to hold all trafic in the circuit until i'd backtracked, switched off, got out, picked the tail up, turned it around, got back in, started up, taken off - not popular.
Unless you can fly one at cost, or you've been offered one very cheap and you only fly just locally outside the circuit on fair weather days, i say don't bother. Fly an RF4, or even better, an RF5.
... or a Piper Cub
FB
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've done some venture flying and I think they're great fun. It is slow, takes forever to get anywhere, especially in a headwind(!), and is a bit cramped if you are a bit tall or a bit wide! Plus I always check runway width where I am planning to go so I know if I can turn around or not without getting out!
However, it's dirt cheap flying, builds your arm muscles up, and is generally a winter fun machine if you're into gliding, and only burns 2 and a bit gallons/hr. It does glide well engine off, I've had some great flights in it up to some dizzy heights in winter wave. Obviously it's not going glide like a high spec glider but i think it does alright, it definitely glides better than a supercub!
I guess it depends what you are after but I love flying 'em
However, it's dirt cheap flying, builds your arm muscles up, and is generally a winter fun machine if you're into gliding, and only burns 2 and a bit gallons/hr. It does glide well engine off, I've had some great flights in it up to some dizzy heights in winter wave. Obviously it's not going glide like a high spec glider but i think it does alright, it definitely glides better than a supercub!
I guess it depends what you are after but I love flying 'em
Just remember one number; 56 kts.
Climb at 56, cruise at 56, approach at 56.
Edited to say:
Come to think of it, maybe it was 60; anyone out there from a VGS?
Climb at 56, cruise at 56, approach at 56.
Edited to say:
Come to think of it, maybe it was 60; anyone out there from a VGS?
Last edited by chevvron; 6th Feb 2008 at 09:12.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hellfire Corner
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My thoughts about the T61A - (not the ex-RAF animal).
45hp that is usually sufficient.
Great fun to fly, much under-rated.
Economical, easy to maintain.
I believe it is now possible to operate on a Permit to Fly (LAA)
Best of both worlds - with and without power. Many will say it's the worst. They often have no idea.
The downside, especially these days, is a bl..dy great wingspan needing hangarage.
That wingspan and limited power does preclude use of small strips.
Slow cruise not always so good for flying in company.
As an eightish stone weakling (then) I didn't feel lifting the tail was beyond me, just something not to be done more than absolutely necessary.
Overall, I'd say if the cons aren't a major issue for you, it's a no-brainer. The glide ratio isn't up to much if you look at performance in gliders but not that bad and far better than most of the aircraft found at the local airfield (Lasham etc excepted, of course).
The fun of all that cheap -or free - flying is hard to beat. Try it!
45hp that is usually sufficient.
Great fun to fly, much under-rated.
Economical, easy to maintain.
I believe it is now possible to operate on a Permit to Fly (LAA)
Best of both worlds - with and without power. Many will say it's the worst. They often have no idea.
The downside, especially these days, is a bl..dy great wingspan needing hangarage.
That wingspan and limited power does preclude use of small strips.
Slow cruise not always so good for flying in company.
As an eightish stone weakling (then) I didn't feel lifting the tail was beyond me, just something not to be done more than absolutely necessary.
Overall, I'd say if the cons aren't a major issue for you, it's a no-brainer. The glide ratio isn't up to much if you look at performance in gliders but not that bad and far better than most of the aircraft found at the local airfield (Lasham etc excepted, of course).
The fun of all that cheap -or free - flying is hard to beat. Try it!
Not to mention the immense amusement value of taking a moderately experienced PPL flying, getting to around 2,000ft and calmly switching the engine off. I suppose I have a warped sense of humour.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure that some hero used to fly one in to LeTouquet from Shoreham. There used to be exchange visits IIRC. I seem to remember Fourniers coming the other way. 'Course could be pure fantasy on my part.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Crawley
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fourniers normally have an annual "walkabout". Not seen a T61 at Shoreham for a long time, the last one there that I can recall was the Ringmer Club one that put in after mag failure on the way back from the Isle of Wight. The Stamo engined version that was at Kenley I believe has now been sold up to Wormingford. Lee on Solent used to have one too, other than that, not sure of any others in the South East.
FB
FB
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK, Paris, Peckham, New York
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly both the falke and the RF3 regularly
RF3 has fantastic handling, i really want to do aerobatics in her but alas only the rf4 is aerobatic...RF3 is faster, better looking, rectracable main gear, simple engine, sips fuel. Still can be tricky to taxi in a x-wind, but are'nt all tail draggers?? it still has a rubbish climb rate (i am on the lardy side though!) and it is single seat. RF3 doest not have an electric starter so starting can be a pain but big thumbs up for the RF3
Falke is a dirt cheap 2 seater, rubbish climb rate, heavy ailerons, but fun, (you can loop them!) A great tool for teaching glider pilots in the winter. I enjoy them a lot, dispite all their down points because I think they are a bit of a laugh! They are slow though.....
If you want company get a falke. Both are cheap to operate.
RF3 has fantastic handling, i really want to do aerobatics in her but alas only the rf4 is aerobatic...RF3 is faster, better looking, rectracable main gear, simple engine, sips fuel. Still can be tricky to taxi in a x-wind, but are'nt all tail draggers?? it still has a rubbish climb rate (i am on the lardy side though!) and it is single seat. RF3 doest not have an electric starter so starting can be a pain but big thumbs up for the RF3
Falke is a dirt cheap 2 seater, rubbish climb rate, heavy ailerons, but fun, (you can loop them!) A great tool for teaching glider pilots in the winter. I enjoy them a lot, dispite all their down points because I think they are a bit of a laugh! They are slow though.....
If you want company get a falke. Both are cheap to operate.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not seen a T61 at Shoreham for a long time,
