What is a Slingsby like to fly?
 

Hi all,

I'd be grateful if anyone could point me to any reviews, or indeed pass on their experiences regarding the Slingsby.

Pros and Cons would be good, any vices?

Thanks in advance.

C23

Which Slingsby?

G

Indeed, which? T67A is very different to T67M-260. Both have low wings, stick and good vis but a bit different thereafter. Or do you mean the Slingsby T66? That's even more different :} (Tipsy Nipper). All are aerobatic though :ok: :ok: :ok: .

T67M
 

...sorry, should have added it's aT67M.

Didn't realise they were all so very different.

For that matter, there are still a few old Slingsby gliders out there.


Slingsby T67M260, from my slightly distant recollection flying the company demonstrator with their chief test pilot.

- Cockpit layout, conventional with good clear instrument layout, predictably placed central stick. Visibility in most directions superb.

- Take-off, conventional and rapid, a little care needed not to over-rotate, lots of rudder needed.

- Climb, trims easily in pitch, climb performance very impressive, annoying requirement to maintain large and continuous rudder input at climb power since the aeroplane I flew had no yaw trimmer. I suspect that later aeroplanes may have one, they certainly need it.

- Use of power - simplified single lever "jetlike" operation, fantastic, a great improvement upon the faffing that goes with most piston engines.

- Manoevring, light and crisp - will test your finesse, but once cracked, a really gorgeous aeroplane to manoeuvre.

- Stalling, (memory may be inaccurate here, as sadly I don't seem to have kept my notes), moderate pre-stall buffet, moderately nose-up attitude, not a particularly high stickforce, a disturbing reduction in back-stick-force immediately prior to stall, firm pitch break, slight tendency to drop a wing.

- Spin, crisp, not particularly oscillatory, 3ish seconds per turn, rapid response to conventional recovery controls.

- Approach, trims well to approach speeds, only small trim changes (again, my memory may be hazy) due to flap selection.

- Landing, bit of a tendency to float unless you get the approach and landing speeds spot-on, but can land in quite a nicely short patch of runway if you get it right.


Overall, I thought it was a lovely aeroplane and that everybody should have one - certainly the M260 was a huge improvement upon the underpowered and too-light (in pitch) A model. But the lightening of the stick force approaching the stall disturbed me and I can't help suspect that's related to the number of aeroplanes that have been lost in spins, even though Slingsby seem convinced when I asked them that it wasn't important and that the USAF losses were primarily down to instructors unused to piston-prop aeroplanes (this latter certainly being true).

G

Could not have flown a nicer aircraft.

I had 1 flight in a T67M but ive got 30 odd hours in the C, Fantastic visability, very responsive and great panel layout.

Watch out for stalls and spins. If you buy one get a good 2 hours spin recovery training with an instructor who flys one all the time.

Oh and remember that the c does not have an inverted fuel pump. Found that one out (as did my instructor) at 4000' over the isle or wight the wrong way up!!!!!:{

dbb

Aha. Ok, 160, 200 or 260? The 260 is a brilliant aircraft, will get to 10,000 ft in 10 minutes and has a Vne of nearly 200 kts. Yahoo! The 160 is good as well and is an excellent progression from the Katana, handles fairly similarly in many ways but more torque so more rudder needed, plus rolls quicker (although still slowly compared with e.g. Pittses). All are +6/-3g limited and have inverted fuel and oil systems. You can't inverted spin or tailslide them but can do everything else. You will hear horror stories about not coming out of spins but in my experience they always recover immediately on application of the correct inputs (even after 23 turns :eek: ) but not if you just let go. Great aircraft, don't stay straight and level.

Yep! .... A new T31m will soon be flying as well. Engine runs planned this week, cowlings to make, then just the final inspection and paper trail :ugh:

SS :ok:

http://www.ivan.pfanet.co.uk

Slingsby make fork lift trucks too. They're not that great to fly. :)

Its a lovely plane to fly. Its an eye opening step up from the C152 and warriors of the world. Good visibility, lovely responsive stick and useful if you like seeing the world from upsidedown.

It spins jolly well. It has no need for a stall warner since it shakes so much near the stall.

The only vice it has is the canopy. Its a bit wobbly and fragile when its open and if you start it with the canopy closed but unlocked it will fly off. Its a bit like landing with the undercarriage up. Everyone has either done it or is about to do it.

Make sure you get one with at least 160 hp.There are plenty of schools with them, go and have a go. PM me if you want to know where they are.

Did my first solo in a T67M2. Fantastic aeroplane to fly, very good basic trainer and fun in every phase of flight.

Thanks all, as usual a good response from PPRUNE.

Funnily enough DB6, I will be stepping up from a Katana, so it's good to know, and yes I've heard some horror stories about spinning. To be honest, it worries me as I've never done any - you aren't allowed to intentionally spin a Katana in the UK.

So, I'll have to take myself off and get some specifc stall/spin training as has been mentioned.

18greens - thanks, I may well be in touch.

Regards,

C23

PS - Good reply Aerbabe!

See AIAB report on the loss of G-FORS which includes a discusion on spinning following more tests.

A very nice a/c to fly, I had about 25 hours in G-FORS (T67c), a very nice 2 seat tourer also but I did no aeros in her.

Cricket23, I am all-seeing, all-knowing (or I looked at your profile :} ).
Spinning can be terrifying at first, but stick with it and you will soon master it. After that it's great fun and a great way to lose height at the end of a sortie (but not all of it!).

Thanks DB6, I'd forgotten about the bit in the profile! Doh!:O

Genghis is right about the spin - responds well to the correct, conventional recovery action. However it can respond poorly to bad recovery action. For example spinning a Cessna 152 (I suspect the first aircraft most people spin) it doesn't matter if you just release the controls. It does in a Firefly, as it can develop into a high-rotational spin, flatter and spinning faster. This still respondes to conventional recovery action, but not as quickly.

When you do spin it (and you should, with an instructor for the first few of course) don't be surprised if the stick is almost fully forward when it recovers. If you want a safety pilot for the spinning I'll do it - my instructor rating is lapsed so I can't even charge, but I love the Firefly!

If it's a 260hp then don't be caught out on the take-off roll! It accelerates quickly, and I only ever had chance to rattle off the checks rather smartly before rotating.

(they also make wheeled hand carts for pushing stuff round in. Probably only fly if pushed from a tall building, and then only briefly!)

I've got about 2hr in the T31b. Want to know what that goes like?

I think you should do your spin training in a Slingsby T21 (side by side, open cockpit, wood and fabric glider). The easiest way to confirm the direction of the spin is that it's opposite to the direction in which your sunglasses departed.

Many flights in T21b (Sedburgh) and T31 Mk3, plus Prefect. Also did two trips in the development T53 and it was HORRIBLE!

I did my first solo in a beautiful Red and Silver T31, on a beautiful summer's day in 1974, at RAF Spitalgate, with the wind in my hair and the wires singing in the (fairly gentle) wind, so for me Fred Slingsby's T31 can do NO WRONG.