Out of reach due to poor route planning, strong winds and marginal workig band between cloud-ground. Cloud base was 1700m MSL and the lake is at 700m MSL and we flew into a 40km/h headwind on the return leg :)
At the end it sorted out that's the most important part of a flight, well done. One thing I have always in mind never go back on a route where you had a minus on the vario. At 2:50 you had a huge field in front of you along the road and river, what was the reason not to land there? Most of the times obstacles are poorly visible on video, that limits drastically the number of landing spots to choose from. Happy flying and must say, the scenery is amazing.
That larger field have power lines running diagonally across 1/3 into the field lengthwise, if coming in with headwind that day. I felt the chosen one was "better" but it was more marginal than anticipated. But I managed to control energy and make a precise touchdown which made it work :) Thank you for commenting and yes I agree, the scenery is amazing! We also often have brilliant visibility, with up towards 250-300km clear line of sight :D
You have had a lift at the beginning of the video, why didn't you keep circling? You should have center of the thermal a little better. Any way nice outlanding
40km/h wind towards the lake so poor thermal = a lot of drift and when low its easy to loose visual contact with the selected field. One could also risk drifting too far downwind and not make it back if one isnt observant. I had tried to get back up for some time prior to turning on the gopro and eventually it is time to commit :) Thanks for the comment :D
@Folken Van Vanel - thank you for dropping in a comment :) In hindsight I probably would have used the @3:00 field instead but due to power wires I felt the selected one as safer (from the air). It was however a little more tight than anticipated so if I needed to do it again the @3:00 would be my choice. The only reason I stayed in that particular area was due to being too low to effectively go thermal hunting deeper into the terrain, and hoping for a save at the sunfacing terrain which did have this field right below it.
fil de laine de travers, passe sous les nuage à l'opposé du soleil (mn 4+) .... heureusement que les planeurs modernes compensent par leurs performances ...
Thank you for taking the time to write a comment :) This is in Norway and Seljord is where I landed. I fly from the airport ENNO (ICAO Airport code) which is one of the more active regions in soutern Norway and we operate the glider center there :)
Nice one. I'm impressed that it worked out. As we say in aviation: always leave yourself an out. I know the glide is incredible with these ships, but we can't exactly just land anywhere. It's worth noting that difficult zones for possible landings should be flown as high as possible when crossing them as opposed to being there while looking for lift. Stop early to climb to make these crossings of difficult landing areas as high as possible so it isn't an issue. Slower? Absolutely. But you'll always have safe landables in reach. As you said: you probably wouldn't land there again. I'm over here on RU-vid. Not judging at all except that it was a great spot landing without horrendous departures of airspeed control. I think you did great. It's up to you to self evaluate, which I have noted you are. Keep em coming. New subscriber!
Thank you very much for commenting and subscribing! Its a constant balance between desired achivements, available options, the unknown and what is needed to be done. I had other options available to me, but I did not find any reason to discard the one I eventually used - but I did overestimate the margins it provided. Hope to bring more interesting content :D
No the field was perfectly level with no gradient at all. It was tight, I am not certain I would choose the same field again as missing the target landing spot by 2-3s could easily eat up the remaining distance for rollo-out. It did work out exactly as planned, but the margins were slim. (note to self :) )
It worked out as planned indeed, but margins were slim so I am not certain I´d attempt to land there again :) There are several realy good options to the north (in the valley up from the lake) but I was hoping for a thermal along the sunfacing ridge. As the field used was deemed okay I stuck to ut and landed when required :)
@@nicolasvillanueva7241 I will never be fully trained :) 500hrs as PIC and 400 landings to date with 100% success rate ;) Granted, only 5-6 of those were at an unplanned destination :)
Valid observation, and yes it was indeed a walking path which was not so apparent from the air. I was thinking farmer / access road at the time. It was also raised perhaps half a foot vs the farmland itself.
There are powerlines running diagonally across that field, roughly 1/3 into it from the north (final) side. Wind was light so I could probably have landed on opposing side (with light tailwind). However I chose to stay committed to the field used, but it did have less margins than predicted from the air.
@@soaringhal Thanks for explanation, I had the same thought. In particular, because you'd be landing into rising terrain instead of towards the water. Anyway, very good flying, highly educational video, and well done!
@@basti4296 - landing into rising terrain will almost every time be better, because your roll-out will be shorter (trading kinetic energy (speed) for potential energy (elevation). Note, that this effect will be reduced a little due to carrying a slightly higher airspeed for the flare as the ground ascend. Here is such a landing I did a couple of years back - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CSUJKx2XKL4.html I carried extra speed for the flare so I not only could reduce sink-through for the touchdown but also carry enough energy to "climb" to match the ascent/gradient.
Curiosity, but find that two strings show minor yaw more precise/visually detecable compared to a single, atleast with the peripheral vision. Two who line up = no yaw. Should one also fall off I still have one, so there is an element of redundancy.
I had a similar episode during my first outlining. I was too low from my airfield and was looking for a good place to land. For some reason, the area I was in was completely undulated, until I found a place that looked Ideal to land in. I lined up on short final and to my surprise, it was a steep uphill that lead to a downhill, leading to trees. I managed to land right at the summit of the hill and immediately hit the wheel brake. Suffice to know I was safe and the Ka-6 was still in one piece. Just another fun day as a glider pilot.
Nice project. I'm also working on a jet engine. I haven't decided what kind of a tachometer to be used. Thinking of hall effect and laser tachometers with Arduino. My question is where did you place the magnet for the tachometer? Also, do you know any other way to detect rpm without modifying the engine parts?
It was a little long wait (3hrs) but it was a warm summer day and I had a grocery store open about a mile away, so basically just had to be patient and enjoy an ice cream or two before my retrieve came to collect me :) My friend who came pick me up flew along with me but had a sustainer engine so he could fly back to the airfield, land, get my car/trailer and took the 1:30hr drive. We enjoyed a good BBQ and cold beer that evening back at the airfield, glider rigged for another day :)
Yeah, not claiming perfect turn/rudder coordination. However the GoPro wide field of view skew that perception a bit. But it is something I focus on to improve, to the extent that is viable. Circling in wind low over ground will make the yaw string buffet around a fair bit and keeping look-out/feel the air can be safer than "chasing the string".
I remember I had to make an outlanding one time while doing aerial photography over Lemmenjoen in my Cessna 182. One of those crazy ass creatures called a Finnish Woodsman shot my engine out with a 2 gauge shot gun. Don't know how you guys survive up there with crazy neighbors like those things
Never even heard of that, even though i fly gliders in finland. Most people who come to see outlanded gliders are just curious. Though i've heard that once a farmer demanded payment for crop damage.
My father-in-law flew in the World Championships in Finland I think in the 80´s, and he outlanded several times. One salad farmer took a landing fee based on how many salad heads my father-in-law had ruined during roll-out ;)
Easy to find such friends within the community, as they might need the retrieve service some time into the future ;) In my club we do have a small core that is cross-country oriented, an outlanding is part of that activity so we never "oppose" the though of an outlanding. "If a pilot decided to land out that is a safety-based decision, so of course we will come pick you up! No worries!" A pilot should never feel peer-pressure towards avoiding outlanding because of the "hassle" associated with it. I rather pick up a pilot&plane after a succesfull outlanding than attending his funeral because he tried to get back at all cost.
Typically about €35k for the LS6 and LS6a models, B/C models are newer and cost more. Assuming decent surface quallity, typically instrumentated and trailer.
@@soaringhal No gliding clips in a while. Im a powered pilot from Sweden really looking forward to get into gliding it looks like the purest way of flying! And my wallet will thank me too. Paying 160$ dollars for a scrubby piper an hour does not work on my avarage pay. So gliding seems like the best if counting hourly cost :). How exspansive is it to own your own glider?
My LS6a cost about 15.000NOK/year in insurance/maintenance/fee's (we are three owners, so this is split in 3 aswell) Personal licence / medical about 3.000NOK/year Rest is aerotow, typical 300-500NOK per flight Many clubs in Norway (I assume Sweden is similar) offer full access to club gliders for 7-8.000NOK/year, meaning you pay that fee once and fly for "free" the entire year. Aerotow/winch is extra and paid per usage. If you love flying and scenic landscape, soaring will provide plenty, heartly recommended! :)
@@soaringhal yeah hopefully I will get into gliding this summer 😊 How long is your average flights? And how far from the field do you go? And how many hours do you get per season?
How often/long vary a lot, but I myself fly typically 30-50hrs per year and maybe 15-20flights. A typical flight usually last 1-4hrs. Other members of my club fly less and some a lot more. With good weather one can stay airborne "all day" :) Bring food, water and plastics bag for pee ;)
The head of the stick was done separately and glued to the top of this piece. Yes it worked out :) The base of the stick grip have a machined aluminum collar that secure the grip to the control arm. Its secured with three set screw and there is also a internal support just below the Arduino to match the arm diameter so the base collar dont become a hinge point :)
@@soaringhal yes, I have printed mine from stefly and will buy the collar there as well. Did I you take the stl file from thingiverse for the stick or did you design it yourself?
@@markusimmig6620 - this was own design because I wanted to learn more in Fusion360. I could also machine the STL-file directly which is an approach I wish to do for a club glider I've installed an OV5,7" in, and upgrading to stick control is on my winter schedule :)
Nicely done. Is that a field that you had considered before ( known possible good landout field) or did you evaluate it only when you knew you had to land out?
No, this field was selected in-situ. I had a predefined field option a few km further east but it had long/tall grass. So I opted for this one, good wind direction and uphill and reduced height of treeline at threshold, grass recently cut and judged to be adequate in length :)
@@soaringhal How do you tell what direction the wind, if any, is from? How does it affect your decision making in picking a field? Btw, I lived in Oslo in the mid 80's. I loved it. Wish I had stayed.
@@davidcrick1123 - I use several indicators such as looking at lakes, percieved drift during flight but the most precise instrument is the flight computer (large screen in the instrument panel) which calculate wind component based on GPS/indicated airspeed vs ground speed etc. Both direction and strength can be calculated and it does so on the fly. Landing into the wind = lower ground speed and therefore less kinetic energy need to be lost during roll-out. Less energy = shorter landing distance = more fields are viable. This particular one was also sloped and the higher ground was into the wind so I had the benefit of uphill roll-out. The current wind on that day was a rare due East and with the more common North/NorthWest wind it would be much less viable. This was about 3hrs from Oslo, deep into Telemark County - a truly scenic part of the Norwegian landscape. Have you ever visited since the 80´s?
