Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site ganash.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!hjuxa!ganash!rgg
From: rgg@ganash.UUCP (Rich Giannotti)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: spoilers/airbrakes -- clarification
Message-ID: <203@ganash.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 13:52:54 EST
Article-I.D.: ganash.203
Posted: Tue Feb  4 13:52:54 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 5-Feb-86 04:46:45 EST
References: <5@petrus.UUCP> <4872@alice.UUCP> <205@isieng.UUCP> <16@petrus.UUCP>
Organization: Periphonics Corp, Bohemia, NY
Lines: 19


I think the Taylorcraft L2M (DCO 65) needed to have the spoilers wired
shut to keep a non-attentive pilot from attempting a take off with them open.

Since you can't see them from the driver's seat like you can in a sailplane,
I assume the FAA took a "better safe than sorry" attitude.

I think the absence of spoilers on most powered airplanes is simply that
they don't give enough of a performance benefit to justify the extra cost.

As someone pointed out,powered airplanes need to slow down and come down to
land,while sailplanes need to speed up and come down. Flaps do the former
well. The addition of spoilers helps control the glidepath without pitch
or power changes(Direct Lift Control on the L-1011),but I think this feature
is not cost justified in the eyes or wallets of the pilot population.

The use of terms like "I think" and "I assume" was intentional.

Rich Giannotti