Jump to content
Touring Motor Gliders Association (TMGA)
EyesUp

Any advice for an eager enthusiast ? Safety, risks, et al ?

Recommended Posts

EyesUp

Hi everyone, allow me to introduce myself, as I am new here. My name is Andre, 39, living in Munich (though not German, have only been living here for 2 years). I came across this forum in my ongoing research into (i) learning to fly and (ii) ultimately owning a TMG. I am hoping you might be able to share some advice about TMG as a class of aviation, to help guide me to the best means (i.e. the safest means) of getting into (and staying in) this incredible sport.

In a nutshell, I would like to pursue my private pilot's license, on a TMG. There is a school near the city that offers our equivalent of a PPL, on a TMG (Dimona H36 / X-Treme) . Before I take to the skies, I have a few burning questions about TMG specifically, which are proving very hard to find a credible answer on (mainly due to limited granularity in reporting data). I'm generally quite an anxious person, though my anxiety is marginally dwarfed by my love of flying. As a father of 2 young kids I do however have a responsiblity to my family, provide for them, etc, etc (including "not to die in fiery plane wreck). I am struggling with balancing the sheer joy and exhilaration (indulgence?) of flying versus the risk of leaving my kids as orphans or even worse, incapacitated due to injury etc. Not a nice thought, but one that I can't seem to shake. I have a pang of guilt for wanting to fly knowing that it is somewhat selfish, as I get such enjoyment out of it. My main questions therefore relate to safety, of not just GA in general, but of TMG more specifically, as a sub-segment within GA.

To start with, several people have likened the risks associated with General Aviation to those of riding a motorbike. This obviously puts me off ever wanting to fly or own a plane, as I associate riding a motorcycle with being exposed to risks well outside my own control. More specifically, there are too many external variables associated to riding a motorbike (at least on the road) that I cannot control but which could kill me. I will therefore (again, as a father of 2 young kids) never own or ride a motorcyle. This is beyond my boundary of acceptable risk. My interpretation of this principle with GA and TMG is a little different though, in that most of the risks associated with flying are well within my control. I imagine I could do things to bring flying well below my threshold of acceptable risk. Specifically, things like good training, learning good airmanship, not flying in bad weather or IMC conditions, proper pre-flights, checks, etc are all within my control. If I make a conscious decision to be as "safe as possible" a pilot, even at the risk of being a boring / unadventurous pilot, then so be it. The exhilaration of flying for me comes from simply being in the air, not necessarily being upside down / sideways / whatever else in the air. I am therefore naturally drawn to TMG as they seem to fit my risk profile (among GA alternatives) best. My logic for this is as follows :

  • TMG seem fairly "steady" in the air. More so than LSA (another alternative) or regular C152 / 172.
  • I have the improved gliding performance (again, only over a C152 / 172) in case I ever need it. Simply put, in the event of an engine out, I have more time to choose a suitable place to land than I would in most other planes.
  • I like the feature of airbrakes/spoilers, which again give me the perception of greater control. One can descend more sharply (i.e. with greater speed and therefore more safely) than with a C152 / 172. Again,
  • I understand TMG have in general a lower stall speed than other GA alternatives, again, reinforcing my impression that these are fairly steady aircraft with fairly docile flight characteristics.
  • I therefore chose TMG to learn to fly as they seem "safer" than the GA alternatives. I recognise that the pilot is what makes a plane safe, but I also acknowledge that some aircraft are inherently less safe than others (just google LSA accident statistics, and you'll see what I mean)

I would love to hear any feedback or thoughts on my impressions above. I realise these could be way-off, hence this post. My burning questions are really : How safe is TMG ? Is it any safer / less safe than other GA alternatives. For the purpose of clarity, I think of a TMG as a Diamond Katana X-treme / H36 Dimona, or Grob G109 a / b.

Oh yeah, one last question - would having a parachute on while I'm flying be a waste of time ?

I would be truly grateful for any views / opinions / experiences that you'd be willing to share, and many thanks in advance

regards from Munich

Andre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EyesUp

Hi everyone, allow me to introduce myself, as I am new here. My name is Andre, 39, living in Munich (though not German, have only been living here for 2 years). I came across this forum in my ongoing research into (i) learning to fly and (ii) ultimately owning a TMG. I am hoping you might be able to share some advice about TMG as a class of aviation, to help guide me to the best means (i.e. the safest means) of getting into (and staying in) this incredible sport.

In a nutshell, I would like to pursue my private pilot's license, on a TMG. There is a school near the city that offers our equivalent of a PPL, on a TMG (Dimona H36 / X-Treme) . Before I take to the skies, I have a few burning questions about TMG specifically, which are proving very hard to find a credible answer on (mainly due to limited granularity in reporting data). I'm generally quite an anxious person, though my anxiety is marginally dwarfed by my love of flying. As a father of 2 young kids I do however have a responsiblity to my family, provide for them, etc, etc (including "not to die in fiery plane wreck). I am struggling with balancing the sheer joy and exhilaration (indulgence?) of flying versus the risk of leaving my kids as orphans or even worse, incapacitated due to injury etc. Not a nice thought, but one that I can't seem to shake. I have a pang of guilt for wanting to fly knowing that it is somewhat selfish, as I get such enjoyment out of it. My main questions therefore relate to safety, of not just GA in general, but of TMG more specifically, as a sub-segment within GA.

To start with, several people have likened the risks associated with General Aviation to those of riding a motorbike. This obviously puts me off ever wanting to fly or own a plane, as I associate riding a motorcycle with being exposed to risks well outside my own control. More specifically, there are too many external variables associated to riding a motorbike (at least on the road) that I cannot control but which could kill me. I will therefore (again, as a father of 2 young kids) never own or ride a motorcyle. This is beyond my boundary of acceptable risk. My interpretation of this principle with GA and TMG is a little different though, in that most of the risks associated with flying are well within my control. I imagine I could do things to bring flying well below my threshold of acceptable risk. Specifically, things like good training, learning good airmanship, not flying in bad weather or IMC conditions, proper pre-flights, checks, etc are all within my control. If I make a conscious decision to be as "safe as possible" a pilot, even at the risk of being a boring / unadventurous pilot, then so be it. The exhilaration of flying for me comes from simply being in the air, not necessarily being upside down / sideways / whatever else in the air. I am therefore naturally drawn to TMG as they seem to fit my risk profile (among GA alternatives) best. My logic for this is as follows :

  • TMG seem fairly "steady" in the air. More so than LSA (another alternative) or regular C152 / 172.
  • I have the improved gliding performance (again, only over a C152 / 172) in case I ever need it. Simply put, in the event of an engine out, I have more time to choose a suitable place to land than I would in most other planes.
  • I like the feature of airbrakes/spoilers, which again give me the perception of greater control. One can descend more sharply (i.e. with greater speed and therefore more safely) than with a C152 / 172. Again,
  • I understand TMG have in general a lower stall speed than other GA alternatives, again, reinforcing my impression that these are fairly steady aircraft with fairly docile flight characteristics.
  • I therefore chose TMG to learn to fly as they seem "safer" than the GA alternatives. I recognise that the pilot is what makes a plane safe, but I also acknowledge that some aircraft are inherently less safe than others (just google LSA accident statistics, and you'll see what I mean)

I would love to hear any feedback or thoughts on my impressions above. I realise these could be way-off, hence this post. My burning questions are really : How safe is TMG ? Is it any safer / less safe than other GA alternatives. For the purpose of clarity, I think of a TMG as a Diamond Katana X-treme / H36 Dimona, or Grob G109 a / b.

Oh yeah, one last question - would having a parachute on while I'm flying be a waste of time ?

I would be truly grateful for any views / opinions / experiences that you'd be willing to share, and many thanks in advance

regards from Munich

Andre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thermalseeker

Hi Andre,

In my opinion, you're on the right track starting your training in gliders. For the first 20 hours or so it doesn't matter if it's a pure glider or a motorglider or a Cessna 150. You're pretty much going to be doing the same thing, learning to fly the airplane. Starting your flying career in a glider will make you a better pilot for several reasons. First, there's less systems to worry about. You'll learn to fly the airplane first. Second, gliders have a longer wing than a Cessna or other conventional trainer. They take quite a bit more rudder to initiate and carve a coordinated turn. This means when you start your training in a glider you'll learn to use your feet early on. Cessna's and other similar trainers take almost no rudder to initiate a turn. A lot of pilots who start in powered planes, then transition to gliders have a hard time because they never learned to use their feet. One benefit of learning to use the rudder effectively is if you ever decide you want to fly a tail wheel aircraft (where knowing how to use your feet is very important) you'll be way ahead of the game. Another thing you're likely to get to do when you start your training in gliders, but you are unlikely to get in most powered trainers is spins. Spins are the main reason why I believe every power pilot should start flying gliders first. There's nothing to fear with spins, but you do need to know how to recover with the least loss in altitude. Stall/spin accidents are most common on the downwind to base or base to final turns on landing approach. Understanding why the airplane spins and what it takes to make it stop spinning is very important, particularly if you're low to the ground. Most power instructors are reluctant to teach spin training, usually because they have not been taught themselves. You usually have to seek out training for spins, unless you start with gliders. Lastly, when you learn to fly gliders first you understand exactly what the airplane is going to do without power. So, if you have an engine out in a powered aircraft it will turn what is for most pilots a terrifying situation into "oh, I've been here before. I'm in a glider again".

With gliders in general, both pure gliders and TMG's, everything happens slower than most powered aircraft. So, it's easier for a student to learn to fly the airplane. Stall characteristics of airplanes vary widely. Some are very benign while others may have a sharp drop of a wing or have a sharp stall break resulting in a steeper nose down attitude. Others might easily enter a spin. Generally speaking, most modern gliders and TMG's have very benign stall and spin characteristics. I've flown a half dozen different TMG's and every one of them you would have to force to spin.

With regard to spoilers, yes they do offer much better approach control on landing than aircraft without spoilers. So, your intuition here is correct. Spoilers also allow for high rates of descent without picking up a lot of speed. This is very beneficial in something that is aerodynamically clean like a glider. When you push the nose over gliders tend to build speed very rapidly, much more rapidly than say a Cessna 150. On approach to landing this is something you don't want. Spoilers allow you to achieve very steep, safe descents without building an excessive amount of speed. Without spoilers, even low performance gliders would take a lot of runway to land. Several years ago I was asked on a biannual flight review to demonstrate a no spoiler landing in my Ximango. I was able to do it, but I used almost the entire length of a 5000' runway. At first, the instructor who was riding with me said that my landing wasn't short enough. So, I asked him to demonstrate it to me. His first two attempts he was unable to get the airplane on the ground without spoilers, resulting in a go around. The third time he was able to get it down and stopped, but he used the whole length of the runway, too. Spoilers can also be very useful if you find yourself in the air and wanting to be on the ground, like when thunderstorms build up suddenly or if a gust front blows through. T-storm formation can happen in mountain environments very rapidly. It's also important that you understand the environment you're flying in. So, a good understanding of micro-meteorology is essential as well.

Your intuition regarding the safety margins of certain designs being better than others is also on track. Ultimately, though, flying is as safe as you make it, regardless of what it is you're flying. The overwhelming majority of accidents are caused by pilot error, not mechanical error. So, it's imperative that you as pilot learn all there is to know about safety. This extends to not only knowing how to fly the airplane from one end of the flight envelope to the other, but also understanding everything there is to know about the mechanical, electrical and hydraulic systems on board whatever aircraft you are flying. Ultimately, it's up to the pilot in command to insure that his aircraft is airworthy and safe to fly. Don't depend on the mechanics to do that for you. I've been flying for over 35 years and I've never once met a mechanic that was as interested in keeping me alive as much as I am. Another thing you'll need to familiarize yourself with is flight physiology. Just as it's important for the pilot to know when an aircraft is safe to fly and when it's not, it's equally important to understand when it's a good idea for you to stay on the ground. In other words, know your own limits. Remember, it's always better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, rather than being in the air wishing you were on the ground.

In regard to parachutes, for me, it depends on the type of flying I'm doing. It's a matter of personal choice. If I know I'll be spending the day turning a lot of circles near a lot of other gliders I will usually don a parachute. When I'm out flying alone, not so much. I almost always wear a parachute when flying a pure glider because I'm almost always going to be flying in close proximity to other gliders. It's more rare when I fly my Ximango and almost never when I fly my power plane unless I'm planning to do aerobatics.

Anyway, good luck with it! There's a lot to learn, but the benefits are unlike anything else. I hope you find the joy that aviation has brought me since I was a wide-eyed 12 year old.

Regards,

John Lawton

Whitwell, TN (TN89)

Ximango #135

Edited by Thermalseeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thermalseeker

Hi Andre,

In my opinion, you're on the right track starting your training in gliders. For the first 20 hours or so it doesn't matter if it's a pure glider or a motorglider or a Cessna 150. You're pretty much going to be doing the same thing, learning to fly the airplane. Starting your flying career in a glider will make you a better pilot for several reasons. First, there's less systems to worry about. You'll learn to fly the airplane first. Second, gliders have a longer wing than a Cessna or other conventional trainer. They take quite a bit more rudder to initiate and carve a coordinated turn. This means when you start your training in a glider you'll learn to use your feet early on. Cessna's and other similar trainers take almost no rudder to initiate a turn. A lot of pilots who start in powered planes, then transition to gliders have a hard time because they never learned to use their feet. One benefit of learning to use the rudder effectively is if you ever decide you want to fly a tail wheel aircraft (where knowing how to use your feet is very important) you'll be way ahead of the game. Another thing you're likely to get to do when you start your training in gliders, but you are unlikely to get in most powered trainers is spins. Spins are the main reason why I believe every power pilot should start flying gliders first. There's nothing to fear with spins, but you do need to know how to recover with the least loss in altitude. Stall/spin accidents are most common on the downwind to base or base to final turns on landing approach. Understanding why the airplane spins and what it takes to make it stop spinning is very important, particularly if you're low to the ground. Most power instructors are reluctant to teach spin training, usually because they have not been taught themselves. You usually have to seek out training for spins, unless you start with gliders. Lastly, when you learn to fly gliders first you understand exactly what the airplane is going to do without power. So, if you have an engine out in a powered aircraft it will turn what is for most pilots a terrifying situation into "oh, I've been here before. I'm in a glider again".

With gliders in general, both pure gliders and TMG's, everything happens slower than most powered aircraft. So, it's easier for a student to learn to fly the airplane. Stall characteristics of airplanes vary widely. Some are very benign while others may have a sharp drop of a wing or have a sharp stall break resulting in a steeper nose down attitude. Others might easily enter a spin. Generally speaking, most modern gliders and TMG's have very benign stall and spin characteristics. I've flown a half dozen different TMG's and every one of them you would have to force to spin.

With regard to spoilers, yes they do offer much better approach control on landing than aircraft without spoilers. So, your intuition here is correct. Spoilers also allow for high rates of descent without picking up a lot of speed. This is very beneficial in something that is aerodynamically clean like a glider. When you push the nose over gliders tend to build speed very rapidly, much more rapidly than say a Cessna 150. On approach to landing this is something you don't want. Spoilers allow you to achieve very steep, safe descents without building an excessive amount of speed. Without spoilers, even low performance gliders would take a lot of runway to land. Several years ago I was asked on a biannual flight review to demonstrate a no spoiler landing in my Ximango. I was able to do it, but I used almost the entire length of a 5000' runway. At first, the instructor who was riding with me said that my landing wasn't short enough. So, I asked him to demonstrate it to me. His first two attempts he was unable to get the airplane on the ground without spoilers, resulting in a go around. The third time he was able to get it down and stopped, but he used the whole length of the runway, too. Spoilers can also be very useful if you find yourself in the air and wanting to be on the ground, like when thunderstorms build up suddenly or if a gust front blows through. T-storm formation can happen in mountain environments very rapidly. It's also important that you understand the environment you're flying in. So, a good understanding of micro-meteorology is essential as well.

Your intuition regarding the safety margins of certain designs being better than others is also on track. Ultimately, though, flying is as safe as you make it, regardless of what it is you're flying. The overwhelming majority of accidents are caused by pilot error, not mechanical error. So, it's imperative that you as pilot learn all there is to know about safety. This extends to not only knowing how to fly the airplane from one end of the flight envelope to the other, but also understanding everything there is to know about the mechanical, electrical and hydraulic systems on board whatever aircraft you are flying. Ultimately, it's up to the pilot in command to insure that his aircraft is airworthy and safe to fly. Don't depend on the mechanics to do that for you. I've been flying for over 35 years and I've never once met a mechanic that was as interested in keeping me alive as much as I am. Another thing you'll need to familiarize yourself with is flight physiology. Just as it's important for the pilot to know when an aircraft is safe to fly and when it's not, it's equally important to understand when it's a good idea for you to stay on the ground. In other words, know your own limits. Remember, it's always better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, rather than being in the air wishing you were on the ground.

In regard to parachutes, for me, it depends on the type of flying I'm doing. It's a matter of personal choice. If I know I'll be spending the day turning a lot of circles near a lot of other gliders I will usually don a parachute. When I'm out flying alone, not so much. I almost always wear a parachute when flying a pure glider because I'm almost always going to be flying in close proximity to other gliders. It's more rare when I fly my Ximango and almost never when I fly my power plane unless I'm planning to do aerobatics.

Anyway, good luck with it! There's a lot to learn, but the benefits are unlike anything else. I hope you find the joy that aviation has brought me since I was a wide-eyed 12 year old.

Regards,

John Lawton

Whitwell, TN (TN89)

Ximango #135

Edited by Thermalseeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barry.h

Hi Andre.

I am flying both LSA/Ultralight/Recreational and a Dimona TMG and I certainly see the TMG as a safer way to fly, but more important I think the TMG training makes me a safer pilot regardless of what I am flying.

While it is probably true that there are less TMG flying so the experience pool is much lower compared to an old Cessna, so there is a slight risk you will be the one to discover some design or manufacturing fault in your model of aircraft - but the chances of that are very very small. If you have an issue, YOU will be the most significant contributor to the situation.

One area I found very interesting is the different philosophy between a glider instructor/syllabus and an LSA syllabus. My TMG instructor is a glider instructor so the whole approach is based on 'we are flying a glider that happens to have a running motor right now'. When we fly cross country - we look at the terrain and discuss what our options are. Like flying a glider, we don't put ourselves in a position where an engine failure leaves us no options (unless we have to - and then it is still very conscious).

I was on a cross country flight with my LSA instructor and we came up to an area with very few landing options. I said I was going to climb and he said 'why? we are ok here.' I pointed out the terrain and said I would prefer the height in that area if the engine stopped. I was thinking like a glider pilot - he was thinking like a power pilot.

Now of course I have the benefit of both training backgrounds so I consider myself a better pilot for that. I think I am safer in an LSA aircraft because of my TMG experience. But even with this - I think I am safer in the TMG because of its performance. I have had one incident in the Dimona that resulted in a forced landing/ out landing when we lost power quite low approaching a controlled airspace airport over semi-suburban terrain - but out of reach of the airfield. My options were very limited (A situation I was only in because it was controlled airspace.) If I was in a Cessna or LSA aircraft I would have had much fewer options and much less time. The time and distance advantage of the TGA almost certainly helped in a better outcome in my situation. (And I had my 13 year old son sitting next to me.)

The only reverse issue in the TMG in my experience they are harder to land. Our Dimona is a tail dragger and is always a challenge to put down nicely. I don't think it is dangerous - and you can argue it makes me a better pilot. There is an increased risk I might damage the plane perhaps - but I think I am still safe. Some of the LSA aircraft almost land themselves and really are a bit too easy. I love the challenge of the Dimona but I have to say I am much more alert when landing it.

But my real motivation is the type of flying. Going out for a cruise in an LSA can get boring. Every flight in the TMG is exciting and challenging. If you start to get bored - go searching for lift somewhere. Slope, wave, thermal, convergence ... There is so much more challenge and enjoyment in the TMG.

So I would agree and encourage you to take the TMG path - both for safety but more important for satisfaction and challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barry.h

Hi Andre.

I am flying both LSA/Ultralight/Recreational and a Dimona TMG and I certainly see the TMG as a safer way to fly, but more important I think the TMG training makes me a safer pilot regardless of what I am flying.

While it is probably true that there are less TMG flying so the experience pool is much lower compared to an old Cessna, so there is a slight risk you will be the one to discover some design or manufacturing fault in your model of aircraft - but the chances of that are very very small. If you have an issue, YOU will be the most significant contributor to the situation.

One area I found very interesting is the different philosophy between a glider instructor/syllabus and an LSA syllabus. My TMG instructor is a glider instructor so the whole approach is based on 'we are flying a glider that happens to have a running motor right now'. When we fly cross country - we look at the terrain and discuss what our options are. Like flying a glider, we don't put ourselves in a position where an engine failure leaves us no options (unless we have to - and then it is still very conscious).

I was on a cross country flight with my LSA instructor and we came up to an area with very few landing options. I said I was going to climb and he said 'why? we are ok here.' I pointed out the terrain and said I would prefer the height in that area if the engine stopped. I was thinking like a glider pilot - he was thinking like a power pilot.

Now of course I have the benefit of both training backgrounds so I consider myself a better pilot for that. I think I am safer in an LSA aircraft because of my TMG experience. But even with this - I think I am safer in the TMG because of its performance. I have had one incident in the Dimona that resulted in a forced landing/ out landing when we lost power quite low approaching a controlled airspace airport over semi-suburban terrain - but out of reach of the airfield. My options were very limited (A situation I was only in because it was controlled airspace.) If I was in a Cessna or LSA aircraft I would have had much fewer options and much less time. The time and distance advantage of the TGA almost certainly helped in a better outcome in my situation. (And I had my 13 year old son sitting next to me.)

The only reverse issue in the TMG in my experience they are harder to land. Our Dimona is a tail dragger and is always a challenge to put down nicely. I don't think it is dangerous - and you can argue it makes me a better pilot. There is an increased risk I might damage the plane perhaps - but I think I am still safe. Some of the LSA aircraft almost land themselves and really are a bit too easy. I love the challenge of the Dimona but I have to say I am much more alert when landing it.

But my real motivation is the type of flying. Going out for a cruise in an LSA can get boring. Every flight in the TMG is exciting and challenging. If you start to get bored - go searching for lift somewhere. Slope, wave, thermal, convergence ... There is so much more challenge and enjoyment in the TMG.

So I would agree and encourage you to take the TMG path - both for safety but more important for satisfaction and challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dcstrng

Newbie alert –

I know almost nothing about motorgliders, let alone touring motorgliders (other than theory from reading… the notion has been a recurrent fascination), but this thread and the included advice caught my eye… If motorgliding is as safe as motorcycling, then it is wonderful – I have noticeably in excess of 400K miles on bikes over 50+ years of riding (yes, I still ride) and although I’ve had a get-off or two, the fault (like the few less than glamorous landings I’ve had) are of my own making. That’s easily acceptable…

Segway into a newbie “hello” and from that I’ll go back into lurking stealth mode and continue reading…

-- Larry

Virginia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dcstrng

Newbie alert –

I know almost nothing about motorgliders, let alone touring motorgliders (other than theory from reading… the notion has been a recurrent fascination), but this thread and the included advice caught my eye… If motorgliding is as safe as motorcycling, then it is wonderful – I have noticeably in excess of 400K miles on bikes over 50+ years of riding (yes, I still ride) and although I’ve had a get-off or two, the fault (like the few less than glamorous landings I’ve had) are of my own making. That’s easily acceptable…

Segway into a newbie “hello” and from that I’ll go back into lurking stealth mode and continue reading…

-- Larry

Virginia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usafmd

Hello everyone. My name is Michael Lewis and I have just joined this group. I began flying gliders in college in the 1970's but was never certified. As I was completing some medical training in the 1980's, I began taking flying lessons in Portland, OR. Had the opportunity to do some soaring a couple of years later outside of Salt Lake City, where I got my Private SEL. Over the years, I have owned a Citabria, Pitts, and was a partner in a Cherokee Six. All the planes are now gone, but I have access to a Cessna Cardinal. I am building a Van's RV-8. The handle "USAFMD" comes from being a Flight Surgeon for five years in the Oregon Air National Guard (142nd Fighter Wing); an F-15 squadron based in Portland, OR. I now live in Astoria, OR and recently came across references to TMGA. The idea of having a reasonably fast touring ship which I can also go soaring in has great appeal to me. Certainly more appeal than a rented spam can. The aircraft which have caught my eye are the Pipestrel Sinus Flex and the Phoenix LSA. I would be very curious to get feedback from members of this group regarding these aircraft and any other aircraft which they deem notable (Lambada, Ximango, etc). Thanks in advance for any advice sent my way, and I look forward to exchanging TMG knowledge in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×