Aircraft Information
> Aircraft Make: Alexander Schleicher. Model: ASK-21. Nickname: none
> Aircraft Mil Civ Description: Glider
> FAA Category and Class: Glider
> Engine Description: none

Aircraft Experience
> As of: 11/5/2025
> Number of Hours Flown: 11
> Number of Times Flown: 20
> Other Aircraft Models Associated: other ASK models.

First Flown Information
> Sequence First Flown: 35
> Date First Flown: 9/9/1987
> Location First Flown: NAS Patuxent River, MD (KNHK)
> Who and/or What Organization First Flown With: White, USNTPS

Recollections: I was assigned to USNTPS as a JO instructor and had been flying the X-26 (SGS 2-32) for the “glider curriculum”.  For one or two cycles of the curriculum we needed to take the X-26 out of service to do a complete inspection and overhaul some structural parts.  So, we contracted with a company to use their ASK-21 to replace, and later augment, the X-26.  The ASK-21 was a much better performer and did everything the X-26 could do, including spins (though it required the installation of a weight on the tail).

The glider curriculum at that time (and for at least a decade before and after) was 5 flights for the student.  The first flight was a 5,000 ft tow, release, basic airwork, loop, roll, spin, practice rope break turns, and a landing (usually demo’d).  The second was a tow to 3,000 ft, repeat practice flight, then a 3rd was another 3,000 ft tow and a checkride for the student.  The final two flights were a 400 ft rope break (fly to a truncated normal pattern) and then a 200 ft rope break (return for downwind landing).  Assuming this all went well, the students then flew two more flights solo, with an engineer classmate and they gathered data for a qualitative evaluation.  The debrief was great because a glider is so different than other airplanes (drag minimization is the name of the game, not stability…this shows up in many ways and drives home the important terms in the basic equations of motion for airplanes). 

Aircraft Information
> Aircraft Make: Schweizer Aircraft Corporation. Model: 2-33. Nickname: none
> Aircraft Mil Civ Description: Glider
> FAA Category and Class: Glider
> Engine Description: none

Aircraft Experience
> As of: 11/5/2024
> Number of Hours Flown: 13
> Number of Times Flown: 51
> Other Aircraft Models Associated: TG-4A (USAFA)

First Flown Information
> Sequence First Flown: 27
> Date First Flown: 9/28/1986 [This is an error; my first flight was 5/2/1982; As a result, the sequence first flown is off]
> Location First Flown: Sky Sailing Airport, Fremont, CA
> Who and/or What Organization First Flown With: Sky Sailing

Recollections: While my number of flights in the Schweizer 2-33 are not large, this glider has had a big effect on my pilot certificate.  In a variety of ways:

–I got my commercial glider add-on in a 2-33 at Skysailing in Fremont, CA (a field that is no longer there, pushed out by development)

–I flew them both with the USAF (see photos below) and, later, in Wichita, KS at a civilian glider club.

–While working for the FAA, I obtained my Glider Instructor certificate (CFIG) at Skylark North in Tehachapi, CA, flying the 2-33

From a performance standpoint, the 2-33 is definitely a GLIDER, not a sailplane but (like all the Schweizers I’ve flown) it handles well, and is forgiving (for training).

Aircraft Information
> Aircraft Make:
Schweizer Aircraft Corporation Model: 2-32. Nickname: Frigate
> Aircraft Mil Civ Description: Glider
> FAA Category and Class: Glider
> Engine Description: none

Aircraft Experience
> As of: 6/27/2024
> Number of Hours Flown: 149
> Number of Times Flown: 112
> Other Aircraft Models Associated: X-26B

First Flown Information
> Sequence First Flown: 31
> Date First Flown: 11/3/1986
> Location First Flown: NAS Patuxent River, MD (KNHK)
> Who and/or What Organization First Flown With: Chris Wheal, US Naval Test Pilot School IP

Recollections: Yes, I’ve flown an “X-plane”.  Sounds cool, until you realize it was just a Schweizer model 2-32.  This glider is described by Wikipedia as follows: “The X-26A was used by the United States Navy to train test pilots in the condition of yaw/roll coupling. Since jet trainers were known to be dangerous in this condition, the X-26 was based on the Schweizer SGS 2-32 sailplane. Sailplanes react much slower and are easier to control than jet aircraft, making the X-26 a much safer training platform.”

While this is somewhat glorified and indirect, the essence of the USNTPS glider program is this: it teaches adaptability and it’s an excellent means to test student knowledge of the basic tenants of aerodynamics, particularly stability and control.  The “adaptability” piece is discussed elsewhere on this website but the fact that each student, after 5 instructional flights, then goes on to solo the glider (this is done near the end of the year-long course) shows THEM just how far they’ve come.  And, they don’t just “fly the glider”, they perform a series of tests which illustrate basics of aero theory….for example: the period of the phugoid is very short…because TAS is the predominant term in the formula for phugoid period.  Dutch roll frequency is slow, due to low static directional stability (why? because that would take a bigger tail, which would defeat the glider’s mission focused on L/D, i.e. performance.  The discussion goes on!). 

The “real X-plane” that looks like the school’s glider was the X-26B, an unusual powered glider, shown in one of the pictures.

I first flew the X-26 with Chris Wheal, one of my favorite instructors.  Chris was a Brit, a task master and–if he didn’t like you–would make your life hell.  Fortunately for me, he liked me.  I went on to instructor in the X-26 for almost a decade and it was one of my favorite school exercises, for the reasons discussed above.

As of this writing (2024), I understand that students no longer solo the X-26, which is a shame in my view, and reflects poor risk management in combination with the mission of training test pilots.  That said, rolling back changes like “IP’s only will be PIC for the X-26” are difficult to reverse.  Here, I think about some Test Pilot schools where (mostly because of insurance purposes) students are NEVER the Pilot in Command. I certainly hope that never happens at the Military TPS’s because the risk will just be shifted from the school, to the test community.