Future of aviation, or flash in the pan??
On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 6:59:56 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 1:48:48 AM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
On Monday, January 27, 2020 at 7:04:36 PM UTC-8, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Sunday, January 26, 2020 at 7:14:12 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
...an electric retrofit for the AS self launchers.
The engineering and installation should be relatively simple.
Um, not on this planet.
Perhaps you did not catch the "relatively"? Engine bay is already there, the doors are there, it is engineered and built for the weight, the extraction mechanism is already there, even the prop and boom. So yes, "relatively simple" compared to retrofitting say an ASW27, which is being done, and has none of those things.
I am not a stranger to complexity, or aircraft design.
"How hard could it be"
That depends.
Certainly if you already have an engine bay, and lift mechanism, you have a great start. No engineering the hole in the fuselage, etc.
If you have a proven drive system, much of the next part is more easily accomplished.
2 meaningful issues with converting the later Schleicher ships:
1) Where do the batteries go? Engine bay has some room but CG possibilities become limited. Wing installation would most certainly involve major stuff in any of the hard tank wings. Support and service access are non trivial.
This is the major task on the '34. The rest is mostly transplanting proven motor and drive into the '34 from the 32E.
2) Engine bay size matters because it limits available prop diameter and this is a real issue in getting performance out of the drive.
I have some practical experience with this as I am now starting test flying of an ASW-24E that has been converted to electric.
How hard could it be?
The largest barrier is a lack of proven motor/ controller systems to incorporate into a project.
FWIW
UH
So how hard was it, for a very skilled and practiced professional? Will you be publishing an article in Soaring, a pre-writeup on RAS? Sounds very interesting.
|