On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:54:52 GMT, "Bill Daniels"
wrote:

Start with the need for 600 Kg cockpit payload.

600?
Aren't 400 more appropriate?

Assume that the best
composite materials and construction techniques are used. That would
suggest a GW of 1000 Kg. Further assume a 25 meter span and 30 Kg/sq. M
wing loading. That yields a wing area of 33.3 Sq. Meters and an aspect
ratio of 18.75. That gives good spar depth to carry the weight.

With retractable gear, flaps and winglets that would suggest ~45:1 L/D and a
min sink of about .55 M/Sec. If flown with a cockpit load of 300 Kg the min
sink would be less.

L/D of 45:1 with such a low aspect ratio? Hardly...

This is easily within the state-of-the-art. Every commercial ride operator
in the world would want one and so would some wealthy individuals and clubs.
Say, maybe a market for 300+ gliders?



Cool idea. I like your 300+ number.
What are you going to use to tow this monster? A P-51 or an F4U?


I have another idea.
Take a proven self-launching glider with sufficient L/D (25 should be
sufficient for a glide) that already has a type-certificate and proven
to be able to perform a halfways safe landing with engine shut down
(Boeing 767, Airbus A 310, Airbus A 330, Space Shuttle), equip it with
a final glide computer (the Shuttle already has one), go to an
airfield with a runway of sufficient length, and you are able to give
several hundred passengers a glider ride. Not to forget the
stewardesses and the presence of a toilet.






Bye
Andreas