FES underpowered for 18m ship?
Definitely not underpowered for 18m D2c (400 kg)
I can climb quickly from 200m to 400m (500 - 1200ft) then have
enough left for 75km in stillish air. Low power is more efficient so
if you recognise the day is dying earlier you don’t need to invest
the charge in climbing so range is much better. It will never
match the range of a conventional turbo but will always get you
away from a farmer’s field to an airfield near home.
Once the FES is running you’re still “soaring” to maximise range.
Still playing the same game, making the same decisions, just
have way better L/D.
I have access to both and first choice is the FES every time.
At 19:52 14 September 2020, Mana wrote:
Thank you Matthew, this is very interesting data, exactly what I
was
lookin=
g for. :-)
BTW battery low =3D lower voltage, so for same output power
to the motor
yo=
u need more amps, hence the battery warms faster (P=3DU*I
=3D R*I*I).=20
On Monday, September 14, 2020 at 9:31:25 PM UTC+2,
wrote:
And it will be dangerous and fool-hardy if you DO NOT
always:=20
- keep a landing spot in easy reach, and=20
- never engage power until the landing is planned in you're in
position.=
=20
=20
Agreed, of course! But the whole point of a "turbo" is to be able
to
regain=
altitude :-) If FES only allowed level flight, then it may expand
the
area=
where you'll find the thermal you need, but since you need to
keep a
landi=
ng spot in reach for the exact reasons you pointed out, level
flight only
w=
ould be very limiting.=20
=20
It could be that the pilot in question used FES regularly during
his
flight=
s and found himself with battery low towards the end (vs. only
using FES
on=
ce with a fresh battery in case of trouble)? I asked for his
contact data
t=
o get real facts vs. speculation and I'll report if I'm able to reach
him.
|