A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Which Tow Vehicle



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10  
Old October 13th 07, 03:14 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,096
Default Cockpit crash protection design

Dan G wrote:
On Oct 11, 3:41 pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Dan G wrote:

Crash-worthiness and energy absorbtion is ENTIRELY down to design, not


material.

The major glider manufacturers don't agree with this: take look at the
cockpit of a Schleicher glider, for example, and see how little of it is
carbon fiber. Aramids and glass fiber absorb energy better than carbon
fiber, and so a designer will use them if it is possible.


Didn't I say it's design, not material? :-) However Shleicher do
actually use carbon fibre reinforcements on at least some of their
cockpits - check their website:

http://www.alexander-schleicher.de/p...g29_main_e.htm


All Schleicher gliders, beginning with the ASW 24, use carbon fiber
rails on the cockpit sill, but even on the ASG 29, most of the cockpit
structure is still glass fiber and aramid composite. Gerhard Waibel had
an excellent article describing the design of the ASW 24 cockpit,
considered the first of the modern "safety cockpits", in Soaring
Magazine about 20 years ago, and also more recent articles in Technical
Soaring. Those articles can explain the design of an improved cockpit
much better than I can here.


Lange might do too - they say they use "F1 materials" for the cockpit
of the Antares.

The underlying point is that you want the safety cell - whether car,
glider or even train cab - to be extremely strong to resist collapse,
with deformable parts elsewhere to absorb energy and hence lower peak
G on the occupant.


To the contrary, Schleicher and the others have chosen not to use a
"safety cell" design. The nose would have to extend several feet beyond
were it does now to have sufficient crush distance, and they do not
believe pilots will buy such a glider.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Saturn V Vehicle for the Apollo 4 Mission in the Vehicle Assembly Building 6754387.jpg [email protected] Aviation Photos 0 April 12th 07 01:38 AM
Lunar Roving Vehicle Installation of the Lunar Roving Vehicle in the Lunar Module.jpg [email protected] Aviation Photos 0 April 10th 07 02:47 PM
Suburban as a tow vehicle? Ken Ward Soaring 11 March 3rd 07 03:40 PM
Looking for a towable tow vehicle [email protected] Soaring 19 February 5th 05 02:14 AM
Tow vehicle for sale Sam Fly Soaring 0 February 4th 05 06:06 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.