![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 31, 2:20*pm, Udo wrote:
Here are the data points for glider A: starts at exactly 13 minutes and 42 seconds. at 2349 ft with a speed of 50 kt arrives at 20:22 at the finish line with an altitude of 121 ft at 95 kt, a distance covered of 12.7 miles. Glider B starts at nearly the same location ( within 100 ft) at 13:56 at an altitude 2400 ft at 57 kt arrives precisely at the same finish line at 20:02 at an altitude of 62 feet with a speed of 103 kt also covered the same distance of 12.7 miles. *The condition are the *same but for the second glider leaving 14 seconds later and arriving 20 seconds *early. The flight pass was nearly identical but for the second glider passing the first hal ways What is the true difference between the two. It is clear there is not much difference. Thanks in advance for shedding light on this for me. Udo Udo, I'm assuming the distance is quoted in statute miles and that the gliders accelerated to their average speed over the distance at the start of the glide and slowed to the finish speed at the end of the glide. Glider A averaged 99.3 kts. Glider B averaged 108.6 kts. The difference between starting and finishing energy for Glider A was 292 feet and for Glider B was 330 feet. If we subtract this energy from the altitude difference for each over the glide we get 1,936 and 2,008 feet and L/D's of 34.6 and 33.4 respectively for Glider A and Glider B. For a current generation 15M glider this is about the performance you'd expect with zero wind and half a load of water. The main anomaly is that for the same glider at the same wing loading you'd expect 4-5 points lower L/D for the higher cruise speed versus the 1.2 points in your example. This would indicate that either Glider B was a higher performance design, was at a higher wing loading or found more favorable conditions on the glide. I'm not sure what you're trying to figure out, but that's how the rough calculations come out for me. 9B |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Martin Van Bommel - Final Glide | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | March 19th 08 04:55 PM |
Final Glide - JD (US) | Roy Clark, B6 | Soaring | 1 | September 19th 07 07:17 AM |
final glide estimates | bagmaker | Soaring | 44 | March 16th 06 11:57 PM |
AC Williams -Final Glide | [email protected] | Soaring | 4 | January 23rd 06 04:52 AM |
Final Glide for Don Dorrell | JJ Sinclair | Soaring | 2 | December 2nd 03 02:56 PM |