![]() |
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:50:05 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 4/4/2013 4:41 PM, GM wrote: Please - someone explain to me why a manufacturer like Windward Performance does not jump at the opportunity to build a modern two-seat trainer rather than trying to compete with the latest super orchid grown in Germany. I think something like this would sell. Let me explain... I talked to Greg Cole of Windward performance today about this subject. He thinks the ideal two-seat trainer... + should have good performance, significantly better than an ASK 21 + be light weight (but rugged) with wing panels weighing less than 140 pounds each, so club members don't mind rigging it each weekend + have very nice handling And ultimately, it should have a front mounted electric motor with a folding propeller ("TFP" - tractor folding propeller). That would allow it to use a car launch to 500', turn on the motor, and look for thermals. No thermals? Climb with the motor. When it lands, the battery can be exchanged for a fully charged one if it needs recharging, and the depleted one put on charge (maybe you need three batteries if the thermals are weak). But even if a conventional towplane is used for the launch, the TFP lets the student and instructor go soaring, even cross country, almost every flight. Imagine how cool that is! Students would be much more enthused about soaring if they actually got to do some soaring on every flight, rather than being told "XC after you have your license", or "XC when you have your own glider". Whether it's car launch or towplane, the TFP would allow and encourage more soaring, even XC, during instruction, and more XC when flown solo. The light weight and easy rigging would subdue the concerns about landing out (unlikely with the TFP), and the utilization of the glider would be much higher than the typical heavy low/medium performance two-seater. Greg thinks it would sell, but bringing this glider (any glider!) to market is very expensive. The full design, molds, production tooling, and testing will easily exceed a million dollars (aka $1,000,000). So, for Windward Performance to jump at this opportunity means coming up with a lot of money. That will a lot easier to do if there are some orders, so if you want one of these, or think you can find some money for Windward, please call Greg Cole, and talk to him about it. Get his contact details he http://windward-performance.com/contact-us/ -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me) No motors! That adds cost, complexity and training issues all out of proportion to any supposed benefit as a trainer. We need *trainers* and a safe, reliable, economical way to launch them. The PW-6 is the closest thing on the market. Evan Ludeman / T8 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ground school training online | Peet | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 29th 08 12:28 AM |
Worldwide glider fleet | Al Eddie | Soaring | 2 | October 11th 06 01:57 PM |
2003 Fleet Week ground transportation questions | Guy Alcala | Military Aviation | 0 | August 10th 03 11:59 AM |
IFR Ground Training | Tarver Engineering | Piloting | 0 | August 8th 03 03:45 PM |
IFR Ground Training | Scott Lowrey | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | August 7th 03 07:19 PM |