SZD-56-2 Diana

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 22:58:33 +0100, Asbjorn Hojmark
wrote:


Actually, it was more of an ASW-20F without the flaps.
My opinion too - so far I'm lacking the proof of the all-new Pegase
airfoil. The airfoil section on the Pegase fuselage looks *very*
similar.

I'm still wondering how an ASW-20 with flaps fixed in setting 3 had
compared to the LS-4. Schleicher tested that once (in an ASW-20 for
some US pilot - Karl Striedieck?), but I have not heard of any
conclusion.

Since the 20 climbs better than the LS-4 (with flaps 3) and has a
significantly better L/D, this might have been an interesting
competition.

Unfortunately Schleicher decided to build the all-new ASW-24 then, and
the days of comfortable Schleicher cockpits for big guys were gone
.....






Bye
Andreas

Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 22:58:33 +0100, Asbjorn Hojmark
wrote:


Actually, it was more of an ASW-20F without the flaps.
My opinion too - so far I'm lacking the proof of the all-new Pegase
airfoil. The airfoil section on the Pegase fuselage looks *very*
similar.


Would you say that the people at ONERA who have done the job are liars?
Here is the reference:
http://www.onera.fr/daap/reussites.html
I will translate for non french speaking people:
"Light aircraft also benefited from these work, which led to the definition
of the wings of the glider Pegase"
Let me recall that ONERA is a public research organisation who has worked
in particular on the Airbus wings. Also note that German glider factories
work in collaboration with universities to refine their aerodynamical designs.
Anyways the Pegase wing has a very good compromise, so that it climbs well
and still has good behavior at high speed.

I'm still wondering how an ASW-20 with flaps fixed in setting 3 had
compared to the LS-4. Schleicher tested that once (in an ASW-20 for
some US pilot - Karl Striedieck?), but I have not heard of any
conclusion.

In principle a flapped glider should be better at both ends, very low speed
and very high speed. The people who designed the Pegase wing could not do
miracles.



--

Michel TALON

On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:56:09 +0000 (UTC),
(Michel Talon) wrote:

Would you say that the people at ONERA who have done the job are liars?
Here is the reference:
http://www.onera.fr/daap/reussites.html
I will translate for non french speaking people:
"Light aircraft also benefited from these work, which led to the definition
of the wings of the glider Pegase"

Thx for the link - my French is good enough that I understand the
text.
Yet I have not seen a source what airfoil was actually used on the
Pegase...

In principle a flapped glider should be better at both ends, very low speed
and very high speed. The people who designed the Pegase wing could not do
miracles.

I was speaking about an unmodified ASW-20 wing (airfoil Wortmann FX
62-K131) without flaps (or rather: with the flap lever fixed in
neutral position. According to Ferriere Schleicher named this glider
"ASW-24 prototype".



Bye
Andreas

Andreas Maurer wrote:
Thx for the link - my French is good enough that I understand the
text.
Yet I have not seen a source what airfoil was actually used on the
Pegase...


For me it is clear, it is an original design obtained following the numerical
work they have done for the airbus wings. So you will not find reference to
a catalogued model.

In principle a flapped glider should be better at both ends, very low speed
and very high speed. The people who designed the Pegase wing could not do
miracles.

I was speaking about an unmodified ASW-20 wing (airfoil Wortmann FX
62-K131) without flaps (or rather: with the flap lever fixed in
neutral position. According to Ferriere Schleicher named this glider
"ASW-24 prototype".


I suppose that if it was a well known airfoil as the one you cite, they would
not take credit of it. Probably also the performance is better than this
classic airfoil, or they would have nothing to be proud of. Now the
performance of our Polish friends show that it is possible to do much much
better, more than twenty years later, with computers infinitely more
powerful, using very rigid materials which allow very thin wings, etc.



Bye
Andreas

--

Michel TALON

Andreas Maurer wrote:
...
Thx for the link - my French is good enough that I understand the
text.
Yet I have not seen a source what airfoil was actually used on the
Pegase...


In the database at http://www.aae.uiuc.edu/m-selig/ads/aircraft.html
Pegase and Marianne are mentionned with airfoil "COAP 1" at wing root
and "COAP 2" at wing tip.