ASW-24

Udo Rumpf wrote:
Of course it would be true, at 80km/k you would be flying to slow
if you tried to thermal.
This is minimum sink speed in level flight at 6.5 lb/sqft.
at 7.5 lb/sqft you would be approaching stall speed.

To recap the ASW24 does not have to be flown any faster then
other glider of its type. Two gliders you have mentioned have a much
lighter wingloading and the Discus and the ASW24 with 7.5 lb/sqft
will fly at about the same speed.

Now I know how misinformation gets started.

Regards
Udo

Udo,

A related question in terms of data points. How significant is the
in-flight CG on climb performance? It's purely subjective, but my LS8
seems to climb markedly better now that I've moved the CG back to about
80% of aft limit (from a previous 45%). Locically, aft CG would
reduce the amount of lift (nose up pitch) required of the
elevator/stabilizer, reducing induced drag from these surfaces. As a
percentage of total induced drag I'm sure this relatively small, but is
it significant?

Erik Mann (P3)

Eric
From my initial set-up I flew with a C of G in the 50% to 55% range.
This worked out nicely. The up elevator in climb was identical
to the down in cruise. I was happy with this compromise.
Then I loaded water 55 litres in each tank about 240 lb total.
To thermal, I needed much more control input and up elevator,
due to the water being ahead of the C of G. Also I had the sense,
aside from being heavier, it was not climbing as well. This could
have been subjective. I added 5 lb to the tail and the handling
improved and felt just as before when dry.
I was surprised when I dumped the water how much more nimble
and responsive but still very comfortable it felt. I am flying dry now
at 85% C of G. The elevator with the new C of G, once the bank and turn
is established, has a minimal up deflection but in cruise the elevator
is even more in a down deflection. This causes more drag. This can
be corrected by placing a washer under the bolt attachment of the
stab to reduce the angle of incidence to reduce the down deflection
in cruise. Ideally the ASW 24 should have a tail tank.
Anyone know of someone that made this mod on the 24?
Regards
Udo



"Papa3" wrote in message
ups.com...


Udo Rumpf wrote:
Of course it would be true, at 80km/k you would be flying to slow
if you tried to thermal.
This is minimum sink speed in level flight at 6.5 lb/sqft.
at 7.5 lb/sqft you would be approaching stall speed.

To recap the ASW24 does not have to be flown any faster then
other glider of its type. Two gliders you have mentioned have a much
lighter wingloading and the Discus and the ASW24 with 7.5 lb/sqft
will fly at about the same speed.

Now I know how misinformation gets started.

Regards
Udo

Udo,

A related question in terms of data points. How significant is the
in-flight CG on climb performance? It's purely subjective, but my LS8
seems to climb markedly better now that I've moved the CG back to about
80% of aft limit (from a previous 45%). Locically, aft CG would
reduce the amount of lift (nose up pitch) required of the
elevator/stabilizer, reducing induced drag from these surfaces. As a
percentage of total induced drag I'm sure this relatively small, but is
it significant?

Erik Mann (P3)

Udo Rumpf wrote:
Eric
The elevator with the new C of G, once the bank and turn
is established, has a minimal up deflection but in cruise the elevator
is even more in a down deflection. This causes more drag. This can
be corrected by placing a washer under the bolt attachment of the
stab to reduce the angle of incidence to reduce the down deflection
in cruise. Ideally the ASW 24 should have a tail tank.
Anyone know of someone that made this mod on the 24?
Regards
Udo


What you really need is a lead weight on a track mounted in the
fuselage driven by a small motor. Move the weight back for climb.
Move it forward for cruise :-)) Actually, the flight research
department at my University had this installed in Navions. I guess
I'm only half-joking...

P3

Papa3 wrote:

Udo Rumpf wrote:

Eric
The elevator with the new C of G, once the bank and turn
is established, has a minimal up deflection but in cruise the elevator
is even more in a down deflection. This causes more drag. This can
be corrected by placing a washer under the bolt attachment of the
stab to reduce the angle of incidence to reduce the down deflection
in cruise. Ideally the ASW 24 should have a tail tank.
Anyone know of someone that made this mod on the 24?
Regards
Udo



What you really need is a lead weight on a track mounted in the
fuselage driven by a small motor. Move the weight back for climb.
Move it forward for cruise :-)) Actually, the flight research
department at my University had this installed in Navions. I guess
I'm only half-joking...

P3

Reminds me of the "mercury pump" gadget Moffat supposedly revealed to
his fellow contestants on the start grid one long-ago day.

Didn't matter whether it worked or not, the other guys were so psyced
out they were beaten before they hooked up.

Bob Johnson