![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 14, 7:56*am, wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:19*am, JJ Sinclair wrote: OR A percentage of MAC behind the wing LE Brian W Errrrr, not neccessarily so; The wing leading edge will be the zero MAC point only if the leading edge of the wing is a straight line, otherwise as in the LS-8, zero MAC will be located behind the leading edge. I know a guy that made this incorrect assumption on the first flight of an RS-15 and he flew the whole flight (rather short) with the stick full back because his CG was forward of the forward limit. He considered bailing out, but found he could keep the nose up if he flew 80 knots. He landed OK touching down at 80. I like to refer to the CG in a percentage of the allowable range. The Genesis likes to be about 85% of the allowable range which is; 0 to 5.25" aft of root rib and 85% is 4.5"aft. After adjusting the CG, give her a test drive. If you find you are trimming forward when entering a thermal, your CG is too far aft. Cheers, JJ Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Herb, J7 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 14, 3:34*pm, Herb wrote:
On Dec 14, 7:56*am, wrote: On Dec 13, 9:19*am, JJ Sinclair wrote: OR A percentage of MAC behind the wing LE Brian W Errrrr, not neccessarily so; The wing leading edge will be the zero MAC point only if the leading edge of the wing is a straight line, otherwise as in the LS-8, zero MAC will be located behind the leading edge. I know a guy that made this incorrect assumption on the first flight of an RS-15 and he flew the whole flight (rather short) with the stick full back because his CG was forward of the forward limit. He considered bailing out, but found he could keep the nose up if he flew 80 knots. He landed OK touching down at 80. I like to refer to the CG in a percentage of the allowable range. The Genesis likes to be about 85% of the allowable range which is; 0 to 5.25" aft of root rib and 85% is 4.5"aft. After adjusting the CG, give her a test drive. If you find you are trimming forward when entering a thermal, your CG is too far aft. Cheers, JJ Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. *If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. *A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! *Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, *Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. *As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. *It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Herb, J7- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Herb means 75-90% aft of the CG RANGE not the MAC. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Herb wrote:
Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Herb wrote:
Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Eric Greenwell wrote:
Herb wrote: Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. I expect it has to do with efficiency. If your CG is such that your control inputs are minimised - you reduce drag. In the case of steep thermalling, it reduces safety - because you can now stall and theoretically spin. There can be few things as frustrating as my experience with my (new to me) Kestrel 19. First flight I wanted to be cautious so set the CG at 35%. Then the day was booming - but with tight strong thermals, and I was continually running out of elevator. Stick against the back stop and the thermal is still tighter. My Cirrus with it's all flying tail never had that problem. Of course you could depart controlled flight if you got too enthusiastic... Bruce |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bruce wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote: Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. I expect it has to do with efficiency. If your CG is such that your control inputs are minimised - you reduce drag. In the case of steep thermalling, it reduces safety - because you can now stall and theoretically spin. There can be few things as frustrating as my experience with my (new to me) Kestrel 19. First flight I wanted to be cautious so set the CG at 35%. Then the day was booming - but with tight strong thermals, and I was continually running out of elevator. Stick against the back stop and the thermal is still tighter. My Cirrus with it's all flying tail never had that problem. Of course you could depart controlled flight if you got too enthusiastic... At 35%, you are a long way from stalling in a steep turn. With a more rearward CG, you would turn tightly enough, but still without enough elevator to stall in a "tight" turn. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Eric Greenwell wrote:
Bruce wrote: Eric Greenwell wrote: Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. I expect it has to do with efficiency. If your CG is such that your control inputs are minimised - you reduce drag. In the case of steep thermalling, it reduces safety - because you can now stall and theoretically spin. There can be few things as frustrating as my experience with my (new to me) Kestrel 19. First flight I wanted to be cautious so set the CG at 35%. Then the day was booming - but with tight strong thermals, and I was continually running out of elevator. Stick against the back stop and the thermal is still tighter. My Cirrus with it's all flying tail never had that problem. Of course you could depart controlled flight if you got too enthusiastic... At 35%, you are a long way from stalling in a steep turn. With a more rearward CG, you would turn tightly enough, but still without enough elevator to stall in a "tight" turn. Hi Eric That is the point I was trying to make. With the CG so far forward the behaviour is really benign, but I can't get enough elevator to stall her. Even straight and level the nose just wallows around at the back stop with ~38kt indicated. I will be moving the CG back until I can stall it, or the handling deteriorates, then move it a little forward. There is no virtue in being able to stall in a tight turn, just efficiency in not holding undue control deflection. Bruce |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 14, 7:55*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Herb wrote: Another useful approach is start at about 66% aft using manufacturer's CG range. When making the tightest turn you normally do, if you run out of elevator, you need to shift CG back a bit. You will probably end up around 75%.There isn't a huge benefit in having the CG way back, but there is a significant deterioration of handling which requires better pilot skills to offset.The last little bit of glider performance costs quite a bit in pilot workload until you are very proficient. I usually take a couple pounds out of the tail in the Spring and put it back in when my skills are back up to snuff. FWIW UH Here's another gem piece of advice: With my 3D model airplanes I roll inverted and check if I need down elevator to stay level. *If so, the cg needs to be moved further back. *A well set up model will happily fly inverted without elevator movement! *Haven't tried that in my LS8, though. Seriously, *Hanks and Eric's methods will both work well. *As long as inside the book range, find the cg that gives you good handling and enough up elevator to stall the plane in a steep turn. *It'll be at 75%-90% aft. Why is the ability to stall in a steep turn a useful criteria? It sounds like a safety problem to me. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Gives adequate pitch authority to pull to max lift coefficient, thus tightest turn. From my experience, this is usually about 75-80% aft in manufacturer's approved range. UH |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thank you UH, P3 and J7 for your thoughts on optimal CG location. My
current CG on the LS8 lies between 45% to 55% of the available range, depending on how well my diet is working. :-( I’ll start next Spring without any rear weight until my proficiency returns, then move the CG back to 65%, then 70%, etc. I’ll quit at 80%, which for me is 1 gal of water in the tail tank and thus serves as a very clear stopping point. -John |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 15, 6:52*am, wrote:
Gives adequate pitch authority to pull to max lift coefficient, thus tightest turn. From my experience, this is usually about 75-80% aft in manufacturer's approved range. UH It's not quite that simple though is it? For the ASW-28, and probably other modern gliders, the "manufacturer's approved CG range" is dependent on the glider mass. Again for the 28, a cg position of 75-80 of approved range at min weight (315-321 mm aft of root leading edge) will be behind the approved aft CG limit at max gross wt (306mm). I used to think that the change in aft cg limit with increasing mass was to protect for the case where the tail tank fails to dump. If that is true then ASW 28 built without the optional tail tank would not have the variable aft limit. Do they? Comments or other explanations of the variable aft limit? Hank - Where is your 28 CG at max gross or at the max weight you fly at if lower? Andy (GY) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Need a little more range for your 304S jet? | Marc Ramsey[_2_] | Soaring | 1 | July 22nd 07 01:39 PM |
VOR volume range | kevmor | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | February 7th 07 10:46 PM |
Long range Wx | Paul kgyy | Piloting | 4 | December 31st 04 04:25 PM |
What is the range of the B-1B? | user | Military Aviation | 10 | December 24th 03 04:15 AM |
Fuel Range | Toks Desalu | Home Built | 2 | November 14th 03 12:51 PM |