A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Jet Glider Sparrowhawk



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 14th 04, 04:28 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Baker wrote:

Project Dog Whistle. LOL

And Bill rightly points out that if the thrust
is behind the CG, any yaw at low speeds means
a ground loop on takeoff unless the tailwheel is
firmly tracking.


No it doesn't. The thrust is always directed through the centre of mass.

It's position of the main wheel with respect to the CM that matters for
a ground loop...

Alan Baker


Correct. I'm mixing apples and oranges. In our Sparrowhawk design,
the engine(s) thrust is through the center of mass, so this
doesn't matter.

I wonder about the Genesis mock-up, where this may not be the case.
  #22  
Old January 14th 04, 04:40 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vaughn wrote:

One more reason why the twin Cri-cri version had it
right, with the two engines well ahead of the
CG, and with exhaust away from anything that might burn.


But introduces the possibility (certainty?) of asymmetric thrust! I
saw a Cri-cri (piston) lose power on TO one year at Oshkosh, it crashed
almost at the crowd line.

Vaughn


Probably because the Cri-cri is such a terrible glider...
A lot in common with the BD-5: rotation speed = Vne = Va =
Vmc = Vs... (or nearly so). ;( The Gruman Yankee also had
critical speeds close together, and the Speed Canard had a
real high stall speed too. One of the reasons I LOVE gliders
is the generally low stall speed.

Some full size regional jets, and the RC models that use the
little turbines, have placed the twin turbines very close
together and near the rear with no blast towards surfaces.
It would be great to put turbine(s) on the tail of the Sparrowhawk,
but the CG would never, ever work...

Alas, back to the drawing board...
  #23  
Old January 14th 04, 11:01 PM
Vaughn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
news:40057f22$1@darkstar...
Vaughn wrote:

One more reason why the twin Cri-cri version had it
right, with the two engines well ahead of the
CG, and with exhaust away from anything that might burn.


But introduces the possibility (certainty?) of asymmetric thrust! I
saw a Cri-cri (piston) lose power on TO one year at Oshkosh, it crashed
almost at the crowd line.

Vaughn


Probably because the Cri-cri is such a terrible glider...


Probably so, but I see I was not clear in my above post. The Cri-cri
apparently lost power in one engine only, the one towards the crowd. We
were sitting at the crowd line, but at the other end of the field, so we
were not among the menaced. Looking at the Cri-cri, the engines look close
enough together that you would think that asymmetric thrust would not be a
problem; apparently not so.

Vaughn




  #25  
Old January 20th 04, 10:17 PM
Ruud Holswilder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 13 Jan 2004 10:55:44 -0700, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:



www.usamt.com

In the specifications I also see a AT1500 engine that delivers 670 N @
75,000 rpm.
Should be more than enough thrust to modify my DDT into a DDJ ?
  #26  
Old January 20th 04, 10:32 PM
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ruud Holswilder" wrote in message
...
On 13 Jan 2004 10:55:44 -0700, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:



www.usamt.com

In the specifications I also see a AT1500 engine that delivers 670 N @
75,000 rpm.
Should be more than enough thrust to modify my DDT into a DDJ ?


If not, you can add the afterburner! (re-heat)

Bill Daniels

  #27  
Old January 21st 04, 06:42 AM
Steve Davis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Early models of the KC-135 tanker used water injection
on takeoff for added thrust. No idea how much additional
thrust could be gained by adding this to a 45Lb thrust
turbine but it wouldn't increase fuel consumption the
way an afterburner would. How about a cowling around
the jet and water could be sprayed or misted onto the
exhaust section. Could the steam then mix with the
exhaust well enough to increase thrust or would it
be a perpetual motion add on?

If not, you can add the afterburner! (re-heat)

Bill Daniels




  #28  
Old January 21st 04, 08:56 AM
Bert Willing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The water was injected into the combustion chamber, not the exhaust.
Evaporation increased the pressure in the chamber without increasing
temperature too much. In the 70's, there has been a spectacular accident of
a Lockheed Tristar outbound Hamburg where the mechanics put fuel ino the
according tanks instead of water - resulting in all three engines failing
during the initial climb, and the aircraft passing underneath a bridge of a
local highway. Partially passing, that is :-(

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"Steve Davis" a écrit dans le message
de ...
Early models of the KC-135 tanker used water injection
on takeoff for added thrust. No idea how much additional
thrust could be gained by adding this to a 45Lb thrust
turbine but it wouldn't increase fuel consumption the
way an afterburner would. How about a cowling around
the jet and water could be sprayed or misted onto the
exhaust section. Could the steam then mix with the
exhaust well enough to increase thrust or would it
be a perpetual motion add on?

If not, you can add the afterburner! (re-heat)

Bill Daniels






  #29  
Old January 21st 04, 01:40 PM
F.L. Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I had no appreciation for how much water was injected until I saw the fire
go out in a KC-135 engine one day when they hit the water after throttle up.
Quite a splash.

Frank Whiteley

"Bert Willing" wrote in
message ...
The water was injected into the combustion chamber, not the exhaust.
Evaporation increased the pressure in the chamber without increasing
temperature too much. In the 70's, there has been a spectacular accident

of
a Lockheed Tristar outbound Hamburg where the mechanics put fuel ino the
according tanks instead of water - resulting in all three engines failing
during the initial climb, and the aircraft passing underneath a bridge of

a
local highway. Partially passing, that is :-(

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"


"Steve Davis" a écrit dans le

message
de ...
Early models of the KC-135 tanker used water injection
on takeoff for added thrust. No idea how much additional
thrust could be gained by adding this to a 45Lb thrust
turbine but it wouldn't increase fuel consumption the
way an afterburner would. How about a cowling around
the jet and water could be sprayed or misted onto the
exhaust section. Could the steam then mix with the
exhaust well enough to increase thrust or would it
be a perpetual motion add on?

If not, you can add the afterburner! (re-heat)

Bill Daniels








  #30  
Old January 21st 04, 03:04 PM
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Water injection works but glowing shock diamonds in an afterburners exhaust
would be cool. Noisy, but cool.

Bill Daniels

"Steve Davis" wrote in message
...
Early models of the KC-135 tanker used water injection
on takeoff for added thrust. No idea how much additional
thrust could be gained by adding this to a 45Lb thrust
turbine but it wouldn't increase fuel consumption the
way an afterburner would. How about a cowling around
the jet and water could be sprayed or misted onto the
exhaust section. Could the steam then mix with the
exhaust well enough to increase thrust or would it
be a perpetual motion add on?

If not, you can add the afterburner! (re-heat)

Bill Daniels





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sport Pilot - School Won't Offer Gary G Piloting 38 February 16th 05 10:41 AM
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons Curtl33 General Aviation 7 January 9th 04 11:35 PM
I wish I'd never got into this... Kevin Neave Soaring 32 September 19th 03 12:18 PM
Restricting Glider Ops at Public Arpt. rjciii Soaring 36 August 25th 03 04:50 PM
Announce/USA: FAA Glider Flying Handbook / Bob Wander SoarBooks Soaring 0 August 11th 03 03:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.