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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message ... Mark James Boyd wrote: Eric Greenwell wrote: Mark James Boyd wrote: At 500 lbs, a notional Sparrowhawk with two AMT-450s would accelerate at .12 g's (2 knots/second), to 40 knots in 20 seconds using 1200 feet of runway. Assuming wheel friction and drag make this figure double, under 2400 feet of runway is still respectable. Wouldn't that be (500/(45+45) = 0.18 g's ? Or 3.4 knots/second to 40 knots in 10.4 seconds, and about 330 feet? So doubling is only 600 feet. I avoided the math and safe-sided the heck out of it and got a way too big figure. Thanks for the extra work Using one engine, 0.09 g's gives 1.7 knots/sec, 21 seconds to 40 knots, and 640 feet, doubled to 1280. With all due respect to Mike B, I might be happy with one engine. Eric Greenwell For self-launch, perhaps, but for 100 knot level flight, or 500 fpm climb, 200 Newtons (45 lbf) may be not enough. I haven't done the disciplined math for this, nor do I know the actual drag in Newtons of the Sparrowhawk. I suppose this can be calculated rather than SWAGed based on weight and the shape of the polar, eh? Any takers? That's an easy one. Basically, the weight/(L:d) at the speed of interest. Sticking with the 500 pounds weight, the drag at best L (36) is 500lb/36=14 pounds, leaving 30 pounds thrust to climb. 500/30=17 L climbing; climb rate is [59 knots at best L]/17=3.5 knots 350 fpm. Not great, but interesting. For 500 fpm climb, a 56 lbf unit would do it. For a 2000 foot climb: - 2000'/350fpm = 6 minutes - 6 min x 460 grams/min = 1200 grams, or almost a gallon liquid. So, carrying 5 gallons would give you one launch, a 4000 foot climb out of a big holes, and some travel towards home at 100 knots. The L at 100 knots ~ 12, so 500/12=41.5 lbf for level flight, so that goal is met with one engine. OK, these are a bit optimistic, because I assumed the engine added no drag. It does show one engine is close to being good, but a 55-60 lbf engine would be "ideal". -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA Have you math whizzes figured out how far the wing runner will have to run before this dog whistle is going fast enough to have aileron control? Bill Daniels |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Daniels wrote:
OK, these are a bit optimistic, because I assumed the engine added no drag. It does show one engine is close to being good, but a 55-60 lbf engine would be "ideal". Have you math whizzes figured out how far the wing runner will have to run before this dog whistle is going fast enough to have aileron control? Wing runner? On an 11 meter motorglider? We don't need no stinking wing runners! This is _Self_ launching! Put wing tip wheels on it and let it roll! Actually, letting it slide on it's plastic pads would work fine, since there is so little weight on the tip. The wing will come up when it's ready. In crosswinds, put the downwind wing down, to help keep it straight. The ultimate answer is a tailwheel with just enough steering ability to keep it straight, since it doesn't need to taxi. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Current Jet Cat turbines require propane to start them. The RC Jet guys at our
field have a whole bunch of Jet RC planes and fly from our field several days a week. Including a FAA safety Inspector. The Jet Cat turbines due to using propane for start, cannot be started inflight. The wind with blow out the flame. Also, our RC guys do have flameouts everyso often requiring them to have a dead stick landing. Jet-RPM of Sweden is making a Jet turbine, I have spoken with him. His Jet Turbines will have a electric start, he hopefully will be ready soon to start selling them. He said the price would be around 3450 euros, this was several months ago. To prep a current Jet Cat for engine start does take alittle time. I believe in March, in Lakeland, Florida the Jet RC people are going to have a big meet. You might want to check it out. Jet RPM said several sailplane manufactures have spoken to him already. It appears the small turbine with a electric start could become a substainer with inflight start very soon. Tom |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Kibby wrote:
My D-2T does not self launch. After an aero tow the D-2T handbook says 216 nm range based on sawtooth method at 882lbs gross weight, 3.43 gal of usable fuel. I don't think that any current small jet engine approach can even approach this. I think it will take a high bypass fan to compete with my current and existing performance. Two stroke engines are much more economical, for sure, but the turbine _seems_ to promise a simpler, more reliable, more easily started system and much less drag while the engine is out, especially interesting in an engine failure situation. And there is the ability to cruise significantly faster. Any one need a copy of the Flight Manual pages documenting this performance? Nah, my ASH 26 E manual says I can go 290 nm on that much fuel, so I believe you (I'm not sure I believe the manual, though!) -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Daniels wrote:
Have you math whizzes figured out how far the wing runner will have to run before this dog whistle is going fast enough to have aileron control? Well, we've got a name for the project! 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. 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. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Borgelt wrote:
When you do the performance calculation correctly you are in for a surprise. Jet engines have more power available the faster you go. The downside of this is if the specs are for thrust in Newtons available at a certain airspeed (not 0). At 0 airspeed, it may be that the AMT-400 puts out significantly less power. This would extend the takeoff roll some, and decrease efficiency at any airspeed lower than "spec." Or maybe the spec is for thrust on a test stand, who knows? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
A Genesis owner in Sweden is planning to install one
or two jet engines which will pop out of the BRS hatch. He's planning to use the electric start version which is being developed. His progress can be monitored on www.genesisflyers.com He has also done some wing root fillet modifications and testing to improve low speed air flow. Good pictures and descriptions. At 05:06 14 January 2004, Tomnkeylargo wrote: Current Jet Cat turbines require propane to start them. The RC Jet guys at our field have a whole bunch of Jet RC planes and fly from our field several days a week. Including a FAA safety Inspector. The Jet Cat turbines due to using propane for start, cannot be started inflight. The wind with blow out the flame. Also, our RC guys do have flameouts everyso often requiring them to have a dead stick landing. Jet-RPM of Sweden is making a Jet turbine, I have spoken with him. His Jet Turbines will have a electric start, he hopefully will be ready soon to start selling them. He said the price would be around 3450 euros, this was several months ago. To prep a current Jet Cat for engine start does take alittle time. I believe in March, in Lakeland, Florida the Jet RC people are going to have a big meet. You might want to check it out. Jet RPM said several sailplane manufactures have spoken to him already. It appears the small turbine with a electric start could become a substainer with inflight start very soon. Tom |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Kibby wrote:
My D-2T does not self launch. After an aero tow the D-2T handbook says 216 nm range based on sawtooth method at 882lbs gross weight, 3.43 gal of usable fuel. I don't think that any current small jet engine approach can even approach this. I think it will take a high bypass fan to compete with my current and existing performance. Any one need a copy of the Flight Manual pages documenting this performance? Bob Kibby "2BK" This turbine approach absolutely will not compare to the fuel efficiency of a piston engine. Our point was simply that fuel efficiency issues are dwarfed by the other advantages of a turbine. Four times a small number is a small number. If the turbine uses four times as much fuel (14 gallons in this case) we are really talking about an additional 70 pounds/$20 of fuel, which we believe is a minor additional cost compared to the other advantages a turbine provides. This is clearly not true for ALL applications (if the 70# extra means you are over gross and can't fly, then this kills the whole idea). But on balance, for many cases, it looks like the turbine idea, with it's fuel inefficiency, is interesting... |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message news:4004fb99$1@darkstar... Bill Daniels 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |