vintage motorglider for sale

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:12:04 -0800, Bill D wrote:

On Mar 7, 6:47Â*pm, Tony wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:05Â*pm, GM wrote:

On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 3:17:37 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
needs a little work.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=276309655

Can this one be aero-towed or winch launched? Getting the fuel for
the small rocket engine might become a problem. That stuff was said
to have some nasty habits like catching fire when it comes in contact
with certain materials and being extremely corrosive.

i think i saw something online that the US acquired a few after the war
and towed them with B-29's while test pilots checked them out. Perhaps
we need to notify the Commemorative Air Force and see if they will put
a towhook on Fifi!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmSNqHckry8

That's obviously the unpowered replica.

Nearly a year ago I visited RAF Cosford on a wet day during a CGC
gliding expedition to The Mynd. Cosford which has a fantastic collection
of Cold War British aircraft including all the V-bombers as well as a
wonderful collection of late 60s British experimental jets and a
selection of WW2 aircraft including a Me-163B. I was intrigued to see it
has a tow hook in exactly the same place as that replica and wonder why.
Was it for aero-towed retrieves if it had to land out after a combat
sortie and/or for moving them between airfields?


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

The 163 used 100% peroxide as the oxidizer. Nasty stuff that would
"burn" anything it could come in contact with.

F-16 doesn't glide any better than a lawn dart.

F-15 glides beautifully. I once rode in one that glided 75 miles from
flight level 400, in flight idle, joker fuel, to pattern altitude
without touching the throttle.

mj

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:34:02 -0800, Martin Gregorie
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:12:04 -0800, Bill D wrote:

On Mar 7, 6:47 pm, Tony wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:05 pm, GM wrote:

On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 3:17:37 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
needs a little work.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=276309655

Can this one be aero-towed or winch launched? Getting the fuel for
the small rocket engine might become a problem. That stuff was said
to have some nasty habits like catching fire when it comes in contact
with certain materials and being extremely corrosive.

i think i saw something online that the US acquired a few after the war
and towed them with B-29's while test pilots checked them out. Perhaps
we need to notify the Commemorative Air Force and see if they will put
a towhook on Fifi!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmSNqHckry8

That's obviously the unpowered replica.

Nearly a year ago I visited RAF Cosford on a wet day during a CGC
gliding expedition to The Mynd. Cosford which has a fantastic collection
of Cold War British aircraft including all the V-bombers as well as a
wonderful collection of late 60s British experimental jets and a
selection of WW2 aircraft including a Me-163B. I was intrigued to see it
has a tow hook in exactly the same place as that replica and wonder why.
Was it for aero-towed retrieves if it had to land out after a combat
sortie and/or for moving them between airfields?



Here's an excellent video with lots of detailed shots. Tost hook is
clearly shown. Also, I'd never noticed the split flaps / drag devices
which are deployed in this video. Revolutionaly airplane in many aspects.

Craig
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:54:15 -0800, Craig Funston
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:34:02 -0800, Martin Gregorie
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:12:04 -0800, Bill D wrote:

On Mar 7, 6:47 pm, Tony wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:05 pm, GM wrote:

On Wednesday, March 7, 2012 3:17:37 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
needs a little work.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=276309655

Can this one be aero-towed or winch launched? Getting the fuel for
the small rocket engine might become a problem. That stuff was said
to have some nasty habits like catching fire when it comes in
contact
with certain materials and being extremely corrosive.

i think i saw something online that the US acquired a few after the
war
and towed them with B-29's while test pilots checked them out. Perhaps
we need to notify the Commemorative Air Force and see if they will put
a towhook on Fifi!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmSNqHckry8

That's obviously the unpowered replica.

Nearly a year ago I visited RAF Cosford on a wet day during a CGC
gliding expedition to The Mynd. Cosford which has a fantastic
collection
of Cold War British aircraft including all the V-bombers as well as a
wonderful collection of late 60s British experimental jets and a
selection of WW2 aircraft including a Me-163B. I was intrigued to see it
has a tow hook in exactly the same place as that replica and wonder why.
Was it for aero-towed retrieves if it had to land out after a combat
sortie and/or for moving them between airfields?



Here's an excellent video with lots of detailed shots. Tost hook is
clearly shown. Also, I'd never noticed the split flaps / drag devices
which are deployed in this video. Revolutionaly airplane in many
aspects.

Craig

It might help to add the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrMmm...layer_embedded


--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Mar 8, 3:47*pm, Mark Jardini wrote:
The 163 used 100% peroxide as the oxidizer. Nasty stuff that would
"burn" anything it could come in contact with.

F-16 doesn't glide any better than a lawn dart.

F-15 glides beautifully. I once rode in one that glided 75 miles from
flight level 400, in flight idle, joker fuel, to pattern altitude
without touching the throttle.

mj

Hmm, that's 11/1, with idle thrust (which is not trivial in an Eagle).
F-16s use 6/1 for flameout approach (1000' for every mile away from
field), probably at around 250 - 300 knots.

F-15 is wonderful, but hardly a glider!

I've done formation recoveries on the wing of F-4s in Aggressor T-38s
(this is a long time ago!). F-4 was at probably 75 - 80%, while the
38 was at idle and using the speed brakes to maintain formation. No
doubt which was the better "glider" between those 2 jets!

Kirk
66

In my wave flight presentations, I always end the talk with a slide
stating that the ideal wave machine is:
- Vne high (most important)
- Proven design
- Self-launching
- and from manufacturers we already know.
.... then I have a pic of the Me163. Wow! Now it's only a matter of
money to restore it to flight status.......

Kemp

Yes it was aerotowed and yes it was a glider for most of it's flying
time. However.

Apparently (Rudi Optiz) they trained pilots by taking a 13m sailplane
and shortening the wingspan to 6m!

Landing approach speed in the 200mph range (that is past my glider's Vne...)
The rudder only became effective at 80mph.
Best climb speed around 420mph - which would give a 70 degree climb at
full power.

Not for the faint hearted.

Bruce

On 2012/03/08 5:40 PM, Berry wrote:
In article
,
Evan wrote:

On Mar 8, 8:36 am, "Peter von wrote:
The thing probably isn't much worse than a 2-22 :-)

Anyone know thae actual best L/D for a Komet?

Pete

No idea, but it obviously isn't horrible. The prototypes (less
engines) were aero towed during the development program.

Someone built a non-powered full-scale replica a few years ago. It was
lighter than the original and I don't know if it used the same airfoils
or not. The builder flew it as his personal sailplane. There were/are
videos on the net of it flying and even thermalling. I think it has
since gone to a museum.

XCOR Aerospace, the outfit that put rocket engines on a Long EZ, was
offering to build rocket powered full scale Me-163 replicas a while
back. I don't think they got any takers.

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

On Mar 8, 3:12*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
On Mar 8, 3:47*pm, Mark Jardini wrote:

The 163 used 100% peroxide as the oxidizer. Nasty stuff that would
"burn" anything it could come in contact with.

F-16 doesn't glide any better than a lawn dart.

F-15 glides beautifully. I once rode in one that glided 75 miles from
flight level 400, in flight idle, joker fuel, to pattern altitude
without touching the throttle.

mj

Hmm, that's 11/1, with idle thrust (which is not trivial in an Eagle).
F-16s use 6/1 for flameout approach (1000' for every mile away from
field), probably at around 250 - 300 knots.

F-15 is wonderful, but hardly a glider!

I've done formation recoveries on the wing of F-4s in Aggressor T-38s
(this is a long time ago!). *F-4 was at probably 75 - 80%, while the
38 was at idle and using the speed brakes to maintain formation. *No
doubt which was the better "glider" between those 2 jets!

Kirk
66

I'd bet good money that an F-22 will out-glide any of the 4th and
earlier generation fighters. Look ma! No external stores!