HpH 304S JET Videos now on Youtube!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFBUv-QYU6M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcTeut1wE2o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ2EX2aJ910

comments from manufacturer below:

in last 3 months I flew about 60 Hours with 304S jet.
Present time are a technical characteristics OK.
Volume Tanks in fuselage: 33Liters
This is petrol A1 + 4% Turbine oil
Consumption: depend on fly strategy.
Flying jet is the some like flying pure glider. Anyway, you can fly faster
as with propeller.
Glider polar is the some, only start is aprox. 1,5m higher - this mean
optimal climbing is on optimal gliding speed + aprox.10% reserve.
In good air is better flying more slowly (130-150Km/h) in bad air is better
flying faster (160-180Km/h).
Good characteristics are by speeds between 130km/h and 160Km/h.
Engine normal using is 85% for cruising speed 155Km/h.
Consumption is about 34 L/Hour.
Cruising ratio is about 150km with speed 150km/h.

You can use another strategy too- climbing and gliding without engine. For
climbing we use 95% of engine thrust (maximal thrust is you can use
5minutes)
Climbing by 130Km/h is about 1- 1,4m/s (depend of fly level - higher is
better).
Usually you can fly between 180-190km.

Until today testing our 304S jet about 100 pilots , usually from Germany.
They say, that noise in cockpit is half of noise in ASG-29 Turbo glider and
climbing is about 40% better + unlimited speed (by ASG-29 you must climbing
on 115Km/h).

How does the vertical fin not get melted by the exhaust?

The Jet is a sustainer..not intended as a self launcher in spite of the fact
that nearly all test flights from short 50 foot auto tows..hence the
temperature at the tail is actually no higher than that of a recip engine on
other sustainers and self launch gliders... remember the engine is a
jet...not a rocket....
tim


"Michael Henry" wrote in message
...
How does the vertical fin not get melted by the exhaust?

On Oct 29, 10:31*am, "Tim Mara" wrote:
The Jet is a sustainer..not intended as a self launcher in spite of the fact
that nearly all test flights from short 50 foot auto tows..hence the
temperature at the tail is actually no higher than that of a recip engine on
other sustainers and self launch gliders... remember the engine is a
jet...not a rocket....
tim

"Michael Henry" wrote in message

...



How does the vertical fin not get melted by the exhaust?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What is the appeal of a 'sustainer'? They seem to be almost as
expensive as a self-launcher, without the ability to self launch.
It's great not to have to land out, but it seems like an awful lot of
money to spend and still need a tug to get airborne.

In message
,
Uncle Fuzzy writes
snip

What is the appeal of a 'sustainer'? They seem to be almost as
expensive as a self-launcher, without the ability to self launch.
It's great not to have to land out, but it seems like an awful lot of
money to spend and still need a tug to get airborne.

In the UK they can be flown without a PPL or NPPL which saves lots and
lots and lots of money. Also many sites (in the UK if not the US) do
winch launching, which is a lot cheaper than a tow, so you launch, start
the motor (or land back if there's a problem) and motor off to the lift.

BTW the BGA accident database contains plenty of sustainer accidents,
where the P1 was concentrating on trying to get it started for far too
long instead of switching to doing a field landing when they could not
get the engine started.

--
Surfer!
Email to: ramwater at uk2 dot net

Uncle Fuzzy wrote:


What is the appeal of a 'sustainer'? They seem to be almost as
expensive as a self-launcher, without the ability to self launch.
It's great not to have to land out, but it seems like an awful lot of
money to spend and still need a tug to get airborne.

Most pilots think they are significantly cheaper to purchase, to
maintain, and to insure. They are lighter, so easier to assemble and
manhandle; they have a wider wing loading, often with both higher *and*
lower wing loadings; and typically, simpler to operate, and more
reliable. In the USA, you don't need a self-launching endorsement to fly
one.

If you can get a tow when and where you want, and don't fly in high
density altitude locations, they are a more attractive alternative to a
self-launcher. They are much more popular in Europe than the USA, in
part because launches are so much easier to get, and because many glider
ports have noise restrictions that prohibit gas powered self-launching.

A sustainer gives you what some of us think is the "best half" of a
powered glider: the ability to fly or explore aggressively without the
worry of an outlanding and a long retrieve. Pilots that haven't flown
motorgliders often underestimate this major feature because it's not an
obvious one, while it's easy for everyone to see the advantage of
self-launching.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

On Dec 9, 7:23*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Uncle Fuzzy wrote:

What is the appeal of a 'sustainer'? *They seem to be almost as
expensive as a self-launcher, without the ability to self launch.
It's great not to have to land out, but it seems like an awful lot of
money to spend and still need a tug to get airborne.

Most pilots think they are significantly cheaper to purchase, to
maintain, and to insure. They are lighter, so easier to assemble and
manhandle; they have a wider wing loading, often with both higher *and*
lower wing loadings; and typically, simpler to operate, and more
reliable. In the USA, you don't need a self-launching endorsement to fly
one.

If you can get a tow when and where you want, and don't fly in high
density altitude locations, they are a more attractive alternative to a
self-launcher. They are much more popular in Europe than the USA, in
part because launches are so much easier to get, and because many glider
* ports have noise restrictions that prohibit gas powered self-launching.

A sustainer gives you what some of us think is the "best half" of a
powered glider: the ability to fly or explore aggressively without the
worry of an outlanding and a long retrieve. Pilots that haven't flown
motorgliders often underestimate this major feature because it's not an
obvious one, while it's easy for everyone to see the advantage of
self-launching.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes"http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* * * New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" atwww.motorglider.org

Thanks Eric,
That puts it into a perspective I can understand.

What ordnace will it carry? ASW-27 seeking missiles?

Last I heard, folks were having trouble getting insurance for turbine-
equipped gliders. Has that situation changed?

Thanks, Bob K.

A friend and I have each have one on order with the plan to start a small
club in the San Francisco Bay area.We are hoping that we can get insurance
once a few are flying and some actual data can be given to the insurance
companies. We are working with Costello on this, which deals with AIG, so
who knows what the future holds. My guess is it will be another year or so
but this is a wild guess.

We both flew the jet version last month when we visited the factory and
were extremely impressed with not only the simplicity and coolness of the
jet but also the glider itself. The flight characteristics were similar to
a Duo but with a much better roll rate. In a 45 degree bank it would stay
there hands off even when upset by the rudders. The control harmony was as
good as it gets and the heads up flap setting, colored lights across the
top of the panel, was very pleasant to use. We plan to write a full
article about our trip and will submit it to Soaring Magazine with some
pics.

They teased us with the idea a high by-pass engine, made by the same
company that makes the current one, that would be available in a few
years. It would only be 15 cm bigger in diameter and 2 cm longer but
provide twice the thrust, self launchable, and burn about the same amount
of fuel because of the better low speed/altitude efficiency. It would fit
in the same hole as the current engine and could be easily switched out
when available or at overhaul.

Drew Pearce

At 18:46 29 October 2008, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
Last I heard, folks were having trouble getting insurance for turbine-
equipped gliders. Has that situation changed?

Thanks, Bob K.