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

ASH 26E VS DG 808C



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 30th 06, 10:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Stefan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 578
Default Antares 20E vs. ASH 26E VS DG 808C

Andy schrieb:

Thanks. That tells me I should expect to replace the batteries at
least every 10 years but I found no informatoion on cost or whether it
was approved owner maintenance.


No. It tells you that you should expect a lifetime of at least 10 years
or 1500 cycles.

Todays cost for a replacement is around 15k, nobody knows what it will
be in 10 years.

Stefan
  #2  
Old October 30th 06, 10:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andor Holtsmark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Antares 20E vs. ASH 26E VS DG 808C

Hi Andy,
User maintenance:
No, Lange Flugzeugbau does not endorse users playing
around with the battery pack. What kind of maintenance
you would want to perform is also unclear to me. Howerver,
removing a battery pack and exchanging single batttery
modules is a simple task which takes little time when
performed by a trained individual.

Battery price:
The price of a full battery pack is an academic issue.
As pointed out; by the time you will need to replace
the pack, the price of the pack will be a very different
one. I am however, rather sure the price will not have
climbed. Furthermore, by then you should have climbed
3.600.000 m (11.811.024 ft) under power, and flown
some 228.000 km (123.110 n miles) in sawtooth flight,
assuming no nasty thermals have decided to interfere.

Andor



  #3  
Old November 2nd 06, 12:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Antares 20E vs. ASH 26E VS DG 808C


Andor Holtsmark wrote:
Hi Andy,
User maintenance:
No, Lange Flugzeugbau does not endorse users playing
around with the battery pack. What kind of maintenance
you would want to perform is also unclear to me. Howerver,
removing a battery pack and exchanging single batttery
modules is a simple task which takes little time when
performed by a trained individual.

Battery price:
The price of a full battery pack is an academic issue.
As pointed out; by the time you will need to replace
the pack, the price of the pack will be a very different
one. I am however, rather sure the price will not have
climbed. Furthermore, by then you should have climbed
3.600.000 m (11.811.024 ft) under power, and flown
some 228.000 km (123.110 n miles) in sawtooth flight,
assuming no nasty thermals have decided to interfere.

Andor


Hi,
Price of $15 000 for the batterie is not so expansive. 1500 tows @ $30
is $ 45 000.
Good deal I think!
S6

  #4  
Old November 2nd 06, 02:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,565
Default Antares 20E vs. ASH 26E VS DG 808C



Price of $15 000 for the batterie is not so expansive.


It's one of the costs of ownership that has to be compared with the
cost of maintaining/replacing an internal combustion engine. A
previous poster was concerned about the cost of replacing the ASH26E
engine and the Antares battery cost seems to be comparable.

Andy

  #5  
Old November 2nd 06, 06:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
bumper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 322
Default Antares 20E vs. ASH 26E VS DG 808C


"Andy" wrote in message
oups.com...


Price of $15 000 for the batterie is not so expansive.


It's one of the costs of ownership that has to be compared with the
cost of maintaining/replacing an internal combustion engine. A
previous poster was concerned about the cost of replacing the ASH26E
engine and the Antares battery cost seems to be comparable.

Andy


I don't think it's fair to compare those items directly. You *know* you will
have to replace the Antares batteries after X number of discharge/charge
cycles or years.

This is not the case with the ASH26E, as it is most unlikely the engine
would ever need to be replaced during the average lifetime of use - - there
has been but one engine failure requiring complete replacement in the US . .
.. and it seems there were extenuating circumstances even in that case.

Of course there are other costs, related to operating an internal combustion
engine, that may more appropriately be compared to the cost of those battery
packs. Stuff like fuel, oil, and the additional engine maintenance of an IC
engine as compared to an electric motor.

The IC engine maintenance seems to be the big variable, with things like the
odd water pump leak and spark plugs to replace. There's also the engine
start sealed lead acid battery to replace every 3 to 5 years (though in my
26E, that amounts to only $60 - - $30 each for two 18 amp hour bats - - one
is for avionics).

I see the main advantage of electric launch as convenience, simplicity, and
reliability (?). The "convenience" is limited, though, to flip-a-switch
operation and probably much less engine maintenance. On balance, the
electric will not be so convenient to use for safari type trips or even
extended day trips that require longer engine runs (i.e. using the glider as
Kempton has for flying from near the California coast, over the Sierra, and
on to the Great Basin in NV. This requires a substantial initial climb, then
glide over a wide sink-hole, and then another long climb to clear the
Sierra - - okay, now where do I plug this sucker in?!).

Each method of propulsion, like the glider designs themselves, has it's
merits and drawbacks, so it looks like variety should be around for awhile.

bumper


  #6  
Old November 2nd 06, 10:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Rory O'Conor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default ASH 26E VS DG 808C

I would like to see more potential to store luggage to enable better
safari trips.
=20
I can already sto
Charts
Fuel pump
Small sleeping bag
Small tie-downs
Bottle engine oil
Toothbrush
=20
(assuming I leave the oxygen behind).
=20
But this is not really enough for a long trip.
=20
I think that the new SLMG should both be potentially competitive for
competition flying and also have sufficient storage to enable a 2-4 week
unsupported safari with a modicum of comfort.
=20
I would like to be able to also sto
a fuel container
a laptop computer
several chargers (batteries, mobile phone, computer etc)
some clothes
a pair of shoes
possibly a bigger sleeping bag
possibly even a karrimat and bivy bag
maybe a few tools=20
=20
I am sure that there is potentially usable space in the control area
next to the fuel tank, wheel box with access from behind the seat.
And maybe it is possible to make a seatback cushion that has space to
store a laptop.
And someone should sell a collapsible fuel container.
Possibly a sleeping bag storage area in the rear fuselage accessible via
the engine bay.
Maybe even potential for some in-wing storage areas.
=20
ps: I would also like more room in the instrument panel. I have no
transponder, nor FLARM nor IPAC, but with Horizon and T&S my panel is
full.
=20
Rory
DG800B
=20
Author:
=20
Date/Time: 00:00 02 November 2006

________________________________


One of my original questions was since both these designs are over 12
years old (normal life span for a design) what changes would you like
to see in future designs? And when do you expect a new self launch
motor glider design to come on the market?

=20




 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:13 AM.


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