Which sustainer system would you chose for your sailplane?

For me electrical sustainer in a glider is the perfect solution. It links in to the spirit of the sport, beter than a turbine. But the propellor on the nose feels slightly off.... Especially when you consider the bugwipergarages becoming standard on the topsailplanes. We are spending more and more on reducing drag. Then this minor addition feels going against the flow. Why not a small pilon whit this nice foldable propellor you have engineered? Or am I the only one who has this uncomfortable feeling?

Secondly adding 45 kg to the non- lifting parts is a bit of a stretch. I contacted a manufacturer who was very kind to talk more than 30 minutes on the subject. But changing this limit on existing planes seems very far fetched. Any news in this area?

Marco

On Sep 26, 6:06*pm, wrote:
For me electrical sustainer in a glider is the perfect solution. It links in to the spirit of the sport, beter than a turbine. But the propellor on the nose feels slightly off.... Especially when you consider the bugwipergarages becoming standard on the topsailplanes. We are spending more and more on reducing drag. Then this minor addition feels going against the flow. Why not a small pilon whit this nice foldable propellor you have engineered? Or am I the only one who has this uncomfortable feeling?

Secondly adding 45 kg to the non- lifting parts is a bit of a stretch. I contacted a manufacturer who was very kind to talk more than 30 minutes on the subject. But changing this limit on existing planes seems very far fetched. Any news in this area?

Marco

I also have an issue with modification to the front of the fuselage
where the tow hook is (at least in my glider) and another point is
that this is an important area not to be tempered with in crash
resistant cockpits. I have no problems with the added weight due to my
good eating habits .

Think of this in terms of cars, would you rather have an electric car or a
jet
car?? Every pilot out there secretly wants to be a jet pilot...

Benefits? Who cares!

My vote goes for the first technology that can be fitted to a Libelle!

Chris



At 20:33 25 September 2012, wrote:
Dne torek, 25. september 2012 18:00:15 UTC+2 je oseba Eric Greenwell
napisala:
On 9/25/2012 7:21 AM, Tim Mara wrote:

For performance, low weight, LOW drag, simplicity and safety. JET!

More manufacturers are developing or exploring Jet sustainers. Quite
simply

the lack of moving parts, the very low weight to power output and
when

properly configured to have the computer take the pilot out of
decision

making of the actual operation of the engine the reliability of
operation

make the Jet the best possible solution. The HpH 304 Jet doesn't
require

massive, heavy and possibly hazardous batteries, doesn't require
start-up

and operation or typical reciprocating engines, no priming, no
chocking,

decompressing or diving to windmill and engine to start, no high
parasitic

drag (the jet engine expended has actually less drag than the landing
gear

down), no wind milling propellers, and short time from switch on the
switch

off and stored, literally seconds to start so even at low altitudes
can
be

operational in seconds and without the high drag of a propeller is a
non

issue when it might be necessary to glide the extra distance to make
a
safe

landing with an extended powerplant.

The Jet does have to be engineered right from the start and have
systems

that are completely monitored and controlled by a computer system to
take

the operator error possibility away and this is what has likely
delayed
the

release of the Jet sustainers from most manufacturers. Having flown
just

about al types from simple 2 cycle ultra-lites to small corporate Jet

aircraft I can see potential issues with operators not fully trained
in
Jet

engine operation without the development of a computer based system
to

control the operation of the jet engine. With the HpH system the
controller

monitors all aspects of the engine from start-up to engine cool down
and

stowage, it is simply refined ...

regards



Tim makes some excellent points for the jet sustainer, but every one of


them also applies to the FES. Sure, it's got those "possibly hazardous

batteries", but it does not have those "possibly hazardous 8 gallons of


fuel".



This illustrates the problem with the current voting choices, offered

without any description of each systems attributes. Even a dealer does

not tell us the important differences between two of the three choices,


so how can the average "voter" make an informed choice?



--

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to

email me)


I will write here just a few attributes of the FES which I think are the
most important:

-reliable start, full power available in 1s, switching off also very
quick
-no smell in cockpit, no oil on fuselage
-small noise outside and inside of cockpit
-low vibrations
-good max climb rate about 2,5m/s at 22kW for LAK17A (depend on weigh
of
glider)
-very efficient system (only 4kW of power is neccesery for horizontal
flight) which gives about 100km of range
-big advantage is that 12V power is available from main baterie pack,
(DC/DC converter) so you have finally enough power for Radio,
Transponder,
PDA, Vario etc, acctually for the whole flying season
-all 12V Pb batteries can be removed (this mean usually minus 5kg)
-only about 50kg of additional weigh - 5kg of Pb= 45kg
-no change of drag or CG position during engine run
-according Idaflieg test results, drag of propeller blades is really
minimal (official results published in winter)
-very chaep charging of batteries, outside of glider
-virtually maintenance-free
-price in range of Solo sustainers

Articles about FES:
http://www.front-electric-sustainer.com/articles.php

Very good article about recent JETs:
http://www.psr-jet-
system.com/___010_content_EN/___030_Download/20120116_-
_The_Turbine_-_better_than_its_reputation_-_Segelfliegen.pdf

There is not much about Solo sustainers but here is one:
http://www.trb.8m.com/

So now is up to you to take some time to read and decide which one you
would choose!

Regards,

Luka

On Thursday, September 27, 2012 12:00:04 AM UTC+1, Chris Davison wrote:

My vote goes for the first technology that can be fitted to a Libelle!


And I only want a system which can provide enough power to self-launch an 18m or larger glider, and have sufficient power left for a relight and/or a long retrieve. Which today means a combustion engine.

But I have to say that if I did not want self-launch, either the FES or the Jet would seem overwhelmingly better than the Turbo. For me it would be the jet because I don't like the idea of even a little drag from the prop, and I feel uneasy about having a mechanism in front of my feet - but it would have to be a jet which gives a good rate of climb, which if I understood correctly pretty much means a JS1 or an HP304.

Dne �etrtek, 27. september 2012 02:07:47 UTC+2 je oseba waremark napisala:
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 12:00:04 AM UTC+1, Chris Davison wrote:



My vote goes for the first technology that can be fitted to a Libelle!





And I only want a system which can provide enough power to self-launch an 18m or larger glider, and have sufficient power left for a relight and/or a long retrieve. Which today means a combustion engine.



But I have to say that if I did not want self-launch, either the FES or the Jet would seem overwhelmingly better than the Turbo. For me it would be the jet because I don't like the idea of even a little drag from the prop, and I feel uneasy about having a mechanism in front of my feet - but it would have to be a jet which gives a good rate of climb, which if I understood correctly pretty much means a JS1 or an HP304.


Video of LAK17A FES takeoff using 120m of rope and Auto tow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTeNK...layer_embedded

Luka,
Many of US glider ports have 4-5000ft paved runway.
Do you think electric scooter hub motor would help FES launch
850lbs Standard glider ?
Do you think , you could change shape of the batteries so we can slip
them in the wings instead of water bags ?
With Chinese batteries prices dropping down,and most of US gliders registered experimental,do you think you could sell FES kits for $15000 if you have at least 100 customers ?
In US most of us are keeping gliders in the trailer, and trailer sits outdoors,did you think about creating solar charging system for FES batteries on the trailer ?
Ryszard

On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:23:59 PM UTC-7, Renny wrote:
On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:53:12 PM UTC-6, Greg Arnold wrote: On 9/24/2012 3:39 PM, Renny wrote: Here's the URL for a PDF brochure that was handed out at the 2012 Reno Convention on the FES. Hopefully,

Renny, so you're running about 170 Amps or so. Your motor and esc need some cooling, so how is that accomplished? And then you must have a way to automatically override throttle if lipos approach 70 to 80% drained?

On Friday, September 28, 2012 6:00:43 PM UTC-6, (unknown) wrote:
On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:23:59 PM UTC-7, Renny wrote:

On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:53:12 PM UTC-6, Greg Arnold wrote: On 9/24/2012 3:39 PM, Renny wrote: Here's the URL for a PDF brochure that was handed out at the 2012 Reno Convention on the FES. Hopefully,



Renny, so you're running about 170 Amps or so. Your motor and esc need some cooling, so how is that accomplished? And then you must have a way to automatically override throttle if lipos approach 70 to 80% drained?

Motor cooling is handled via a small electric fan forward of the rudder pedals, an air vent in the nose cone that allows outside air to help cool the motor (and the cockpit), and 3 electric fans on the shelf behind the pilot's seat to cool the controller. When the batteries get low, warnings go off on the FCU, and I would then throttle back and turn off the FES. There is no automatic shutdown of the FES which allows the pilot to keep the FES running if there is an emergency situation. Thx - Renny

Here are my answers:

Dne petek, 28. september 2012 23:50:12 UTC+2 je oseba RW napisala:
Luka,

Many of US glider ports have 4-5000ft paved runway.

Do you think electric scooter hub motor would help FES launch

850lbs Standard glider?

Now we have 22kW in front which is plenty of power for good acceleration on paved runway. Small enough motor which could fit into hub of Tost whell, I think could not have more than 1 or maybe 2kW.
You can see a video of LAK17A FES selflaunch at 400kg weight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gLH9...layer_embedded

Even for selflaunch from a grass is enough power and we will also increase it in future. What is really neccesery for safe selflaunch from grass is slightly higher undercariange, which is also possible to achive, with some modifications.
And this is the plan to do it!

Do you think , you could change shape of the batteries so we can slip

them in the wings instead of water bags ?

Unfortunately this is not so simple. Check how batterie in the wings are arranged at Antares:
http://nadler.com/Antares/Antares_MechanicTraining.html

It can not be done in much different way, and so you need to have built in rails, to slide them in and so that they are fixed. Another issue is that wings are bending etc. On used glider all this would be science fiction...

With Chinese batteries prices dropping down,and most of US gliders registered experimental,do you think you could sell FES kits for $15000 if you have at least 100 customers ?

Electric system must be properly installed, so we do not support selling kits, as we can not be sure that instalation would be done properly. There is only very little choice for suitable batteries (capacity, size, weight, and C ratings) which are still expensive. With bigger series I am sure price could drop considerably.

In US most of us are keeping gliders in the trailer, and trailer sits outdoors,did you think about creating solar charging system for FES batteries on the trailer ?

This is possible and it was done already by solar and wind generators by other companyes, but it would higher the price, especially if there are buffer batteries in trailer like it was done at those solutions. To take batteries out and charging them on the grid is the cheapest and the safest way. But onyl at FES this is possible as there are only two 15kg batterie boxes, and they are easy to take out and install back. Storage of batteries is prefared at room temperatures. If trailer is standing on hot sun, than temperature inside is higher and this is not good for time life of batterie packs.


Ryszard

Dne sobota, 29. september 2012 02:17:14 UTC+2 je oseba Renny napisala:
On Friday, September 28, 2012 6:00:43 PM UTC-6, (unknown) wrote:

On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:23:59 PM UTC-7, Renny wrote:



On Monday, September 24, 2012 4:53:12 PM UTC-6, Greg Arnold wrote: On 9/24/2012 3:39 PM, Renny wrote: Here's the URL for a PDF brochure that was handed out at the 2012 Reno Convention on the FES. Hopefully,







Renny, so you're running about 170 Amps or so. Your motor and esc need some cooling, so how is that accomplished? And then you must have a way to automatically override throttle if lipos approach 70 to 80% drained?



Motor cooling is handled via a small electric fan forward of the rudder pedals, an air vent in the nose cone that allows outside air to help cool the motor (and the cockpit), and 3 electric fans on the shelf behind the pilot's seat to cool the controller. When the batteries get low, warnings go off on the FCU, and I would then throttle back and turn off the FES. There is no automatic shutdown of the FES which allows the pilot to keep the FES running if there is an emergency situation. Thx - Renny

On our latest instalations, we manage to arrange cooling also without electric fan infront of pedals. Motor itself has bigger centrifugal ventilator at back side!

Regards, Luka