Bill Daniels wrote:
"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...

smjmitchell wrote:

snip


Think how the creations of each of these designers changed the course of
gliding. Most of these designers created gliders that set new levels in
glider performance. We have reached a point now where we can no longer
afford more performance. We need creative ideas to reduce cost. We need

a

new bunch of designers to tackle this issue. snip

Mitchell makes some good points, and I agree with them in general, but I
think the focus for cheaper gliders should be on the gliders clubs and
commercial operations will buy. If cheap, good gliders are going to
increase the number of pilots, we need these gliders where these new
pilots will see them and use them.

For example, if a brand new PW5 or similar was only $10,000, that would
make it almost irresistible to a lot of clubs. The members would have a
good transition to cross-country flying from the two seat trainers;
bigger clubs could afford more than one; and many new pilots would
become private owners of this glider.

Eventually, as the number of pilots increased, so would the demand for
higher performance to where a high volume, lower cost LS4 equivalent
could be practical to manufacture. My belief is we have to ensure the
demand first, then build that cheap LS4.

I realize a $10,000 PW5 equivalent is a dream, when even the low tech
trailer for it will cost $5000, but I hope you see the point that lower
cost high performance gliders at the high end won't do as much for
soaring as a low cost medium performance glider. The high end glider
only appeals to those already committed to the sport.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA



Finding a way to produce a 'cheap' LS4 isn't going to be the result of
re-shuffling the compromises that produced the LS4 in the first place.
Composite gliders are made the way they are because hand labor can produce a
high performance product in low quantities. There's not a lot a room for
improvement in that process. (Finding cheap labor will be a short term
solution since once they can produce a quality product, they won't be cheap
anymore.)

What's needed is a breakthrough in materials and processes. I don't know
what that is or if it's even possible but if we are to succeed, it will
require thinking WAY "outside the box".

A modern glider is a very large assembly of light, strong, highly accurate
parts. How do we do that cheaply? Solve that riddle and you will be a
legend.

Bill Daniels


Injection molding the surface. Build a light strong substructure, place
it in the mold, squirt in the surface material. The structural parts
would have to have some way for the surface to bond to it. Various
possibilities exist. Wait for the epoxy to cure, pop it in an oven for
a while-whatever. Remove nearly finished product.
The surface would have to be fairly thin to avoid weighing a ton, but
their are lots of very strong, light plastics and moldable composites
out there.
A big advantage I can see is that the structure doesn't have to have the
ultra-smooth surface required for laminar flow. The aerodynamic surface
isn't load bearing. Both can be optimized for their purpose.
Surface repairs wouldn't be structural. Perhaps you could ship a wing
back to the factory and have a new surface reapplied. Who knows.
The surface material could be optimized to avoid cracks and
deterioration due to UV, thus eliminating the need for complete
refinishing. Colors anyone? :-)
The surface material would have to have similar expansion and
contraction properties to the structure.
The surface could be heavy. On the other side the structure could
probably be made ridiculously light. Don't really know though
Just a thought.
Flame away!

Shawn