Schumanized Wing?

[Walt Connelly]

I might be spelling this wrong but could someone fill me in as to the advantages and disadvantages to the Schumanized Wing?

Thanks,

Walt

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Nov 19, 10:36*pm, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> I might be spelling this wrong but could someone fill me in as to the
> advantages and disadvantages to the Schumanized Wing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

Schueman did extensive tests and detirmined the lower wing surface was
all turbulent at speeds above 70 knots on the H-301 Libelle. He
modified the Huter (sp?) airfoil to make it more like a wortman with
pointed, rather than round leading edge. He also changed the flap
drive to make the ailerons follow the flaps throughout all flap
movements. I did all this + wing fairings and Kestral canopy on my
H-301. She would keep up with the ASW-20's. They'd outrun me, but then
mark the next thermal, where I'd outclimb them because they had 40
gallons of water vs. my 25 gallons. Sweet ship right up till the day
the SSA said we couldn't race above the manufactures published maximum
weight......................and the H-301 is 660 max!
Good by Libelle, you were a good old bird right up till the bureacrats
gave us the Spring Surprise in 1981?
Cheers,
JJ

[[email protected]]

On Nov 20, 1:36*am, Walt Connelly <Walt.Connelly.
> wrote:
> I might be spelling this wrong but could someone fill me in as to the
> advantages and disadvantages to the Schumanized Wing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Walt
>
> --
> Walt Connelly

See www.betsybyars.com/guy/soaring_symposia/72-modif.html for Wil
Schuemann's description of the many modifications he made to his
H-301. The biggest advantage of the Schuemannized wing is its
drastically improved performance at high cruising speeds while giving
up none of its climbing abilities. Disadvantages? The wings are a
little heavier. And of course re-contouring the wings is no walk in
the park, but if you like going faster than the other guy...

Jack Wyman
(Former owner of the "Schuebelle": it's now in the National Soaring
Museum).

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

>. Sweet ship right up till the day
> the SSA said we couldn't race above the manufactures published maximum
> weight......................and the H-301 is 660 max!
> Good by Libelle, you were a good old bird right up till the bureacrats
> gave us the Spring Surprise in 1981?
> Cheers,
> JJ

Speaking as a bureacrat, JJ, do you seriously think we should get rid
of weight restrictions? I can't wait to see what the FAA says when
some guy crashes while flying at 15 lbs/ft2...

John Cochrane

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

> Speaking as a bureacrat, JJ, do you seriously think we should get rid
> of weight restrictions? I can't wait to see what the FAA says when
> some guy crashes while flying at 15 lbs/ft2...
>
> John Cochrane

I objected to the way it was done, 2 months before the nats I was told
my ship would not be allowed to compete. Carl Herold said there would
be a "grandfather" provision to allow the H-301 to fly and then did
nothing to implement it.
Water under the bridge,
JJ

[Steve Leonard[_2_]]

On Nov 22, 8:02*am, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
>
> Water under the bridge,
> JJ

Or, out of the bags, right JJ?

Steve Leonard