GP 14 Update and Video of Innovative Motor Deployment System for GP14 E Motorglider

[Tim[_11_]]

Hello All:

While progress has not been as quick as we had hoped for, plans are moving forward to take the GP 14 E Motorglider to first flight very early in the new year and then for first customer deliveries soon after just in time for the beginning of the European racing calendar.

For a taste of what is to come, please have a look at the two links below for "first Look" at the innovative pylon/motor deployment system for this new motorglider in the 13.5 Meter Class.

https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995333550523888

https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995321143858462

- Quick Deployment (@ 5 seconds to deployment and power on)
- Minimal Deployed Drag (Pre-start/Post-shutdown)
- No Aligning of the Prop for Quick Stowage (@5 seconds to full retraction from power off)

Pretty cool!

Tim McAllister "EY"
GP Gliders USA

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 7:44:01 PM UTC-8, Tim wrote:
> Hello All:
>
> While progress has not been as quick as we had hoped for, plans are moving forward to take the GP 14 E Motorglider to first flight very early in the new year and then for first customer deliveries soon after just in time for the beginning of the European racing calendar.
>
> For a taste of what is to come, please have a look at the two links below for "first Look" at the innovative pylon/motor deployment system for this new motorglider in the 13.5 Meter Class.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995333550523888
>
> https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995321143858462
>
> - Quick Deployment (@ 5 seconds to deployment and power on)
> - Minimal Deployed Drag (Pre-start/Post-shutdown)
> - No Aligning of the Prop for Quick Stowage (@5 seconds to full retraction from power off)
>
> Pretty cool!
>
> Tim McAllister "EY"
> GP Gliders USA


The batteries will be in the wings or in the fuselage?

[Tim[_11_]]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 10:20:59 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 7:44:01 PM UTC-8, Tim wrote:
> > Hello All:
> >
> > While progress has not been as quick as we had hoped for, plans are moving forward to take the GP 14 E Motorglider to first flight very early in the new year and then for first customer deliveries soon after just in time for the beginning of the European racing calendar.
> >
> > For a taste of what is to come, please have a look at the two links below for "first Look" at the innovative pylon/motor deployment system for this new motorglider in the 13.5 Meter Class.
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995333550523888
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995321143858462
> >
> > - Quick Deployment (@ 5 seconds to deployment and power on)
> > - Minimal Deployed Drag (Pre-start/Post-shutdown)
> > - No Aligning of the Prop for Quick Stowage (@5 seconds to full retraction from power off)
> >
> > Pretty cool!
> >
> > Tim McAllister "EY"
> > GP Gliders USA
>
>
> The batteries will be in the wings or in the fuselage?

The battery packs will be located in the wings and connected for easy removal for charging separate from the glider should that be required.

Tim McAllister "EY"
GP Gliders USA

[pjschae]

What is the the duration of the batteries?

[pjschae]

....and self-launch or just sustainer?

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:50:00 PM UTC, pjschae wrote:
> ...and self-launch or just sustainer?

http://www.gpgliders.com/gp-14-e-velo

[lynn]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 7:44:01 PM UTC-8, Tim wrote:
> Hello All:
>
> While progress has not been as quick as we had hoped for, plans are moving forward to take the GP 14 E Motorglider to first flight very early in the new year and then for first customer deliveries soon after just in time for the beginning of the European racing calendar.
>
> For a taste of what is to come, please have a look at the two links below for "first Look" at the innovative pylon/motor deployment system for this new motorglider in the 13.5 Meter Class.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995333550523888
>
> https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995321143858462
>
> - Quick Deployment (@ 5 seconds to deployment and power on)
> - Minimal Deployed Drag (Pre-start/Post-shutdown)
> - No Aligning of the Prop for Quick Stowage (@5 seconds to full retraction from power off)
>
> Pretty cool!
>
> Tim McAllister "EY"
> GP Gliders USA

Tim, Do you have a price list? Will there be any sales presence at the SSA Convention?

[krasw]

The published masses of E-model are just not realistic. GP website says 135 kg empty weight for pure glider and 170 kg for electric one. Even production glider mass is bound to be higher than specified (it invariably is). Current FES installations with 4 kWh batteries weigh 70-75 kg extra with over 30 kg for batteries alone. How an earth GP is going to pull of this feat, doing the whole installation with 35kg weight penalty? FES installations have very little structure for motor/propeller, whereas GP uses complex mast (which looks nice BTW) and doors. It seems quite clear that to participate 13.5m comp you would have to strip pretty much everything from GP-E.

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 10:41:37 PM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> The published masses of E-model are just not realistic. GP website says 135 kg empty weight for pure glider and 170 kg for electric one. Even production glider mass is bound to be higher than specified (it invariably is). Current FES installations with 4 kWh batteries weigh 70-75 kg extra with over 30 kg for batteries alone. How an earth GP is going to pull of this feat, doing the whole installation with 35kg weight penalty? FES installations have very little structure for motor/propeller, whereas GP uses complex mast (which looks nice BTW) and doors. It seems quite clear that to participate 13.5m comp you would have to strip pretty much everything from GP-E.


Where do you get 75 kg for FES weight? I see 45 kg on the FES website.

[krasw]

On Sunday, 27 December 2015 08:54:46 UTC+2, wrote:
> On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 10:41:37 PM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> > The published masses of E-model are just not realistic. GP website says 135 kg empty weight for pure glider and 170 kg for electric one. Even production glider mass is bound to be higher than specified (it invariably is). Current FES installations with 4 kWh batteries weigh 70-75 kg extra with over 30 kg for batteries alone. How an earth GP is going to pull of this feat, doing the whole installation with 35kg weight penalty? FES installations have very little structure for motor/propeller, whereas GP uses complex mast (which looks nice BTW) and doors. It seems quite clear that to participate 13.5m comp you would have to strip pretty much everything from GP-E.
>
>
> Where do you get 75 kg for FES weight? I see 45 kg on the FES website.

That's pretty consistently the difference in empty weight when comparing FES-equipped glider to similar pure glider. Check LAK-17B for example.

[Casey Cox]

Tim,

That motor looks different and the power is also different than FES. Is this motor made by FES or you just calling it that generically? GP web site says "also come with electric self-launch versions" with no mention of FES.

I can understand the lower power motor due to lower weight and maybe design. And the cost should be less than a FES as well. Just curious of the motor and battery manufacturer.

Should be a big competitor for other 13.5 and FES gliders.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 8:04:19 AM UTC-8, Casey Cox wrote:
> Tim,
>
> That motor looks different and the power is also different than FES. Is this motor made by FES or you just calling it that generically? GP web site says "also come with electric self-launch versions" with no mention of FES.
>
> I can understand the lower power motor due to lower weight and maybe design. And the cost should be less than a FES as well. Just curious of the motor and battery manufacturer.
>
> Should be a big competitor for other 13.5 and FES gliders.

A search for "Interview with Jerzy Peszke 30 January 2015" gets an interview where Peszke says that the batteries weigh 20 kg (versus 32 kg for the FES). Of course, it is not clear how the GP 14 gets the same range as a FES glider like the Silent Electro 2, yet has batteries that weigh only 2/3 as much.

[Casey Cox]

> A search for "Interview with Jerzy Peszke 30 January 2015" gets an interview where Peszke says that the batteries weigh 20 kg (versus 32 kg for the FES). Of course, it is not clear how the GP 14 gets the same range as a FES glider like the Silent Electro 2, yet has batteries that weigh only 2/3 as much.

Thanks. I see that he states the power plant can produce 3 launches to 500m. I heard that the Silent does 3 launches as well but don't know the height nor reserve power.

This is an exciting glider and can't wait to see more videos of it in action.

[Sean Fidler]

This one is going to change the world!

We have one (or two) coming to Ionia. I cannot wait to fly it.

[krasw]

On Sunday, 27 December 2015 19:33:58 UTC+2, wrote:
>
> A search for "Interview with Jerzy Peszke 30 January 2015" gets an interview where Peszke says that the batteries weigh 20 kg (versus 32 kg for the FES). Of course, it is not clear how the GP 14 gets the same range as a FES glider like the Silent Electro 2, yet has batteries that weigh only 2/3 as much.

FES installations use total of 4,2 kWh battery capacity with mass of 30+ kg.. GP states it has 4 kWh battery capacity. To get that from 20 kg commercially available battery would be nothing short of sensational.

[Tim[_11_]]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 8:47:28 AM UTC-6, pjschae wrote:
> What is the the duration of the batteries?

Standard Motor is 15 kW with a Battery Capacity +/- 4 kWh

Delivering 3x 500 m climb OR 1x 500 m climb + 100 km in-flight range

Self-Launch Capable under standard atmpshere/European conditions and up to 35 kg/m2 wingloading

PLUS, we will be offering a upgraded 25 kW Motor (Manufactured by Rotex - Czech Repuiblic) for Hot + High (as well as higher wingloading) selflaunch operations.

Tim
GP Gliders USA

[Tim[_11_]]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 12:51:15 PM UTC-6, lynn wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 7:44:01 PM UTC-8, Tim wrote:
> > Hello All:
> >
> > While progress has not been as quick as we had hoped for, plans are moving forward to take the GP 14 E Motorglider to first flight very early in the new year and then for first customer deliveries soon after just in time for the beginning of the European racing calendar.
> >
> > For a taste of what is to come, please have a look at the two links below for "first Look" at the innovative pylon/motor deployment system for this new motorglider in the 13.5 Meter Class.
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995333550523888
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/gpgliders/videos/995321143858462
> >
> > - Quick Deployment (@ 5 seconds to deployment and power on)
> > - Minimal Deployed Drag (Pre-start/Post-shutdown)
> > - No Aligning of the Prop for Quick Stowage (@5 seconds to full retraction from power off)
> >
> > Pretty cool!
> >
> > Tim McAllister "EY"
> > GP Gliders USA
>
> Tim, Do you have a price list? Will there be any sales presence at the SSA Convention?

Lynn et. al.:

GP 14 and GP 14 S list at 57,500 Euro
GP 14 E and GP 14 SE list at 74,750 Euro

Please note, Promotional Pricing remains in effect and may be extended to more than the first 15 gliders ordered - likely until spring of 2016.

For those willing to deposit between 50% and 100% of your order, you will get between 10% and 20% off the total order price (base glider PLUS options, including trailer) A pretty sweet deal and one that will not go on forewever.

AND YES, there will be a sales presence (booth) at the SSA Convention.

Tim
GP Gliders USA

[[email protected]]

And will there be a larger battery option to go with the larger battery option?

[Tim[_11_]]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 10:04:19 AM UTC-6, Casey Cox wrote:
> Tim,
>
> That motor looks different and the power is also different than FES. Is this motor made by FES or you just calling it that generically? GP web site says "also come with electric self-launch versions" with no mention of FES.
>
> I can understand the lower power motor due to lower weight and maybe design. And the cost should be less than a FES as well. Just curious of the motor and battery manufacturer.
>
> Should be a big competitor for other 13.5 and FES gliders.

Casey:

While "FES" has been, and probably may be, considered for future installations should the market demand it, GP Gliders will not be offered with "FES" the foreseeable future. However, the GP Glider Team's system should prove a very effective system while minimizing drag penalities associated with FES, and acheiving "FES"-like deployment times when compared to many traditional boom deployed systems. The GP 14 is meant to be the ultimate expression of innovation and performance inthe 13.5 meter span, for which an equally innovative and performance-minded self-launch system has been designed.

GP Gliders are offered with Electric Self-Launch/Sustainer capability using its own fuselage and boom deployment system deploying a standard motor (15 kW)/controller produced by JETI of Czech Republic and now offering an upgraded 25 kW motor produced by Rotex of Czech Republic for those wishing for better hot/high and higher wingloading self-launch capability. The batte4ry packs will be produced in-house using Sony components at this time.

The unique motor deployment system as well as the fuselage boom mounting offers many advantages to the "FES" including:
- Less overall drag
- Minimal deployed/unpowered system drag
- Fast deployment to Power On (@6 seconds)
- More Propulsive Efficiency (including Peszke optimized folding propellers)
- Power Off and Immediate Stow (no aligning propeller with boom)
- among other advantages

Tim McAllister
GP Gliders USA

[Tim[_11_]]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 2:23:32 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> And will there be a larger battery option to go with the larger battery option?

At this time, the battery system will remain the same for both motors. Obviously a self-launch with the full 25 kW system performance will leave "something less" than 100 km range remaining for self-retrieve at the end of a day.

In a glider this small, larger battery packs would also mean less wing water-ballast for those pilots wishing to maximize overall performance for the glider.

However, Peskze S.C. remains committed to be as responsive as possible to customer input and ongoing refinement of the product. So, unlike with other manufacturer's, customer suggestions are welcome :-)


Tim
GP Gliders USA

[Casey Cox]

I can see this glider in my future.

I see some design differences than other gliders.
1) The trailer looks to be well designed and galvanized frame. Longer lasting and saves the time and expense of painting.
2) The wing tips are not removable. Saves time rigging, expense, and weight, but wonder if its harder or if one has to be a little more careful pulling out of trailer.
3) The gear is more forward of gear doors, where most gear is almost center of gear doors. Don't know but wondering if all gliders gear hinge the same direction (forward or rearward). I think I have seen one other glider with gear forward of the doors.
4) Looks like the wings would have to be disassembled or at least pulled out some to get the batteries out. Rigging every day would not be a problem and I guess as long as they can be charged while in the wing would not be a problem. Wonder how long the batteries are and if that is the case of removing the wing completely to get the batteries out. Not sure I would want to charge the batteries while still in the wings. I've recently had a battery catch fire overnight.
5) Wonder why all the effort to have 2 cockpits. Resale may be hurt if someone has the slim and potential buyer did not like the tight fit. Wonder if the weight is the same and L/D any better on slim.
6) I like the standard BRS. I guess it is located in the pylon compartment and would exit via the pylon doors.

Cant wait to see more of it.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 4:40:08 PM UTC-8, Casey Cox wrote:
> I can see this glider in my future.
>
> I see some design differences than other gliders.
> 1) The trailer looks to be well designed and galvanized frame. Longer lasting and saves the time and expense of painting.
> 2) The wing tips are not removable. Saves time rigging, expense, and weight, but wonder if its harder or if one has to be a little more careful pulling out of trailer.
> 3) The gear is more forward of gear doors, where most gear is almost center of gear doors. Don't know but wondering if all gliders gear hinge the same direction (forward or rearward). I think I have seen one other glider with gear forward of the doors.
> 4) Looks like the wings would have to be disassembled or at least pulled out some to get the batteries out. Rigging every day would not be a problem and I guess as long as they can be charged while in the wing would not be a problem. Wonder how long the batteries are and if that is the case of removing the wing completely to get the batteries out. Not sure I would want to charge the batteries while still in the wings. I've recently had a battery catch fire overnight.
> 5) Wonder why all the effort to have 2 cockpits. Resale may be hurt if someone has the slim and potential buyer did not like the tight fit. Wonder if the weight is the same and L/D any better on slim.
> 6) I like the standard BRS. I guess it is located in the pylon compartment and would exit via the pylon doors.
>
> Cant wait to see more of it.


The glider has potential. It seems to be a smaller version of the Diana (similar wing and fuselage shapes). But it does not have the eccentricities of the Diana (no side stick, and no spars sticking out the side of the fuselage).

There does seem to be a disconnect between the advertised range/climb and the advertised weight of the batteries. Also, a more powerful optional motor seems to serve no purpose unless it either is turning the prop faster or is turning a larger prop. Otherwise, the extra power will not used.

Removable batteries in the fuselage would be a lot more convenient than having them in the wings. A leak of the water ballast could short the batteries, but at least you would have the ballistic chute if the wings catch on fire.

[[email protected]]

And/or if the prop has a different pitch.

[[email protected]]

Two obvious reasons for not putting the batteries in the fuselage:

1 - that's where the motor assembly is.

2 - Even if the batteries and motor assembly could be fitted in the aft fuselage the C of G issues would be a big problem in such a light glider. A lot of lead in the nose would be required.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 7:53:48 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> Two obvious reasons for not putting the batteries in the fuselage:
>
> 1 - that's where the motor assembly is.
>
> 2 - Even if the batteries and motor assembly could be fitted in the aft fuselage the C of G issues would be a big problem in such a light glider. A lot of lead in the nose would be required.

The bigger issue is the mass of non lifting items. With a low mass glider this becomes a big deal. Batteries in the fuselage increase this mass, leading to need for heavier structure, primarily the spar, this making the whole glider heavier. Move the mass to the wing, somewhat outboard is better, and this problem is avoided.
Bigger motor buys takeoff margin, then throttle back to lower consumption for balance of the climb. Larger battery not really needed.
UH

[Dan Marotta]

On 12/27/2015 7:05 PM, wrote:
> A leak of the water ballast could short the batteries, but at least you would have the ballistic chute if the wings catch on fire.

I don't think you'd want to be hanging under a parachute in a burning
aircraft... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH3XTseNpw0

--
Dan, 5J

[[email protected]]

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 5:38:01 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 7:53:48 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > Two obvious reasons for not putting the batteries in the fuselage:
> >
> > 1 - that's where the motor assembly is.
> >
> > 2 - Even if the batteries and motor assembly could be fitted in the aft fuselage the C of G issues would be a big problem in such a light glider. A lot of lead in the nose would be required.
>
> The bigger issue is the mass of non lifting items. With a low mass glider this becomes a big deal. Batteries in the fuselage increase this mass, leading to need for heavier structure, primarily the spar, this making the whole glider heavier. Move the mass to the wing, somewhat outboard is better, and this problem is avoided.
> Bigger motor buys takeoff margin, then throttle back to lower consumption for balance of the climb. Larger battery not really needed.
> UH


The glider will have 8 gallons of disposable fuselage ballast:

http://www.gpglidersusa.com/gp14/

Maybe that 30 kg of ballast is only for light pilots. If not, it appears the glider has space in the fuselage for the 20 kg of batteries, as well as no W & B or structural issues if fuselage batteries are installed in the area planned for the fuselage ballast.

[Tim[_11_]]

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 7:38:01 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> The bigger issue is the mass of non lifting items. With a low mass glider this becomes a big deal. Batteries in the fuselage increase this mass, leading to need for heavier structure, primarily the spar, this making the whole glider heavier. Move the mass to the wing, somewhat outboard is better, and this problem is avoided.
> Bigger motor buys takeoff margin, then throttle back to lower consumption for balance of the climb. Larger battery not really needed.
> UH

On both counts, exactly UH ! EY

[Tim[_11_]]

On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 6:40:08 PM UTC-6, Casey Cox wrote:
> I can see this glider in my future.
>
> I see some design differences than other gliders.
> 1) The trailer looks to be well designed and galvanized frame. Longer lasting and saves the time and expense of painting.
> 2) The wing tips are not removable. Saves time rigging, expense, and weight, but wonder if its harder or if one has to be a little more careful pulling out of trailer.
> 3) The gear is more forward of gear doors, where most gear is almost center of gear doors. Don't know but wondering if all gliders gear hinge the same direction (forward or rearward). I think I have seen one other glider with gear forward of the doors.
> 4) Looks like the wings would have to be disassembled or at least pulled out some to get the batteries out. Rigging every day would not be a problem and I guess as long as they can be charged while in the wing would not be a problem. Wonder how long the batteries are and if that is the case of removing the wing completely to get the batteries out. Not sure I would want to charge the batteries while still in the wings. I've recently had a battery catch fire overnight.
> 5) Wonder why all the effort to have 2 cockpits. Resale may be hurt if someone has the slim and potential buyer did not like the tight fit. Wonder if the weight is the same and L/D any better on slim.
> 6) I like the standard BRS. I guess it is located in the pylon compartment and would exit via the pylon doors.
>
> Cant wait to see more of it.

Casey

Glad to hear of your interest - we can't wait to see you in a GP 14 :-)

Some answers to your above points:
1) Trailer "Box" in the picture is shown mounted on rather "industrial/agricultural" under-body frames that were produced in Russia. If you've ever driven in Russia you would understand why the frames are built like this. Production trailers will feature the same Peszke "box" on a much more elegant and lighter underbody frame, but still featuring AlKo bits and pieces (axle, wheels, tongue, etc.)
2) Yes, this is true, the winglets are built into the wing structure to save weight. That puts the left/right wings on the opposite sides of the fuselage for rigging. But with the wings very light weight this should not be very problematic. With the clamshell open, you will be able to raise the wingtips up to allow for fuselage removal for routine maintenance and tinkering without wing removal.
4) Yes, this is the case, but other designs have had the batteries in the wings with no ill affect (knock on wood...)
5) Maximum Performance is the answer for the Slim fuselage. Slim fusleage offers very minor reduction in weight and a noticeable improvement in drag. If you are not buying your "forever" glider, then considering the standard/large fuselage for re-sale value is very smart. However, I will say that having sat in the GP 14 standard/large fuselage, it seemed quite "cavernous" around my 5'8" 170 lb. frame.
6) The non-optional/standard equipment GRS Ballistic 'Chute opens up the cockpit without the need for a parachute on the pilot. If you take a close look a the video, the pylon and GRS compartments each have their own door(s) within a larger, removable "turtle-back" that will make maintenance and inspection much easier in that entire area, including the fuselage control linkages.

If you have not already, please go to www.gpglidersusa.com and sign up for our email list for the latest details. And please get in touch with me by phone if you would like to discuss this glider further.

Best,
Tim
GP Gliders USA