Ventus C vs B

[tango4]

Apart from the very sweet looking 17.6 m tips and tail ballast what are the
other differences between the Ventus B and the Ventus C.

Does the C have the same long cockpit as the B ?

I believe the C handles a lot better.

Ian

[Marc Ramsey]

"tango4" > wrote...
> Apart from the very sweet looking 17.6 m tips and tail ballast what are
the
> other differences between the Ventus B and the Ventus C.

The C has a different root fairing which improves performance and handling
at slow speeds. The trailing edge divebrakes are replaced by conventional
spoilers, which makes it a lot easier to properly seal the flaps.

> Does the C have the same long cockpit as the B ?

There are actually C/A and C/B variants. The C/B has the same cockpit as
the B, whereas the C/A has the shorter, narrower cockpit of the A. CMs and
CTs use the C/B fuselage.

> I believe the C handles a lot better.

Having owned a B and flown a C a few times, I'd say that, at best, the C
handles slightly better than the B. The C is a bit more stable in the roll
axis (particularly at thermalling speeds), and requires less control force
in roll. Ptich and yaw stability are pretty much the same. The C is
probably easier to land for the uninitiated, but can't match the Bs
outstanding short field landing capability.

Marc

[Stewart Kissel]

At 18:12 09 September 2003, Tango4 wrote:
>Apart from the very sweet looking 17.6 m tips and tail
>ballast what are the
>other differences between the Ventus B and the Ventus
>C.

Marc covered the primary differences, having recently
shopped for a Ventii, there appears to be a significant
price difference between the two(B's and C's). Many
B's have had tail tanks added, and some have also ended
up with the 17.6 tips. Google RAS for some lengthy
B threads, and Al's site has a parallel thread on the
subject as well.
>Does the C have the same long cockpit as the B ?
>
>I believe the C handles a lot better.
>
>Ian
>
>
>

[Marc Ramsey]

"Todd Pattist" > wrote..
> The C has excellent large dive brakes that produce a steep
> over-the-trees descent to the start of your short field,
> but I suspect you are right that the flaps of the B provide
> a slightly lower energy landing.

The B trailing edge divebrakes create more drag than conventional
divebrakes, plus increase the effective flap angle. This allows one to
maintain a 50 knot or so approach speed at up to a 45 degree angle of
descent. Done right, it's more like landing an HP than a conventional
flapped glider.

Marc

[Mike Borgelt]

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:00:25 -0700, "Marc Ramsey" >
wrote:


>Having owned a B and flown a C a few times, I'd say that, at best, the C
>handles slightly better than the B. The C is a bit more stable in the roll
>axis (particularly at thermalling speeds), and requires less control force
>in roll. Ptich and yaw stability are pretty much the same. The C is
>probably easier to land for the uninitiated, but can't match the Bs
>outstanding short field landing capability.
>
>Marc
>
I own a C model with A fuselage and have flown several A and B models.

The C model has 3 degrees of dihedral and vs 2 degrees on the A and B
and is more stable in roll at thermalling speeds particularly with the
17.6 meter tips.
The full span flaperons on the C generate much less adverse yaw than
the ailerons on the B greatly reducing workload in turbulent air.

The top surface drives for the flaperons on the C model dramatically
reduce friction and improve linearity in the aileron control circuit
compared to the half baked Schempp excuse for an attempt at the
Glasflugel skew bar drive in the A and B model. With careful
maintenance that friction can be controlled. Winglets on the A or B
(15m) seem to improve aileron handling dramatically. The last A model
I flew had them and was quite pleasant compared to the other A and B
models I've flown.

Mike Borgelt

[Jim Phoenix]

Todd,

Looking at Mike Newgard's C last weekend I noticed it has the external
aileron drives, I believe he said that arrangement was peculiar to the C.
Does your have the internal geometry drives (like my N3)?

Jim
"Todd Pattist" > wrote in message
...
> "Marc Ramsey" > wrote:
>
> >The C has a different root fairing which improves performance and
handling
> >at slow speeds.
>
> Also makes it much easier to tape (the little things are so
> important :-)
>
> >There are actually C/A and C/B variants. The C/B has the same cockpit as
> >the B, whereas the C/A has the shorter, narrower cockpit of the A. CMs
and
> >CTs use the C/B fuselage.
>
> Surprisingly, the Carl Herrold handicap rates the Ventus C
> with the B fuselage (what I own) as performing better (dry)
> than the Ventus C/A. It's presumably due to the slightly
> higher weight.
>
> >Having owned a B and flown a C a few times, I'd say that, at best, the C
> >handles slightly better than the B.
>
> I've never flown a B, but those who have that I've asked
> have all agreed with "slightly better" One who owned a B
> felt there was a larger difference that he noticed when he
> lost some weight and flew it near the rear CG.
>
> I was also told there was an airfoil difference, but I don't
> know if that is true. Can anyone confirm or deny?
>
> >The C is a bit more stable in the roll
> >axis (particularly at thermalling speeds), and requires less control
force
> >in roll. Ptich and yaw stability are pretty much the same. The C is
> >probably easier to land for the uninitiated, but can't match the Bs
> >outstanding short field landing capability.
>
> The C has excellent large dive brakes that produce a steep
> over-the-trees descent to the start of your short field,
> but I suspect you are right that the flaps of the B provide
> a slightly lower energy landing.
>
> I believe some earlier B models cannot be retrofitted to the
> 17.6 tips.
>
>
> Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

[Jim Phoenix]

You answered the question I posed to Todd. I wish my N3 had the top surface
drives.

Jim
"Mike Borgelt" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:00:25 -0700, "Marc Ramsey" >
> wrote:
>
>
> >Having owned a B and flown a C a few times, I'd say that, at best, the C
> >handles slightly better than the B. The C is a bit more stable in the
roll
> >axis (particularly at thermalling speeds), and requires less control
force
> >in roll. Ptich and yaw stability are pretty much the same. The C is
> >probably easier to land for the uninitiated, but can't match the Bs
> >outstanding short field landing capability.
> >
> >Marc
> >
> I own a C model with A fuselage and have flown several A and B models.
>
> The C model has 3 degrees of dihedral and vs 2 degrees on the A and B
> and is more stable in roll at thermalling speeds particularly with the
> 17.6 meter tips.
> The full span flaperons on the C generate much less adverse yaw than
> the ailerons on the B greatly reducing workload in turbulent air.
>
> The top surface drives for the flaperons on the C model dramatically
> reduce friction and improve linearity in the aileron control circuit
> compared to the half baked Schempp excuse for an attempt at the
> Glasflugel skew bar drive in the A and B model. With careful
> maintenance that friction can be controlled. Winglets on the A or B
> (15m) seem to improve aileron handling dramatically. The last A model
> I flew had them and was quite pleasant compared to the other A and B
> models I've flown.
>
> Mike Borgelt