Our intrepid billionaire on another journey....

[Stewart Kissel]

http://news.com.com/2300-11395_3-6035411-1.html?tag=ne.gall.pg

15,000' of runway to takeoff on....

[[email protected]]

.... and a fuel leak keeps him from trying ...

The USA Today article described the plane as an ultralight. I looked it
up; its dry weight is about the same as my Toyota pickup's.

[Stewart Kissel]

At 22:12 07 February 2006, wrote:
>.... and a fuel leak keeps him from trying ...
>
>The USA Today article described the plane as an ultralight.
>I looked it
>up; its dry weight is about the same as my Toyota pickup's.

All up weight is 11 tons according to CNET...anybody
know what sort of wingloading he has at that? They
fixed the fuel leak and he is off

[Martin Gregorie]

Stewart Kissel wrote:
> At 22:12 07 February 2006, wrote:
>> .... and a fuel leak keeps him from trying ...
>>
>> The USA Today article described the plane as an ultralight.
>> I looked it
>> up; its dry weight is about the same as my Toyota pickup's.
>
> All up weight is 11 tons according to CNET...anybody
> know what sort of wingloading he has at that? They
> fixed the fuel leak and he is off
>
The web site says 3350 lbs empty and 22,000 lbs Mtow, adding that makes
it 85% fuel weight at Mtow.

There's also a comment that descent requires the chutes out and throttle
closed because the L/D ratio is so good, but doesn't say what the L/D
figure is or what speed gives best glide.

--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
Martin Gregorie > wrote:

> Stewart Kissel wrote:
> > At 22:12 07 February 2006, wrote:
> >> .... and a fuel leak keeps him from trying ...
> >>
> >> The USA Today article described the plane as an ultralight.
> >> I looked it
> >> up; its dry weight is about the same as my Toyota pickup's.
> >
> > All up weight is 11 tons according to CNET...anybody
> > know what sort of wingloading he has at that? They
> > fixed the fuel leak and he is off
> >
> The web site says 3350 lbs empty and 22,000 lbs Mtow, adding that makes
> it 85% fuel weight at Mtow.
>
> There's also a comment that descent requires the chutes out and throttle
> closed because the L/D ratio is so good, but doesn't say what the L/D
> figure is or what speed gives best glide.

With the takeoff weight 22,000 lb and the engine 2300 lbf of thrust
(derated from 3000 lbf) we can be pretty sure the L/D ratio is
significantly better than 10:1 :-)

This page...

http://www.aahs-online.org/articles/globalflyer.htm

.... says 37:1.

Also: "Initial climb speed is 100 knots prior to gear retraction and 130
knots after. Cruise speed for best range is about 250 knots (true)."

With 22,000 lb and 400 sq ft of wing the wing loading is about 55 lb/sq
ft, which is about five times higher than a typical Std class glider
with water. So the stall speed should be about sqrt(5) = 2.23 times
higher -- maybe around 90 knots.

Wing loading with empty tanks is right about the same as sailplanes, and
wingspan is only 4m more than the Eta. It should be capable of
thermalling effectively!


Max range with zero wind is quoted as 19,000 miles (I've seen 21,000
elsewhere). He's flying 26,000 miles this time, so he does neeed quite
significant tail wind (or wave lift!).

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

[Martin Gregorie]

Bruce Hoult wrote:

..../...

> This page...
>
> http://www.aahs-online.org/articles/globalflyer.htm
>
> ... says 37:1.
>
Thanks for that. It beats out the U2 (28:1) quite handsomely, then.

> Also: "Initial climb speed is 100 knots prior to gear retraction and 130
> knots after. Cruise speed for best range is about 250 knots (true)."
>
Interesting: he was running at 362 kts at 45,433 as he crossed Nagasaki.
Wish I knew if the site is showing TAS or ground speed: has to be too
high to be IAS.

>
> Max range with zero wind is quoted as 19,000 miles (I've seen 21,000
> elsewhere). He's flying 26,000 miles this time, so he does neeed quite
> significant tail wind (or wave lift!).
>
Lots of different numbers quoted, it seems:
- In the briefing after take-off they mentioned a burn rate of
750 lbs of fuel per 1000 miles. The fuel load is about 18650
lbs, so at that rate you get a range of 24,850 miles.

- They also said they expect to arrive at Manston with 500 - 1500
lbs of fuel , which gives an average burn rate of 678 lbs per
1000 miles if you assume they arrive with 1000 lb reserve.



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
Martin Gregorie > wrote:

> > Also: "Initial climb speed is 100 knots prior to gear retraction and 130
> > knots after. Cruise speed for best range is about 250 knots (true)."
> >
> Interesting: he was running at 362 kts at 45,433 as he crossed Nagasaki.
> Wish I knew if the site is showing TAS or ground speed: has to be too
> high to be IAS.

VNE is 170 knots, due to flutter. Obviously that's IAS, not TAS, since
he's doing double that TAS, but no word on whether the IAS VNE decreases
with altitude.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

[Wallace Berry]

> > http://www.aahs-online.org/articles/globalflyer.htm
> >
> > ... says 37:1.
> >


My suspicions are confirmed. The Globalflyer is actually a jet powered
twin Libelle ; )

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
Martin Gregorie > wrote:

> There's also a comment that descent requires the chutes out and throttle
> closed because the L/D ratio is so good, but doesn't say what the L/D
> figure is or what speed gives best glide.

On the site now:

"if Steve does cross the*Atlantic and finds he does not have enough fuel
to keep the engine running for the last leg of the flight, his glide
ratio is 200 miles from 50,000 feet. And, as we all know, if anyone has
to glide an aircraft, Steve - with all his gliding records - is the man
for the job."

That's between 21.1:1 and 24.3:1 depending on whether they mean statute
or nautical miles. That's close to ILS approach slope, which regular
airliners pretty much glide down the last 100 or 150 miles.

Perhaps the 37:1 is only with the engines idling?

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

[Martin Gregorie]

Bruce Hoult wrote:
> In article >,
> Martin Gregorie > wrote:
>
>> There's also a comment that descent requires the chutes out and throttle
>> closed because the L/D ratio is so good, but doesn't say what the L/D
>> figure is or what speed gives best glide.
>
> On the site now:
>
> "if Steve does cross the Atlantic and finds he does not have enough fuel
> to keep the engine running for the last leg of the flight, his glide
> ratio is 200 miles from 50,000 feet. And, as we all know, if anyone has
> to glide an aircraft, Steve - with all his gliding records - is the man
> for the job."
>
> That's between 21.1:1 and 24.3:1 depending on whether they mean statute
> or nautical miles. That's close to ILS approach slope, which regular
> airliners pretty much glide down the last 100 or 150 miles.
>
> Perhaps the 37:1 is only with the engines idling?
>
That wouldn't be a total surprise. Just compare the frontal area of the
engine with the rest of the plane.

As a related thought, I'm wondering if the speed on the tracking page is
really ground speed. It varies a lot compared with altitude and heading,
which are both pretty much nailed. I've read that one of the Global
Flyer secrets is a really good autopilot, so I do wonder about the speed
variations. If it is ground speed that would make a lot of sense....


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[Stewart Kissel]

http://www.virginatlanticglobalflyer.com/

Any ras types who live on the rainy island going to
attend the *planned* landing at Manston?

[Stewart Kissel]

Sounds like he landed out...but made it.


At 15:54 11 February 2006, Stewart Kissel wrote:
>http://www.virginatlanticglobalflyer.com/
>
>Any ras types who live on the rainy island going to
>attend the *planned* landing at Manston?
>
>
>
>

[Jono Richards]

At 20:12 10 February 2006, Wallace Berry wrote;

'My suspicions are confirmed. The Globalflyer is actually
a jet powered twin Libelle ; )'

I must say there is a huge similarity! Around the same
sort of performance as a Libelle too...hmm is this
Glasflugels latest project...?