Musings on SOARING cover photos

Is there a rule stating the cover photo for SOARING
magazine HAS to be a sailplane?

I would doubt it. And why should there be?

I like the cover photo, showing the SSA headquarters
building at Hobbs, NM, in snow. It's a nice, seasonal,
shot of our organization's home base.

What else could go on the cover? Photos of:

Soaring pilots;
Soaring crew;
igc flight traces;
Screen shots from See You or Stre Pla;
Convention photos;
Tow planes;
Winches;
Glider fields;
And, surely those with an artistic touch have much
better ideas.

The cover photo doesn't have to show the ubiquitous
German glider.

As for the Best Ever photo? Has to be the one by Chris
Woods over the Wright Brothers Memorial, shot on 4
JUL 03.

Snotty
aka Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

I'd like to know more about the glider on the March 1984 cover, and
where the photo was taken ...

btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

wrote in message oups.com...
btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

It's a Rutan Solitaire, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Self-launcher with an interesting engine installation concept. The
engine is placed in the fuselage in front of the pilot rather than in
the rear fuselage.

I seem to recall that one of them was built here in Denmark in the
late 1980's or early 90's, either from a kit or bottom-up from
drawings. I think it was sold out of the country a few years later.

Bo Brunsgaard

Bo Brunsgaard wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

It's a Rutan Solitaire, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Self-launcher with an interesting engine installation concept. The
engine is placed in the fuselage in front of the pilot rather than in
the rear fuselage.

I seem to recall that one of them was built here in Denmark in the
late 1980's or early 90's, either from a kit or bottom-up from
drawings. I think it was sold out of the country a few years later.

Bo Brunsgaard

I communicated back in the late 1980s with a US gentleman that was
selling a Rutan Solitaire homebuilt you see in the picture (email
lost). He indicated some concern about his Rutan Solitaire being
tricky for an inexperienced pilot. Apparently the canard was designed
to stall first causing a nose pitch down - as you would expect. Except
that the transition could be abrupt and in the landing flare this would
put your nose abruptly in contact with the pavement.

Perhaps this thread will get forwarded to said owner and he'll fill in
the details.

Best,
Richard

This is the big lie behind canards. Of course they
stall. After the mains touch down, holding the nose up
with the front canard until it stalls makes a good
bang onto the nose gear. If the C.G. is far enough aft,
you can stall both wings in flight. And inverted, all bets are off.

The Speed Canard is a certified aircraft in Europe.
Although the "stall" speed (really maximum
"sink" speed) is below 60 knots, we used to fly it on
at 80 and do a wheel landing and lower the nose before
the forward canard stalled.

We had to use 3000ft runways or longer for this, and
even that was edgy.

It was fun for a little while, until I realized that an
off-field landing would be, gulp, interesting. I'm
NOT a fan of high stall (or max "sink") speeds.

The interesting thing about a canard glider, however, is
that the weight to span ratio means something different because of
two wings. Maybe a good way to get out of using this
ratio for experimentals?

I suspect that if the 32:1 ratio I saw for the Solitaire is correct,
the forward canard was a "stall all at once" design,
so keeping the nose unscarred must have been "interesting."

In article . com,
RichardFreytag wrote:

Bo Brunsgaard wrote:
wrote in message
roups.com...
btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

It's a Rutan Solitaire, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Self-launcher with an interesting engine installation concept. The
engine is placed in the fuselage in front of the pilot rather than in
the rear fuselage.

I seem to recall that one of them was built here in Denmark in the
late 1980's or early 90's, either from a kit or bottom-up from
drawings. I think it was sold out of the country a few years later.

Bo Brunsgaard

I communicated back in the late 1980s with a US gentleman that was
selling a Rutan Solitaire homebuilt you see in the picture (email
lost). He indicated some concern about his Rutan Solitaire being
tricky for an inexperienced pilot. Apparently the canard was designed
to stall first causing a nose pitch down - as you would expect. Except
that the transition could be abrupt and in the landing flare this would
put your nose abruptly in contact with the pavement.

Perhaps this thread will get forwarded to said owner and he'll fill in
the details.

Best,
Richard



--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Bo Brunsgaard wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

It's a Rutan Solitaire, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Self-launcher with an interesting engine installation concept. The
engine is placed in the fuselage in front of the pilot rather than in
the rear fuselage.

I seem to recall that one of them was built here in Denmark in the
late 1980's or early 90's, either from a kit or bottom-up from
drawings. I think it was sold out of the country a few years later.

Bo Brunsgaard

I communicated back in the late 1980s with a US gentleman that was
selling a Rutan Solitaire homebuilt you see in the picture (email
lost). He indicated some concern about his Rutan Solitaire being
tricky for an inexperienced pilot. Apparently the canard was designed
to stall first causing a nose pitch down - as you would expect. Except
that the transition could be abrupt and in the landing flare this would
put your nose abruptly in contact with the pavement.

Perhaps this thread will get forwarded to said owner and he'll fill in
the details.

Best,
Richard

"RichardFreytag" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bo Brunsgaard wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
btw that photo is he
http://soaring.aerobatics.ws/Soaring...84Mar_full.jpg

It's a Rutan Solitaire, unless I'm very much mistaken.

Self-launcher with an interesting engine installation concept. The
engine is placed in the fuselage in front of the pilot rather than in
the rear fuselage.

I seem to recall that one of them was built here in Denmark in the
late 1980's or early 90's, either from a kit or bottom-up from
drawings. I think it was sold out of the country a few years later.

Bo Brunsgaard

I communicated back in the late 1980s with a US gentleman that was
selling a Rutan Solitaire homebuilt you see in the picture (email
lost). He indicated some concern about his Rutan Solitaire being
tricky for an inexperienced pilot. Apparently the canard was designed
to stall first causing a nose pitch down - as you would expect. Except
that the transition could be abrupt and in the landing flare this would
put your nose abruptly in contact with the pavement.

Perhaps this thread will get forwarded to said owner and he'll fill in
the details.

Best,
Richard

Kind of defeats the purpose of having a canard. Perhaps it was built wrong.

Frank Whiteley

I'd like to know more about the glider on the March 1984 cover, and

Why, that's the Rutan Solitaire, of course, winner of SSA's homebuilt
motorglider design contest. I'm too lazy to dig up my hardcopy, but it's
likely astronaut Mike Melvill on board. Or perhaps NASA test pilots
Enevoldson and Meyer whose data argued that canards aren't ideal for
sailplanes.

Earlier, John H. Campbell wrote:

...winner of SSA's homebuilt motorglider design contest...

I believe that the event was actually sponsored by the SHA (Sailplane
Homebuilder's Association).

Thanks, and best regards

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com