![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Joa, I think there is enough data to say that VG's operate essentially as
you and your competitors claim - especially when used on the relatively poor airfoils found on GA aircraft. i.e. they do reduce stalling speeds. But, would that benefit a glider tug? I notice no claims that the climb speed at a typical towing speed of 70 knots is improved in any way. I would expect little improvement from VG's in the climb rate @ 70 knots. Just for your edification, a tow plane has some special requirements. For example, there is the need to get a heavily ballasted glider up to aileron control speed as quickly as possible. ( An open class glider may have more than 600 pounds of water in its wing tanks.) The 0-60 acceleration time is very important. VG's don't help here. Perhaps you are unaware that a fully ballasted glider will have a stalling speed significantly higher than a Pawnee's. A nightmare scenario is a tug that lifts off and starts to climb away at a speed near the stalling speed of the glider it's towing. VG's might make this situation much worse. I expect that a Pawnee would land slower if equipped with VG's but they land pretty slow as it is. Perhaps a slightly shorter landing roll might shorten the turn around time between tows but even here the landing roll is usually determined more by the need to clear the airport boundary fence with a 250 foot rope dragging behind. Perhaps there would be a small increase in the service life of tailwheels and main tires with lower touchdown speeds but again, few tuggies like to hang in the air waiting for the airspeed to dissipate and the weight to be transferred to the wheels on gusty afternoons. Now, the Pawnee isn't by any means a perfect tow plane. It probably consumes 80% of its horsepower pulling itself through the air leaving only 20% to tow the glider. However, I doubt VG's would help with that either. Now, if we were talking about a candidate tug whose only shortcoming was a high stall speed, adding VG's might make sense. PA-28 - 235's maybe? Bill Daniels "Land Shorter!" wrote in message m... Actually Dave, vortex generators are WELL proven. They have been since the 50s. That's why nearly every airliner and military aircraft in the US uses them. In the past VGs were considered a "band aid" and many aircraft designers were too proud to use them ("...*my* wing doesn't need them..."). This is starting to change as more and more aircraft companies are realizing the benefits of VGs. The other big reason VGs haven't taken off quicker has been the price. Most STCed versions run up to and over the $1000 mark and that's just too much for most folks to spend. They aren't for every aircraft. In fact most modern/clean sailplanes won't benefit from using them on your laminar wings (though zig-zag and dimple tape, a version of VGs, often works very well). But for non-laminar airfoils, especially for STOL aircraft that need to operate safely when low and slow (like your tugs), my vortex generators are just the ticket. In fact don't take my word for it... visit my site and check out the links to other companies making VGs. I've listed them in the "info" section. I think you'll find that VGs, as well as those of us that market them, are far from "flim flam". If you're still not convinced then go read a good aero design book (Hoerner's books, etc) or read the numerous NACA and NASA reports, or look at any of the wind tunnel studies done on VGs by major universities (Ohio State, etc). All of them say that VGs will do exactly what I say they will. Joa www.landshorter.com (David Bingham) wrote in message . com... Be real careful about unsubstantuated claims for much better performance. Show me an unbiased independent appraisal of the performance of an aircraft with and without these vortex generators that shows a measurable improvement. I bet you can't. There are so many flimflam products on the market that promise the world but deliver nothing. If there really is an improvement why haven't the manufacturers of aircraft ALL been using them? What's one of the timeless truths concerning life? Buyer beware! There is always a sheep to be sheared. Dave |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Home Built | 3 | May 14th 04 11:55 AM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | May 11th 04 10:43 PM |
Here's the Recompiled List of 82 Aircraft Accessible Aviation Museums! | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 18 | January 20th 04 04:02 PM |
Compiled List of Aircraft-Accessible Aviation Museums | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 23 | January 17th 04 10:07 AM |