JS3 chatter

On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 9:31:01 AM UTC-8, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Beautiful sailplane. Does anyone else think the forward fuselage, looks like it barrowed lines from the Schleicher series, ASW-24,27,28, ASG-29? The tapper looks different.

The JS1 fuselage is a near exact copy of the ASH26E. Close enough that I suspect they simply took a mold off of one. Imitation is flattery I guess.

Not sure why Schliecher did not copyright the design of the fuselage.

On Saturday, December 17, 2016 at 8:26:48 AM UTC-8, jfitch wrote:
On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 9:31:01 AM UTC-8, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Beautiful sailplane. Does anyone else think the forward fuselage, looks like it barrowed lines from the Schleicher series, ASW-24,27,28, ASG-29? The tapper looks different.

The JS1 fuselage is a near exact copy of the ASH26E. Close enough that I suspect they simply took a mold off of one. Imitation is flattery I guess.

The 26 and the JS3 fuselages are identical in overall shape but the 26 has deeper sides on the canopy cutout.

I always thought the 26 fuselage was a copy of the Ventus. Much better lines than the 27 & 29. We don't call them Schleicher spoilers. Who was copying whom?

The JS3 fuselage is NOT a 26 copy. Please.

On Sunday, 18 December 2016 10:47:31 UTC+2, Sean wrote:
The JS3 fuselage is NOT a 26 copy. Please.

After you notice new canopy shape, wing-fuselage junction and new tail, the fuselage plug shape is very close to old '26. I guess after designing structure and opening for JS1 jet option it's not realistic to really do much else.

I read SA aviation forum and it appears that JS3 has JS1 EVO wing that is cut 1,5 m from the root, thus 15m span from original 18m wing.

I have no doubt it can be great 15m glider for extremely good or even moderately good weather and surely it is beautiful, but I'm only seeing normal evolution of design instead of all-encompassing revolution. Probably most 3s will be flown with 18m span.

JS3 fuselage: leading edge forward is a blend from the ASW-17 and ASW-22; definitely influenced by Schleicher. Notice the '17 also had a higher shoulder position. https://www.flickr.com/photos/tibenham/6150202179

On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 4:11:36 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Thanks to J.Nieuwenhuize for posting this link Jonker's aerodynamicist Johan Bosman pictures of the JS3. http://www.imgrum.net/user/johanjbosman/697025039

As suggested, the Akaflieg München Mü31 article is also a good read. http://www.akaflieg.vo.tum.de/index.php/en/mue-31-en

Go around-come around...interesting how we're back to the AS Ka-6E shoulder wing. Can't wait to inspect how they did the automatic hook-ups. Really like the retractable tail wheel too. Congratulations Johan Bosman.

We'll see...pretty is as pretty does.

The 26 fueselage is considerably different than a Ventus. Place the two side by side and there is no doubt. Different shape, different cockpit, different canopy. Everything different. Place a 26 fuselage next to a JS1 and you cannot tell them apart. Even many of the details inside are the same. I'm not complaining about it, I doubt the 26 fuselage is legally protectable intellectual property. But the question was posed above.

On Sunday, 18 December 2016 17:46:45 UTC+1, jfitch wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 4:11:36 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Thanks to J.Nieuwenhuize for posting this link Jonker's aerodynamicist Johan Bosman pictures of the JS3. http://www.imgrum.net/user/johanjbosman/697025039

As suggested, the Akaflieg München Mü31 article is also a good read. http://www.akaflieg.vo.tum.de/index.php/en/mue-31-en

Go around-come around...interesting how we're back to the AS Ka-6E shoulder wing. Can't wait to inspect how they did the automatic hook-ups. Really like the retractable tail wheel too. Congratulations Johan Bosman.

We'll see...pretty is as pretty does.

The 26 fueselage is considerably different than a Ventus. Place the two side by side and there is no doubt. Different shape, different cockpit, different canopy. Everything different. Place a 26 fuselage next to a JS1 and you cannot tell them apart. Even many of the details inside are the same. I'm not complaining about it, I doubt the 26 fuselage is legally protectable intellectual property. But the question was posed above.




The aerodynamic shape of the JS1b/c is a 100% direct copy of the ASH26. They took an existing ASH26 fuselage, and made a negative mould of it.

The internals are different.

On Saturday, December 17, 2016 at 9:13:58 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Well here is a noise story. For ten years I lived at an airport, attached 800 sq.ft., condo to a 5,000 sqft hangar. This is an airport with airport people. My neighbor would always raise holly hell, when I did a compressor wash or any maintenance runs outside the hangar. Neighbor would come over and tell me to take it out to taxiway (not practical). It was a Turbine helicopter (the quietest one made). Haters are going to hate. Show up with a jet self launch and soon you will find out if your neighbors will accept, my guess is they will not. Turbofan are much quieter. This is why (among other reasons) early Lear Jets are not permitted at many airports (jet engine = noise)turbofan, much less noise.

*haters gonna hate* in the parlance of our times.