A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FES climb rate question.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 7th 20, 11:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JM LN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default FES climb rate question.

Hi everybody.
I would like to know the opinion of a owner of a HPH Shark with FES.
Which is the true climb rate?.
Somebody has proven to use FES like a supplement tow mechanism?. I mean, how efficient is take a tow to 300 or 400 m and later start FES to climb at 900 or 1000 m.

Thank you very much.

Juan.
Ads
  #2  
Old October 8th 20, 10:56 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Peter F[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 56
Default FES climb rate question.

So you're spending 150k Euro on your glider then trying to save a few Euro
per launch on the tow?

The climb rate of a FES glider easily beats the traditional Turbos but do
you really want to use up the limited duration of the batteries in this
phase of the flight?

You'd be better off taking the higher tow & saving the FES for the retrieve
if needed.
Or take the lower tow & soar

PF

At 22:27 07 October 2020, JM LN wrote:
Hi everybody.
I would like to know the opinion of a owner of a HPH Shark with FES.
Which is the true climb rate?.
Somebody has proven to use FES like a supplement tow mechanism?. I mean,
how efficient is take a tow to 300 or 400 m and later start FES to climb

at
900 or 1000 m.

Thank you very much.

Juan.


  #3  
Old October 8th 20, 01:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Matthew Scutter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default FES climb rate question.

On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 12:00:07 PM UTC+2, Peter F wrote:
So you're spending 150k Euro on your glider then trying to save a few Euro
per launch on the tow?

The climb rate of a FES glider easily beats the traditional Turbos but do
you really want to use up the limited duration of the batteries in this
phase of the flight?

You'd be better off taking the higher tow & saving the FES for the retrieve
if needed.
Or take the lower tow & soar

PF
At 22:27 07 October 2020, JM LN wrote:
Hi everybody.
I would like to know the opinion of a owner of a HPH Shark with FES.
Which is the true climb rate?.
Somebody has proven to use FES like a supplement tow mechanism?. I mean,
how efficient is take a tow to 300 or 400 m and later start FES to climb

at
900 or 1000 m.

Thank you very much.

Juan.

You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.
  #4  
Old October 8th 20, 07:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JM LN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default FES climb rate question.

El jueves, 8 de octubre de 2020 a las 12:00:07 UTC+2, Peter F escribió:
So you're spending 150k Euro on your glider then trying to save a few Euro
per launch on the tow?

The climb rate of a FES glider easily beats the traditional Turbos but do
you really want to use up the limited duration of the batteries in this
phase of the flight?

You'd be better off taking the higher tow & saving the FES for the retrieve
if needed.
Or take the lower tow & soar

PF
At 22:27 07 October 2020, JM LN wrote:
Hi everybody.
I would like to know the opinion of a owner of a HPH Shark with FES.
Which is the true climb rate?.
Somebody has proven to use FES like a supplement tow mechanism?. I mean,
how efficient is take a tow to 300 or 400 m and later start FES to climb

at
900 or 1000 m.

Thank you very much.

Juan.

Thank you Peter.
The idea is not to take a tow and release early.
Now I have a turbo discus and all my tow are at 500 or 600 m, but if the day is weak and lose the fisrt thermal when I start the turbo at 300 m I usually can not climb. Whe this happen the zone near the aerodrome is dead even you find descendet air and usually the mountain works, but it is a litle far away. I was thinking in this kind of situation. If I will move to a FES glider I want to be sure it can climb at 2m/s, and you can travel to the mountain gaining height.
Regards.
  #5  
Old October 8th 20, 09:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default FES climb rate question.

You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.

On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less than 2m/s as it is a heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The maximum rate of climb is available only for a few minutes with fully charged battery packs. As battery voltage is reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower. The average rate of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off weight. Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere conditions depends on the type of sailplane, its weight and aerodynamic qualities. To achieve the maximum altitude gain, use about 15kW of power. Do not use full power as the efficiency of the system is lower. Usually, 80-85 km/h is best for the climb with positive flap setting (the same setting as used while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
•1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i.e. Silent 2 Electro
•1400 m (4500 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 400kg take-off weight (without water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
•1200 m (3900 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 450kg take-off weight (without water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES
  #6  
Old October 9th 20, 01:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default FES climb rate question.

On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:14:30 PM UTC-7, Mana wrote:
You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.


On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less than 2m/s as it is a heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The maximum rate of climb is available only for a few minutes with fully charged battery packs. As battery voltage is reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower. The average rate of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off weight. Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere conditions depends on the type of sailplane, its weight and aerodynamic qualities. To achieve the maximum altitude gain, use about 15kW of power. Do not use full power as the efficiency of the system is lower. Usually, 80-85 km/h is best for the climb with positive flap setting (the same setting as used while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
•1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i.e.. Silent 2 Electro
•1400 m (4500 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 400kg take-off weight (without water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
•1200 m (3900 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 450kg take-off weight (without water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES


Sounds like a very marginal self-launch system and is really just a decent self-retrieve (turbo) setup.

Tom
  #7  
Old October 12th 20, 09:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default FES climb rate question.

Dne pátek 9. ř*jna 2020*v*2:54:13 UTC+2 uživatel 2G napsal:
On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:14:30 PM UTC-7, Mana wrote:
You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.


On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less than 2m/s as it is a heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The maximum rate of climb is available only for a few minutes with fully charged battery packs. As battery voltage is reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower. The average rate of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off weight. Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere conditions depends on the type of sailplane, its weight and aerodynamic qualities. To achieve the maximum altitude gain, use about 15kW of power. Do not use full power as the efficiency of the system is lower. Usually, 80-85 km/h is best for the climb with positive flap setting (the same setting as used while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
•1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i..e. Silent 2 Electro
•1400 m (4500 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 400kg take-off weight (without water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
•1200 m (3900 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 450kg take-off weight (without water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES

Sounds like a very marginal self-launch system and is really just a decent self-retrieve (turbo) setup.

Tom

HI
stefan langer discus capabilities of Shark FES in some of his videos, I dont remenber exact number but you can try wach it.
https://www.youtube.com/user/SLSoaring

  #8  
Old October 12th 20, 03:46 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kinsell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default FES climb rate question.

On 10/8/20 6:54 PM, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:14:30 PM UTC-7, Mana wrote:
You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.


On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less than 2m/s as it is a heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The maximum rate of climb is available only for a few minutes with fully charged battery packs. As battery voltage is reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower. The average rate of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off weight. Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere conditions depends on the type of sailplane, its weight and aerodynamic qualities. To achieve the maximum altitude gain, use about 15kW of power. Do not use full power as the efficiency of the system is lower. Usually, 80-85 km/h is best for the climb with positive flap setting (the same setting as used while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
•1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i.e. Silent 2 Electro
•1400 m (4500 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 400kg take-off weight (without water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
•1200 m (3900 ft) for the 18m class sailplanes at 450kg take-off weight (without water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES


Sounds like a very marginal self-launch system and is really just a decent self-retrieve (turbo) setup.

Tom


These gliders are sustainers only.
  #9  
Old October 12th 20, 07:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kinsell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default FES climb rate question.

On 10/12/20 8:46 AM, kinsell wrote:
On 10/8/20 6:54 PM, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:14:30 PM UTC-7, Mana wrote:
You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow
to 400m and use the FES straight and level until you find a thermal.
It's much more efficient in level flight than climbing.

On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less
than 2m/s as it is a heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

*From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The* maximum rate* of climb* is* available* only* for* a* few
minutes* with* fully* charged battery packs. As battery voltage is
reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower. The average rate
of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off
weight. Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere
conditions depends on the type* of* sailplane,* its* weight* and
aerodynamic* qualities.* To achieve the maximum altitude* gain, use
about* 15kW* of* power. Do* not* use* full* power* as* the
efficiency* of* the system* is* lower. Usually, 80-85* km/h is* best
for the* climb with positive flap* setting (the same setting as used
while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
•1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i.e.
Silent 2 Electro
•1400* m (4500* ft)* for* the* 18m* class* sailplanes* at* 400kg
take-off weight* (without water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
•1200* m* (3900* ft) for* the* 18m* class* sailplanes* at* 450kg
take-off weight* (without water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa
FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES


Sounds like a very marginal self-launch system and is really just a
decent self-retrieve (turbo) setup.

Tom


These gliders are sustainers only.


Looks like the Silent 2 is rated for self-launch.
  #10  
Old October 12th 20, 08:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default FES climb rate question.

kinsell wrote on 10/12/2020 11:40 AM:
On 10/12/20 8:46 AM, kinsell wrote:
On 10/8/20 6:54 PM, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, October 8, 2020 at 1:14:30 PM UTC-7, Mana wrote:
You'll get at least 2m/s dry. But like PF says, better to take a tow to 400m and use the
FES straight and level until you find a thermal. It's much more efficient in level flight
than climbing.

On the Shark, based on a test flight I think that you will get less than 2m/s as it is a
heavier glider than Matthew's Diana 2 :-).

*From the FES manual:
5.3.4.1 Rate of climb
The* maximum rate* of climb* is* available* only* for* a* few minutes* with* fully* charged
battery packs. As battery voltage is reduced, the maximum achievable climb rate is lower.
The average rate of climb depends mostly on the type of sailplane and its take-off weight.
Maximum attainable altitude gain that in standard atmosphere conditions depends on the
type* of* sailplane,* its* weight* and aerodynamic* qualities.* To achieve the maximum
altitude* gain, use about* 15kW* of* power. Do* not* use* full* power* as* the efficiency
of* the system* is* lower. Usually, 80-85* km/h is* best for the* climb with positive flap
setting (the same setting as used while thermaling). Here are rough numbers:
1600 m (5200 ft) for UL sailplanes at 300kg take-off weight, i.e. Silent 2 Electro
1400* m (4500* ft)* for* the* 18m* class* sailplanes* at* 400kg take-off weight* (without
water ballast), i.e.LAK17A FES
1200* m* (3900* ft) for* the* 18m* class* sailplanes* at* 450kg take-off weight* (without
water ballast); LAK17B FES, Ventus 2cxa FES, Discus 2c FES, HPH 304ES

Sounds like a very marginal self-launch system and is really just a decent self-retrieve
(turbo) setup.

Tom


These gliders are sustainers only.


Looks like the Silent 2 is rated for self-launch.


As is the miniLak FES, also a 13.5M glider. It works well for them because they are lighter
than the 18M gliders.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Isn't Vx The Best Rate Of Climb? RandyL Piloting 18 September 28th 06 07:50 PM
figuring Rate of Climb Michael Horowitz Home Built 1 June 19th 05 03:16 AM
Newbie question on Rate of Climb Wright1902Glider Home Built 0 August 17th 04 03:48 PM
Rate of climb Dillon Pyron Home Built 3 May 8th 04 01:08 PM
Climb Rate for DG-600M Steve B Soaring 5 August 25th 03 08:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.