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
|
|||
|
|||
Vans RV-11
If you take a look at the Vans Aircraft website.
You will find the story and pictures of the RV-11. Looks cool. Scott. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Here is the link:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-11int.htm At 17:18 28 December 2003, Scott Correa wrote: If you take a look at the Vans Aircraft website. You will find the story and pictures of the RV-11. Looks cool. Scott. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:02:46 -0600, "Scott Correa"
wrote: If you take a look at the Vans Aircraft website. You will find the story and pictures of the RV-11. Looks cool. Scott. About a month ago I had the fortune to be able to discuss this project with the man himself. Looks interesting with some good ideas about reducing drag while the engine is not running. It is however a proof of concept vehicle not a kit prototype at this stage and is using the HP 18 wings. Mike Borgelt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Borgelt" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:02:46 -0600, "Scott Correa" About a month ago I had the fortune to be able to discuss this project with the man himself. Looks interesting with some good ideas about reducing drag while the engine is not running. It is however a proof of concept vehicle not a kit prototype at this stage and is using the HP 18 wings. Mike Borgelt I believe, that www.icon.fi/~jtki/3dimens.html could be a good point for a discussion how to use the HP 18 wings. George |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Correa wrote:
If you take a look at the Vans Aircraft website. You will find the story and pictures of the RV-11. Looks cool. I think it is an interesting idea, but if it is simply a grob 109 or an HP-18 self-launcher, I don't think there would be much market. On the other hand, a metal glider with a turbine self-launch would be interesting. Gliders are extremely elegant and clean. Turbines are also quite elegant and reliable, with the only drawback being fuel consumption. For self-launch gliders this is not very important, since only minutes of climb are needed anyway. The benefit is the simplicity. Those silly retract booms or the awkward gear and prop of a Grob 109 are inelegant. So how about a single turbine putting out 150# thrust? Burns maybe 25 gallons an hour? And a small size (8" by 8" by 12")? Boy it'd be nice if they were made of some material that cooled real fast (ceramics?) so it could be retracted quickly. I saw the twin 40# thrust glider jet. I'd rather have a single, more powerful turbine. Simpler, and I'd imagine cheaper. Throttle response should be no issue at all. When landing, if you want to do a go around, just land with full throttle and using spoilers to destroy lift. If you want to go around, close spoilers fully. If you're landed and stopped, throttle back the engine. I wonder about the glass vs. metal advantages with a turbine, however. Weight is a real issue (so a Sparrowhawk turbine would be nice) for acceleration for takeoff. But heat and structural fastening seem to be important too. And then the fuel weight vs. capability (runway length) issue seems important. Hmmm...I hope Van's builds a Proof of Concept turbine glider. I'd like to see an experienced designer pick up this ball and approach the idea of "personal jets" from a minimalist point of view... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The turboprop is also a lot more suitable for a pusher installation than any
recip. Have a look at www.icon.fi/~jtki/3dimens.html George "Kirk Stant" wrote in message om... (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:3fefb612$1@darkstar... So how about a single turbine putting out 150# thrust? Burns maybe 25 gallons an hour? And a small size (8" by 8" by 12")? Boy it'd be nice if they were made of some material that cooled real fast (ceramics?) so it could be retracted quickly. What would really be nice is a small turboprop - a lot more reliable than any recip, and much more efficient (and quieter) than a pure jet. Heavier, though, and you are back to the pylon, unless you put it on the tail; or in the nose - and there we are back to the RV-11 or Carat configuration. But a turboprop would allow a nice pointy nose, and with a feathering prop... Kirk |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Not a great idea. Turboprops cost, even in the cheapest incarnation several
hundred thousand $s and the lowest powered engines available are really big and heavy compared to what is needed. A warp drive proton engine would be suitable though. I don't like the idea of a touring motor glider. I don't see the point, they don't glide well enough to be much use as a glider except in exceptional conditions. "Kirk Stant" wrote in message om... (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:3fefb612$1@darkstar... So how about a single turbine putting out 150# thrust? Burns maybe 25 gallons an hour? And a small size (8" by 8" by 12")? Boy it'd be nice if they were made of some material that cooled real fast (ceramics?) so it could be retracted quickly. What would really be nice is a small turboprop - a lot more reliable than any recip, and much more efficient (and quieter) than a pure jet. Heavier, though, and you are back to the pylon, unless you put it on the tail; or in the nose - and there we are back to the RV-11 or Carat configuration. But a turboprop would allow a nice pointy nose, and with a feathering prop... Kirk |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
John Mason wrote:
Not a great idea. Turboprops cost, even in the cheapest incarnation several hundred thousand $s and the lowest powered engines available are really big and heavy compared to what is needed. A warp drive proton engine would be suitable though. I saw a web site with turboprop based on one of the large model airplane turbines, but can't find it now. It was attached to about a 50-60 inch propeller. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"John Mason" wrote in message ... I don't like the idea of a touring motor glider. I don't see the point, they don't glide well enough to be much use as a glider except in exceptional conditions. Hmmm, generalizations? The Stemme S10-VT tours quite nicely, thank you. It also handles adverse conditions, such as being able to taxi out in 30+ knot crosswinds with no wing walker, stuff that would keep most gliders in their trailers (I'm not recommending this BTW, but I watched 4 Stemmes do it at Cedar City, UT a couple of years back - - one being mine.). The point you failed to see is that it glides well too, with a claimed L/D of 50 to1 (but most owners find 47 is probably closer), no matter, it is still a capable glider even in relatively light conditions. Does okay in exceptional conditions as well (g). Okay, there are lessor performing touring MGs as well. Most do what they were designed to do and their owners enjoy them . . . *that's* the point. -- bumper ZZ (reverse all after @) "Dare to be different . . . circle in sink." |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vans RV-Light Sport Aircraft | Dale | Home Built | 6 | October 12th 04 12:28 AM |
Vans RV-G glider | Mark James Boyd | Soaring | 16 | November 6th 03 10:03 PM |
Van's C of G program | Ray Toews | Home Built | 5 | September 30th 03 01:20 PM |
bulding a kitplane maybe Van's RV9A --- a good idea ????? | Flightdeck | Home Built | 10 | September 9th 03 07:20 PM |
Vans RV4 or RV6 wanted | Joe | Home Built | 0 | August 17th 03 01:02 PM |