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.

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.

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.

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

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

Dne pátek 9. Å™Ã*jna 2020Â*vÂ*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

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.

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.