Europa could do some real performance testing of the glider wings. They
should get some glider folks to do the testing in FL.
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of William McClellan
Subject: Re: Mini U2
Dave, thanks for the explanation. I still wonder what the real glide
performance will be of the long wing. Europa gives stats of a 17 to 1 L/D
which apparently is not correct from private tests as recently posted in
previous messages. Does anyone have information on this?
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: <DJA727@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Mini U2
> In a message dated 9/24/2002 9:52:34 AM Pacific Standard Time,
wilmac@gte.net
> writes:
>
>
> > Does the Mini U2 refer to the long wings and is that what you are
building.
> > I am curious for your thoughts on building the long wing version (if you
> > are) and using it as a motor glider. I own a Standard class glider and
> > haven't seen much of the Europa glider stats (other than the 27 to 1
glide
> > ratio) but if the intent is to soar, there are many hinderances and
> > compromises, i.e., the big ol' prop sticking out there and the
maneuvering
> > of those long wings on the ground in tight places. I certainly enjoy
> > soaring and would like to hear positives of the long wings. I believe
that
> > high altitude flight would be augmented with the long wings assuming a
> > turbo'ed engine. I have seen some recent postings regarding the L/D of
the
> > Europa not really being the 17 to 1 suggested in the Europa stats. How
do
> > you see all this.
> >
>
> I have a lot of flight experience and am currently in an FAA medical
fiasco.
> That is the primary reason to build the glider version, as in the US it is
> legal to fly without a medical. Having said that, I also have been spoiled
by
> flying multi engine airplanes and high performance multi engine airplanes
as
> well. I live in the area of the country where soaring conditions are
> excellent (Minden, Nevada) and it also has a lot of high terrain. I am
> looking at this airplane as having 2 "power" sources. One is the turbo 914
> engine and the other is the high aspect ratio wing. In this airplane,
should
> the engine fail, you have more options for forced landings due to the
glide
> ratio. It also has low stalling speeds and a gear configuration that is
> better for off field landings (mono). IT is slower and significantly
slower
> in indicated maximum speed (127 knots vs 165 knots). Where this airplane
will
> be in its element will be flying at high altitudes - and I am speaking of
the
> range of 15 to 18,000 feet. At those altitudes with the turbo engine, the
> airplane will have very respectable cruise true airspeed. The high aspect
> ratio will enable it to climb well to those altitudes. With the 914
engine, I
> suspect it could make it into the 30 to 40,000 foot range if the O2 and
ATC
> constraints weren't there.
>
> An example of a flight I plan to make in this airplane -- one that I have
> made numerous times in my twin comanche - is from Minden airport to
Livermore
> in the bay area. That is about a one hour flight in the PA30 and should be
> about 10 minutes longer in the Mini U2. What I will do for safety sake
will
> be to fly the flight at high altitudes of about 14 to 15000 feet at least.
At
> these altitudes, even over the rough terrain over the Sierras, an engine
> failure should result in a landing at an airport and not in a rock meadow
in
> the high Sierras. If the airplane were a short wing version, that prospect
of
> landing in the mountains is not one I relish.
>
> The airplane has a fealthering prop - airmaster - which will help the
drag. I
> have seen a Grob 109 out here soaring over the mountains with similar
> performance as the Europa should have. I also intend to do a clean up
> operation on the design and am considering things like severe cowl flaps
to
> block the cooling air when the engine is shut down, retracting the
outriggers
> - or making them very short - and other ideas to reduce the drag of the
> airplane.
>
> I know it is more than possible to land the sort wing airplane dead stick
> into an airport, but the Mini U2 will make that easier and more plentiful.
If
> you assume a 27 to one glide ratio and a cruise altitude of 14,500 feet
over
> the Sierras west of here, the airplane can glide in the theoretical still
air
> 43 nautical miles back to the 4700 elevation of Minden airport. That is
more
> than enough distance to return to the field -- or make it to the next
> airfield on the West side of the Sierras. On days where there is lift,
this
> can obviously be even better.
>
> I am in glider training right now and going for my rating on Friday. I can
> see by flying those airplanes how the glide ratio will be a good thing.
>
> After all that, I may still go out and build the short wings and throw
> caution to the wind -- what the heck!
>
>
> Dave
|