Different System for Sailplane Size and Mass.

Treating a lifting surface 3 dimensionally. Currently our systems for evaluating the loading of a profile is with just 2 dimensions and that tends to create a bit of mysticism resistive to expected performance and comprehension of profile capabilities. Wing loading, span loading is a bit crude in our modern times, and wing volume loading truly give a much better picture, along with comprehension of the employment of wider speed ranged profiles for their interinsic advantages. Taking two popular sailplanes of the past we come up with interesting extrapolations regarding performance. Lamon Payne's 95 ounce Legionair (typical loading) = 9.5 ounces/ft vs my 99 ounce Pierce Paragon that has volume equality for wind penetration of 20 mph force. Typical wing loading for the Paragon was 13 ounces per foot so original structure was stiffened with additional structure like wide sheeted D tube with laminated glass core carry-through couplers, and unilateral sparing (polypropylene reinforced tension spar). Basically, the old big P was carrying 2 lbs of Ballast (and that is why Cecil capitalized on the thinner Legionair profile; he was a free flight'er from the make it light school). Now this Paragon is competitive to the Legionair; and because of more alpha range, could still out-climb it. I went through my Eppler book, MTB 1/2, and tried to match up a similar Eppler section to this modified Paragon airfoil with a Phillips entry. The nearest I can come up with is either a E195 or E197. Both have good thermalling ability, wide drag buckets, and gentle stalling characteristics, but also have higher profile drag because of their greater thickness than the more common E193 or E205. My simpler approach was to increase the radius of a rounded leading edge to raise MCL. This paragraph demonstrates the attitude of not respecting loading as a needed component to extract the full performance capability out a profile; by the forced limitations that occur when limited to surface area, rather than wing volume. And then evaluate it without a properly apportioned universe. Take the old 6409 profile, and put it on a large high AR cross country machine with loading starting at 18 ounces per foot wing area. Yes, fuse would be bulkier for additional ballast, and if profile was fattened to 14% thick, the machine would move from large to huge (meaning 'motor' is to be increased)! So going back to the Big P loaded to 13 oz/ft., and we can see the evolutionary restriction of the 3 channel spoiler machine. Lamon Payne saw this upcoming problem, and added top and bottom spoilers to his Legionair - that worked quite well. Flaps worked better for spot landings i.e. for the new even higher performing machines; with profiles that were more effectively loaded (because lift quantum was reduced); however, thinner profiles reduced needed ballasting - thus sleeker fuse designs were adopted - to sate the artistic passion of modelers, primarily! Dave Thornburg integrated artistry with his Bird of Time in an effort to mix nostalgia with Cecil Haga philosophy; however the concept of simple to build wooden sailplanes became modified to - simpler to buy production copies of advanced technology, stimulated by the AMA's relaxation of builder of the model ruling. The concept of RC soaring completely changed with high torque 3 hp winches, that could fling a model to full size sailplane altitude, although technically in violation to rules and laws by placing models high enough to easily compete with full size (to the limit of vision) in order to make thermalling similar to sloping. [30 mph velocity with 1/3 the sink of full size, makes the tiny spiraling of the model (at the low velocity), climb like mad in the more violent air currents; to the glee of pilots that are unbelievers of a nude Dave Thornburg flying short launched Gls and HLs, while being more intimate with local meteorology to plan his flight program. HL today is still popular, but has also became more commercialized, and is truly a sport of athletes, and should be worked into the Olympics.

But unlike spear chucking and archery sports, that are based upon the 'art-form' of killing folks, I don't think it will ever catch on! Mike Bame was clever in making a thick profile for tremendous strength, so as to be able to toss a light structure into full size altitude with the modern winch. Unfortunately his desire for light was shooting himself in the foot; by reducing a needed natural mean camber-line; for lift reduction to gain performance. He would have been far better off to use a big fat fuse to carry pounds of ballast to load a 7% MCL. The extra inertia generated by the modern winch, and the wider speed range would have successfully made his compact (but large wing-volume machine) very effective (i.e. with simple top and bottom spoilers to campaign against the modern sleek full house designs). But with builders now becoming extinct, simple solutions are now barred by those that would prefer to buy an AVA, and soar by assistance of foreign labor. The scampering bubble that forms at low CL has made aerodynamic engineers cringe, and that is actually silly. Using Edwin Hubble's philosophy, it would yield a much different approach than what is popular. Looking at Herk's Soar Tech polars, one can see the wind tunnel effects on the employment of articulated flaps. Some of the popular profiles have improved L/D with +6 degrees of flap demonstrating compensation near the TE could be more effective than concentrating on profile convolution while maintaining a low MCL. Horrors; to soar with +n degree flap would mean more ballast? Hey; the skinny fuse will not allow this additional weight on the CG, so the concept is discarded. However in 1990 I discovered the Sugar Trip (turbulator at 75% wing chord) to solve my problem. To prove my point I demonstrated with a wing on my Oly III without turb doing a high speed pass; enjoying the roar from the model. Then, after installing the 40 mill turb and doing the same pass in silence, though a bit faster, proved the Dennis Oglesby wind tunnel report on drag reduction by bubble closure. Since I am a sport pilot, and not that competitive, my advice is treated as voodoo, and folks that try my cures rationalize they are superior, then misapply suggestions; only to attempt to force it their way. My approach to soaring was very different. Build my machines to fly efficiently, develop short launch concepts of simple competition to stay within FAA and AMA rules; and launch from soccer fields with a very portable histart. This meant light machines were needed. My Big P empty @ 7.5 ounces/ft would work well, and be very visible. My Last Chance (a Don Chancey inspiration) @ 7 ounce/ft empty was another fine low launcher. A rigid wing GL was another park flier that at 6.5 oz/ft was easier to work lift than the sophisticated discus launched machines. And I do mean launched by a skilled athlete; these little guys work best in the hands of an expert. Excluding the GL; my birds were stout enough to winch launch - loaded with ballast, and had surprisingly good performance for their more bulky appearance. In fact they had too much performance for spoiler applications. I am reminiscing above, imprisoned by my individuality (a Cherokee characteristic). Semi paralyzed legs, means I use a hybrid mobility scooter to get me about at competitive bicycle velocity. The one flying field that is in range, used to be locally popular, but is now barren due to SLNT's aversion of limited soaring - out of a small field. They just felt the ingenuity to make them work for larger machines was immature. I guess this makes me the last HOT AIR MASTER* *HAM was my last attempt to interface a future of extreme political pressure against an individual's right to soaring. Clubs can be politically controlled, however civil rights mean individual 'peer pressure' freedom, and that feeds ingenuity that is obviously despised in the modern corporate world! It breaks the taboo that if a problem exists, one is supposed to throw money at it! And if an association is large enough, it can break civil law! [Dale Carnegie, 1920] L' 'bl, Histarter, Al Sugar 8 8 2013