cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:45 pm Post subject: To Tom |
 |
|
Tom- I heard you did a great job with the area
that covers the area between the wheel pant and the
fuselage. can you explain how you did it? charles
--- Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Charles,
Actually I could believe the Allison Turboprop
could run off of unleaded car gas. I remember a guy
filling a Lear up with 100LL. They discovered the
error and cracked out the manuals and made the
determination that they could fly. Said that Lear
planned for a 100LL burning jet engine so that if
needed it could take on fuel where jet fuel wasn't
available. They were checking to see how long they
could wanted to run on that mixture though. Guess
it burns hot and sooty, reduced time to overhaul
engines. I believe that you are probably right
about the plane being stalled. I do know that the
company still exists though and just last year put
out a special aerobatics plane. Brian W.> Date:
Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:53:37 -0700> From:
cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Lightning-List:
RE: To Brian W. > To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com>
>
Dewey <cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com>> > Brian, I get the
feeling the Impulse Extreme might be> an abandoned
pipe-dream project that never got off the> ground. I
noticed in one of the links on their website> the
date of 2004- so it has been at least a few> years.
They claim the Allison 250 can run off of jet> fuel
or unleaded car gas- seems like an unusual> claim...
charles> > > --- Brian Whittingham
<dashvii(at)hotmail.com> wrote:> > > > > Charles,> > I
don't know any more about the Impulse than what> >
is posted. In over a year it doesn't look like the>
> site has changed other than adding a pic of their>
> Unlimited Aerobatic plane similar to an Extra on
the> > front page of the site. Brian W.> > > > >
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 22:32:22 -0700> From:> >
cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Lightning-List:>
> RE: To Brian W. // Tom Hoffman> To:> >
lightning-list(at)matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List>
> message posted by: Charles Dewey> >
<cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com>> > Brian- When will the> >
Impulse Extreme be available?> > Tom Hoffman- I> >
heard you did a great job with the area> that
covers> > the area between the wheel pant and the>
fuselage.> > can you explain how you did it?
charles> > Charles>> > --- Brian Whittingham
<dashvii(at)hotmail.com> wrote:>> > > > > > Charles,> >
Were you the one that asked> > about a turboprop> >
Lightning? Here's a vision of> > what one might
look> > like with a turboprop and> > tailwheel and
tip tanks. > >>> >>
http://www.capco-aviation.be/Impulse%20Gallery/IprobJet.jpg>>
|
| Quote: | > > It is a real aircraft, called the Capco Impulse>
>> > Xtreme. It is that! 220knot cruise speed or
270> >> > knot full throttle. 8,000 fpm climb rates
and a> >> > fuel burn of 15gph at 220 knots. The
stall speed is>> > > 54 knots and takeoff and
landing distances are> > about> > like the
Lightning. Look through these> > aircraft> > here:>
>> >
http://www.capco-aviation.be/Impulse%20Aircraft.htm>
> > > Scroll down and look at the Impulse Xcite. It>
> has> > what I imagine the new flared tips for the>
> future> > Lightnings might look like. It features
an> > IO-320> > and cruises at 190mph on what I
would> > think would be> > around 10 gph. > > > >
Personally> > I like that small turboprop. Looks
like> > an SF-260> > turboprop, such as here:> >> >>
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1003679&size=L>>
|
| Quote: | > > Which is in of itself a development of the
Falco.> > > > I would also say that for an aircraft
capable> > of> > 300mph the Xtreme is probably the
lowest fuel> > that> > you'll find. That Relentless
NXT of Kevin's> > is for> > sale now on ebay,
opening bid $250k. No> > takers yet.> > He is
burning around 30 gph at full> > tilt, and about> >
380mph! The Xcite also gives you> > an idea of what>
> it'd take to get a plane of> > roughly the same
size> > and shape up to those> > speeds. It has
about 300hp> > from a derated Allison> > turboprop.
100hp = 175 mph,> > 300 = 250mph. Also> > notice
that 3 times the power> > doesn't equal three> >
times the speed. The first> > 200mph come at a> >
pretty low power, but the next> > 50-70mph takes 3>
> times the power! 3 times the power,> > and also> >
notice, three times the fuel burn from 5gph> > -> >
15gph. Still, this is not bad, considering it's> >>
> about like a new Bonanza or Mooney. > > > > The> >
airplane that I was considering for modification> >>
> to a 250mph machine is this one:> >>> >>
http://www.millennium-aircraft.com/photogallery.php?id=1&img=images/multimedia/photo/1/DSC_9698T.jpg>>
|
| Quote: | > > I was looking for 250-260mph at full throttle>
>> > though. It's a beautiful little tandom seat> >>
> aerobatic airplane. It is not as wide as the> >> >
Lightning and about the same height cabin, so> >
should> > be reduction of frontal area. The wing is>
> a high> > speed design. The plane also features a>
> built in> > fire suppression system and BRS> >
equipped. It's> > capable of 190mph on a 100hp> >
Rotax. I think if you> > doubled the power, perhaps>
> a little more than double> > it'd do 250mph wide>
> open. The modified Jabiru> > engine, reportedly> >
capable of 200hp is from the> > "Snark" UAV and can>
> be read about here: > >>> >>
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ext.php?ref=http://www.gizmag.com.au/go/4785/1/>>
|
| Quote: | > > > > Brian W> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:00:58> >
-0700>> > From: cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RE:>>
> > RE: Flying Pencil> To:> >> >
lightning-list(at)matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List>>
> > message posted by: Charles Dewey> >> >
<cdewey6969(at)yahoo.com>> > Brian, Thanks for the> >>
> responses. That is a lot of> great material you>
>> > gave. With the hand out the window> example,
it> >> > seems like if you had a Jabiru 3300 on a>
plane> > that> > had half the height (vertical
dimension) of>> > the> > Lightning, was only a
one-seater (thus> > narrower),>> > and one would
virtually be laying> > down while> > flying;> it
would greatly increase> > your> > aerodynamics. It
would> truly be a flying> > pencil. It> > seems like
these> aerodynamic> > improvements would> > more
than make up for> the> > lack of engine brawn, and>
> be able to push the>> > plane to 250. It actually>
> sounds really> > comfortable> practically lying
down> > while flying-> > you would have to> fight
not to sleep.> > I know we> > had this discussion>
months back- and the> >> > conclusion rached back
then was> that you simply> >> > have to have more
horse power to> propel it once> > you> > reach a
certain speed, no matter> how> > aerodynamic> > the
plane is--- is that the case> > with> this> >
prototype I have in mind? Charles> ---> > Brian> >
Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> wrote:> >> > > >
>> > Charles,> > I do have an appreciation for> >
all things> > that go> > fast. I do know of maybe> >
aircraft that> > are single> > or dual seat
aircraft> > capable of that> > speed and easy> > on
the fuel,> > unfortunately they> > are one of a
kind> > aircraft.> > One of these is Cory> > Bird's
"Symmetry"> > which> > probably several people> >
have seen at Oskosh. > >> > Little yellow airplane.
If> > you haven't read the>> > > history of the
plane it is> > incredible! He spent> > a> > couple
of years alone> > making the wings as> > smooth as>
> posible. They> > weren't just smooth> > though,
there was> > virtually> > no distortion in> > the
wing, even the> > slightest> > ripple or ridge.> > >
> > > There's a couple of> > unfortunate problems> >
with what> > you asked about.> > First, even though>
> I'm certain the> > guy saw some> > real benefits
in> > airspeed from that> > kind of> > attention to>
> detail, most of us aren't that> >> > dedicated
and> > consider the time put into it versus>> > >
the> > reward and decide against it. I was writing
a>> > >> > paper a couple of years back that
compared and> >> >> > contrasted light sport
aircraft for training> >> >> > purposes and compared
them to 5 popular non-light>> > >> > sport aircraft.
I compared several performance>> > >> > variables
between all aircraft. Anyhow, long> > story>> > >
short one of those was comparing the> > engines,> >>
> specifically the fuel flow in gph per> >
horsepower. >> > > All the light sport were pretty>
> much identical,> >> > which I kind of expected.
The> > thing I didn't expect>> > > was the higher> >
horsepower engines and the> > aircraft> > not> >
limited to light sport speeds also> > had almost> >>
> the exact same ratio. What this tells> > me is
that>> > > you can only get so much power out of> >
a gallon> > of> > gas, no matter how fuel efficient
the> >> > engine is. > > So, that means we have to
compete on>> > > the level of> > superior
aerodynamics. > > > >> > What> > I learned with the
Arion project was just> > how> >> > important that
frontal area of an aircraft> > is. If> >> > you
notice the Lightning doesn't have> > an elevated> >>
> seat like in a Cessna 182, you> > basically sit on
the>> > > floor. It does have a> > reclined seat
back which> >> > gives even 6 foot 4> > guys the
ability to have> >> > headroom, but doesn't> >
vertically stretch out the> >> > cockpit. How much>
> speed do you think an additional>> > > 6 inches> >
across the top of the canopy would make?> > > >
Well> > it's not just the 6 inches vertical, but> >
the 40>> > > some odd inches horizontal. That's a
lot> > of> > square> > inch area that would add to
the> >> > airframe. Now if> > you've ever stuck your
hand out>> > > the window and held> > it out like a
wing and> > felt> > it glide on the breeze,> > then
turn it> > vertical> > against the win and felt the>
> force of> > resistence,> > then you're starting
to> > understand> > how just a> > little surface can
create a> > huge> > amount of drag.> > Another point
is that of> >> > having a high natural> > laminar
flow wing. Now I'm>> > > not talking about> >
minimizing Induced Drag here,> > that> > becomes
less> > important as you go faster,> > I'm talking>
> about the> > mixing of the air caused> > by having
the> > vortices> > come off of a wing at a> > point
further> > forward> > than a NLF wing. The NLF> >
wing can basically> > be> > considered sleeker> >
because it's not displacing> >> > air as far from> >
the
=== message truncated ===
|
__________________________________________________
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
