Anybody have any good suggestions and experience of testing different wings in turbulent windy conditions.
Turbulance! what size Trike wing
Turbulance! what size Trike wing
I am trying to figure out what is the best size trike wing to use in turbulent conditions. As I understand it the higher the wing loading i.e. the smaller the wing the better it should handle turbulent conditions. However I have heard that there are other factors such as the smaller wings tend to be a bit twitchy and hence more difficult to keep straight.
Anybody have any good suggestions and experience of testing different wings in turbulent windy conditions.
Anybody have any good suggestions and experience of testing different wings in turbulent windy conditions.
Hawk & Cheetah
I am talking to myself...
I had a old Windlass with one of those big wings, eish!! big job flying those in bumps, I then flew a friends Aquilla with the 14 wing and that was great in turbulent conditions but the climb rate was a bit down. When time came for a new trike I test flew a Raptor with a 16 wing, that is great in turbulant conditions and has great climb rate 
If my 2c is worth anything I'd say that smaller wings are beter specialy if two up, like you said, wing loading
If my 2c is worth anything I'd say that smaller wings are beter specialy if two up, like you said, wing loading
Don't know, everyone said it was big so I take it as big, can't be much more than a 17. 1sm is not much, I know but the Raptor has a beter penatration and therefore will handle turbulance a bit beter. Windlass is a great trike and there is nothing wrong with it, please don't get me wrong, I'm only saying that in turbulance Raptor is more stable. I'm also refering to wing size and not a/craft type, I'm sure all 16 wings fly more or less the same and the same with 15's and 14's I just found the 16 ideal for my flying conditions. Hope that helps
-
ZU-ANE
Try Aerotrike's Wing 15.3 (it used to be called Spirit 15.3).
It's a realtively new wing (been out for about 3 years now).
It uses a lot of new ideas in wing design and is a great handling wing. Very good speed range, light in controls but very stable, slow stall and good penetration. Also very easy to rig.
It's a realtively new wing (been out for about 3 years now).
It uses a lot of new ideas in wing design and is a great handling wing. Very good speed range, light in controls but very stable, slow stall and good penetration. Also very easy to rig.
A lot depends on the design of the wing and wing loading in two seaters
ie one up or 2-- I had an aircration Racer with a 11 m2 wing very nice plane but my Blade with a 15 m2 wing was the most stable trike i ihave ever flown bar none- i have 17 trikes on my licence and stabilty in turbulance is one area where a Blade out performs the by far
ie one up or 2-- I had an aircration Racer with a 11 m2 wing very nice plane but my Blade with a 15 m2 wing was the most stable trike i ihave ever flown bar none- i have 17 trikes on my licence and stabilty in turbulance is one area where a Blade out performs the by far
Flying flying flying-- and a bit of gliding
STABLE WINGS
Unfortunately in my experiance with trike wings, nothing is for free. If you get a stable wing in turbulence, you have a wing heavy in the roll. I takes a lot to get it to bounce around and you also have to pull hard to bring it back. If you have a wing light in the roll, you will get trashed in turbulence.
Increase the wing loading is actually the only answer. But now you are flying faster. You need longer and better runways. This puts you and your trike into a whole new speed envelope. You will always be waiting for your mates. The Pegasus Quik 10 sq meter wing is superb, if this is what you want. It does not have bad stall problems. It just mushes and gently drops its nose if you try to stall it.
With this wing turbulence is no problem. But the question is, do you want to fly around at 80 to 100mph?
Increase the wing loading is actually the only answer. But now you are flying faster. You need longer and better runways. This puts you and your trike into a whole new speed envelope. You will always be waiting for your mates. The Pegasus Quik 10 sq meter wing is superb, if this is what you want. It does not have bad stall problems. It just mushes and gently drops its nose if you try to stall it.
With this wing turbulence is no problem. But the question is, do you want to fly around at 80 to 100mph?
P&M AVIATION SA. Quik GT450, Mainair and Pegasus Trikes
"Take Flight and Reach for the Sky"
"Take Flight and Reach for the Sky"
Here,s my theory!
I own two microlights.
1: 14.8 Wing, 503 "C" gearbox- Excellent to fly in any weather. Don't get me wrong, it can be very bumpy, but a beauty! :D
2" 18 Wing, 503 "B" gearbox- A real oldy! Heavy wing to fly, not very aerobatic, and in turbulent weather she will throw you around!
So, my preference definitely leans towards a smaller wing, lighter to fly, aerobatic!
I own two microlights.
1: 14.8 Wing, 503 "C" gearbox- Excellent to fly in any weather. Don't get me wrong, it can be very bumpy, but a beauty! :D
2" 18 Wing, 503 "B" gearbox- A real oldy! Heavy wing to fly, not very aerobatic, and in turbulent weather she will throw you around!
So, my preference definitely leans towards a smaller wing, lighter to fly, aerobatic!
Flying tha beast named "Wollie"
ZS-WGT
Springs 122.40
ZS-WGT
Springs 122.40
-
Fairy Flycatcher
- The sky is all mine
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:17 pm
- Location: In the sky or under the trees - Durban
I prefer the 14.8 Aeros Wing, to most wings I have flown before. So far I have only found the Little Air Creation Racer beats it.
We have a couple of guys who fly regularly in turbulence, and one with the old about 18m2 Windlass wing, he loves it, swears by it and flies more than any social pilot at the airfield.
What I find is that a lot of guys tend to fight the bar in turbulence, which makes for really horrrrible flying. Each wing size has its own way of flying in turbulence, but essentially, there is no use locking on the bar and keeping it there with brute force. Brute force is a guy thing, and I guess that is why woman make better pilots :D
Turbulence is only a real problem if the rotors over the berg are testing your flying wire snap-resistance (and making you try and decide which religion you want to stick or quickly convert to), or when you come in for landing.
With landing, each wing again seem to have its own good way of approaching in turbulence. I try to encourage myself to fly as much mid-day gusty windy conditions as possible, so I know that each wing has its own tricks of dealing with it. I found that the larger 16.8 wing you have to really bomb at the runway, and sort of drop through the turbulence into ground effect to manage, while the Aquilla I fly needs to be powered in at about 15-20 degrees, just not enough speed retention, The Racer means you have to be lightning quick on the inputs, but it is sooooo easy to do!
I agree that for turbulent flying the wing design has at least as much, if not more, to do with design vs size.
Lift is the other thing which seems to actually have more to do with design than size. Many people called our 16.2 the "high lift" wing, but the Cosmos (13.9?) outperformed it on the climb, time and time again. We even tried swapping props to see if the extra lift is extra thrust related, but still about 200'min difference! It seems that drag can cancel out some of the lift.
To me, the size issue is more with handling the wing in windy conditions on the ground. Especially taxiing cross-wind. Anything over 15 knots I seriously battle with in the 16.2, and literally had bruises from holding my 14.8 in SE 15-25 knots. I guess sometimes the brute force thing can come in handy
We have a couple of guys who fly regularly in turbulence, and one with the old about 18m2 Windlass wing, he loves it, swears by it and flies more than any social pilot at the airfield.
What I find is that a lot of guys tend to fight the bar in turbulence, which makes for really horrrrible flying. Each wing size has its own way of flying in turbulence, but essentially, there is no use locking on the bar and keeping it there with brute force. Brute force is a guy thing, and I guess that is why woman make better pilots :D
Turbulence is only a real problem if the rotors over the berg are testing your flying wire snap-resistance (and making you try and decide which religion you want to stick or quickly convert to), or when you come in for landing.
With landing, each wing again seem to have its own good way of approaching in turbulence. I try to encourage myself to fly as much mid-day gusty windy conditions as possible, so I know that each wing has its own tricks of dealing with it. I found that the larger 16.8 wing you have to really bomb at the runway, and sort of drop through the turbulence into ground effect to manage, while the Aquilla I fly needs to be powered in at about 15-20 degrees, just not enough speed retention, The Racer means you have to be lightning quick on the inputs, but it is sooooo easy to do!
I agree that for turbulent flying the wing design has at least as much, if not more, to do with design vs size.
Lift is the other thing which seems to actually have more to do with design than size. Many people called our 16.2 the "high lift" wing, but the Cosmos (13.9?) outperformed it on the climb, time and time again. We even tried swapping props to see if the extra lift is extra thrust related, but still about 200'min difference! It seems that drag can cancel out some of the lift.
To me, the size issue is more with handling the wing in windy conditions on the ground. Especially taxiing cross-wind. Anything over 15 knots I seriously battle with in the 16.2, and literally had bruises from holding my 14.8 in SE 15-25 knots. I guess sometimes the brute force thing can come in handy
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest