Originally Posted by sneu

I have not weighed it yet--was more interested in flying. I will when I get a chance.

Larry and I started flying electric with planes that had just "enough" power. There is no doubt that you can make a clean efficient plane like the Aspire fly with low power setups. I got past that point along time back--I want "more power" in my planes these days F5B planes can climb to 800 feet in under 3 seconds

I see little advantage to a few ounces less weight in a plane the size of the Aspire in anything other than 7am still air flying. With any wind and lift the higher weight becomes a advantage.

Steve Neu

Fast climbs are great, but F5J will never match F5B or even come remotely close, so I'm coming to appreciate the advantages of minimising the wing loading. After all that reflects the F3J trends where bigger and lighter ships are the observed trend. Minimum sink is one thing but lower wing loading planes signal lift better, have smaller turning circles (very important at low heights with weak thermals) and land more accurately.

Despite that its interesting that at the last F3J WC held in very windy conditions Cody Remington came 3rd with an Egida which has 10-20% less wing area than explorers and maxas

At competitions the early round(s) will often be held in low wind and low lift it certainly helps minimum sink plane. In Australia any rounds held after lunch will often be in strong wind eg 6-8 metres second and probably strong lift (sink). To win the comp you have to do well in all those conditions. Its quite a challenge really and still not sure what the best approach is. One model or two. Certainly its no good having a model that penetrates the wind if the pilot cant work out where the lift is anyway (that's often my problem)

David,
In the conditions you have described a design with the attributes of the Aspire will do well. It is a clean airframe with great penetration, excellent handling, and it loves ballast. When it comes to competition one has to separate pilot skills and glider capability. Meaning a high performance glider design will always be capable, and will always perform better in a skilled pilots hands. The combination of a good glider, a pilot that has come with a good skillset, and the strategy and will to win is a tough combination. LJ

Originally Posted by roydor

By how strongly the model pitches up I decide if I can spiral down under power and then shut off the motor, gaining some F5J points, or throttle up to get more altitude if it’s too light an air.

Roy

Just to clarify a point -- Under F5J rules you will not gain any points by spiraling down under power.
Your launch height is defined by the highest altitude reached from launch until 10 seconds after motor shut off.
Spiraling down under power would not be advantageous.

Lenny

I understood the rules as Roy did.

The 10 seconds after shutting off is to prevent high speed zooming.

If you come lower with the motor running, within the allowed motor run time, your starting height is the lower height where you start your gliding. That height is measured when 10 seconds have elapsed after motor shut off.

Tommy

Originally Posted by davidleitch

At competitions the early round(s) will often be held in low wind and low lift it certainly helps minimum sink plane. In Australia any rounds held after lunch will often be in strong wind eg 6-8 metres second and probably strong lift (sink). To win the comp you have to do well in all those conditions. Its quite a challenge really and still not sure what the best approach is. One model or two. Certainly its no good having a model that penetrates the wind if the pilot cant work out where the lift is anyway (that's often my problem)

Given that vast majority of flights are flown other than zero lift still air it does not seem to make sense to me to optimize a design for the minority condition. The ability to search more area for lift beats a slight sink rate advantage nearly every time.

Steve Neu

Originally Posted by s2000

Steve, were you able to weigh it? I know Larry's ALES powered setup was designed for that event and was not high powered but certainly more than powerful enough for the event since they have a 30 second time to climb window, Larry was hitting max altitude around 18 to 20 seconds as I recall.

It weighs 79 oz.

Steve

Lenny is correct, the altitude used for the height penalty is the Highest altitude reached in the 40 second period, defined as the launch and 10 second after time period assuming the motor run is 30 seconds. LJ

That is great Steve,
At 79 ounces the Aspire still flys light and covers ground with the best. I am anxious to see your Aspire goooooo! LJ

Originally Posted by sneu

Given that vast majority of flights are flown other than zero lift still air it does not seem to make sense to me to optimize a design for the minority condition. The ability to search more area for lift beats a slight sink rate advantage nearly every time.

Steve Neu

I guess one could optimize for the minority condition (zero lift, early morning) and then ballast for the other 90% of flying conditions? Personally I prefer the way a heavier wing loading flies and dont understand this push towards uber lite 60oz 4 meter ships. My beat up supra is in the mid 70's and can handle the calm conditions well enough. In XC flying here on the west coast we all fly at the max allowed 5kg (11 lbs, 176 oz) and a 14-15oz wing loading seems to be about right which limits the size of the racers. Often we wish we could add even more wieght. And our XC planes aren't a whole lot bigger than the current crop of TD models. But XC flights can last hours over a wide variety of terrian and conditions, not minutes over limited flat field terrain. Perhaps we get away with this because in sink or zero lift we can cruise down the road for miles until conditions improve. And these heavy ships are quite capable of low saves at handlaunch hieghts, sometimes 3, 4 or more over the course of a 40 mile flight.

The whole topic of wing loading for the various flight tasks is complicated, but interesting.

Steve

ps: btw, Steve, for next years ALES season I am going to pack one of your 1506 2.5D 6.7 motors into a Nan Orion. RFM 17x13, 2200 4S 45-90C... not exactly a floater. Will it be the optimum ALES sailplane? No. Will it be fun? Hell yes.

Originally Posted by Larry Jolly

Lenny is correct, the altitude used for the height penalty is the Highest altitude reached in the 40 second period, defined as the launch and 10 second after time period assuming the motor run is 30 seconds. LJ

Just for clarification, it is 40 seconds IF you use the entire 30 second motor run. Otherwise, as you note, it is from launch until 10 seconds after the motor is shut off.

Happy Landings,

Don

Larry,

Now that you have some time on your E-spire, is there anything that you would do differently the next time around? Are there any changes that you would recommend for those of us waiting for the E-fuse?

Thanks,

Ron

Hey Ron,
If you build it exactly as I suggested,it is a very competitive machine. I recently flew the last ALES comp up at SVSS. Honestly the Aspire's perfomance left nothing to be desired. Mine is a little light at sub 68 ounces but I was able to move with standard reflex settings. I will set up a second model with a heavier wing and ballast tube. The firewall-fender washer is strong enough for competitive landings. In 5 landings I was able to post 4-50pointers and 1-40 pointer when I bounced off the metal center which looked like it was the tongue end of a seat belt. By the way on one flight I went horizontal for 12 seconds then when I saw the bounce went vertical for 15 when the Aspire reached 200 m...
If I am still building your fuse out get your components together..LJ

Larry,

Thanks for the good news. I plan on using the Tony-the-Tiger wing on the E-fuse. Unless gravity increases, I don't think weight will be a problems.

I will email you off list for shipping and other details.

Ron

I pick up my E-aspire fuselage today, long with the exact power plant Larry used! Can't wait to give it a go, next up is flying "Altitude Limited Electric Soaring" not the "ALES" thing, AKA eastern ALES.

Hi Guys,

I've got a question that I'm hoping this group can answer for me. Last winter I purchased an Aspire Disser and converted it to electric for ALES. I've flown it for an entire year now and have had great luck with it and really love the plane. I'm running a Hacker inrunner B40 w/gearbox and did not have to add any weight to get the correct 118 - 119 CG. The Disser floats wonderfully with this setup and still penetrates well in normal to med. wind conditions. With the inrunner I can run a 3S battery for normal conditions at around 600 watts, or put in a 4S and the B40 will crank out just over 1,000 watts if I need it.

My question is; What is the advantage to running an outrunner like the Hacker A20-6XL??? Am I missing something???

Any input would be welcome. Thanks,

Murph