custom-vince Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Air Conception made a jump in the prop size. A Nitro XL. is exactly that. Same nitro engine but mounted to a 150cm propeller, using a 165cm frame. While it sounds huge its actually only 17.5cm wider each side, so not as drastic as it first sounds. Thrust is up from 73kg to 80kg, economy is down to 2lph and less, noise is down, torque is unaffected due to special 600gram prop. What do you think? Will it catch on? At first I was shocked but now I see it as a logical step, lots of benefits for what seems a little drawback of a larger frame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 I think it's too big for anyone other than giants personally. That cage is 8cm smaller than I am tall. Also wondering how much different it will be during a light wind forward launch and how much extra stress the lines will put on the cage. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 @weesplat Fancy a go on one of these? I recon your feet would not touch the ground. lolol SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cas_whitmore Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 Just got the tape measure out . That's arms stretched out finger tip to tip . Trying to picture a forward launch , have you tried one Vince . cas . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted November 14, 2016 Author Share Posted November 14, 2016 No, I haven't got one in yet. My synergy frame is 160cm and I didn't even notice it was bigger than 140cm AC frame till I measured it and put it side by side. As I said, my first thought was wow that's big, but I have come around to the idea. From shoulder straps down it would be about 92cm. The original test pilot is 1m65 tall and has no issues launching a 16m snake. His tests have managed below 2lph. I don't know what he weighs. I am 6'2" so well up for it. I'm pretty sure my next machine will have 150cm prop. Probably with electric start and a clutch. Im told forward launches are fine and don't see why they wouldn't be. Eric has one on order and am waiting his views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chrisg547 Posted November 26, 2016 Share Posted November 26, 2016 Any word on when the electric start with clutch is due out Vince? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted November 27, 2016 Author Share Posted November 27, 2016 A great video by Eric, shows the size of the XL. It interesting and funny to see it side by side the normal frame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted November 30, 2016 Author Share Posted November 30, 2016 Interesting conversation about fuel consumption vs weight. The XL machine is 1kg heavier, yet is uses about 1 litre per hour less. <subjectively, it will change from pilot to pilot etc.. All up fuelled for a 3 hours flight, the weight will tip the scales back the other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 need to see pic on small person"s back say 5/7.good for trike looks good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted January 9, 2017 Author Share Posted January 9, 2017 I would like to see a pic with a few machines though the ages lines up. From 90cm prop to 115cm to the 125cm then 150cm. That would be cool. XL is not something I need at all but the idea of flying with low rpm just ticking along is appealing. The large frame might be cumbersome or might be easy to live with, not in flight but for handling in and out of the shed etc. in flight it will all be behind me. The extra size actually makes it only 12cm longer behind my leg which should be fine as its a machine that sits high anyway plus im 6'2" I have seen a pic with a guy wearing it who is the same size as the cage. See if I can find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 On 1/9/2017 at 08:36, custom-vince said: XL is not something I need at all but the idea of flying with low rpm just ticking along is appealing. That's exactly what I get from my Moster engines in the Zenith and the Maverick with a normal cage. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 imagine knocking another 2000rpm off the level flight without go up in wing size. Fast, economical & quiet. It might catch on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 The engine would coke up. I worry about that already with the Moster when in a mellow low level flight 'the ones I like at the moment' I genuinely don't see a benefit to any normal pilot. Soz chap SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted January 17, 2017 Author Share Posted January 17, 2017 thats because the moster is running rich to keep it cool. The nitro runs well in the lower rpm, we have lighter and heavier pilots happily flying them. My on an XL is about the same as someone lighter on a 125cm prop. Still see if it catches on, it might, it might not. Credit to AC for leaping ahead with such a design which is a bit controversial / a little outside the box. Its interesting and helps move things forwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 To clarify, the Moster + has never actually coked up... I just worried about it happening because of it's low RPM during level flight, like I would with ANY 2 stroke engine that was not regularly hitting the power band. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hann__ Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 What rpms are you seeing in these level flight conditions, Simon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin (Simon W) Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 We don't have RPM readouts for the school machines, but I know that it's very very low for level flight. I just had another couple of flights today and it's just nuts how little work the engine has to do to keep me flying . Nowhere even close to the power band. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 (edited) Have some doubts about low fuel consumption looking at this table (not XL version), taken from the link below. Almost 9 litres per hour with 7900 rmp?! http://www.custom-air.co.uk/Custom_Air_Paramotors/Air_Conception_Nitro_200_Paramotor_Engine.html 4000 rpm = 2,25 l/h 5000 rpm = 2,66 l/h 5500 rpm = 3,27 l/h 6000 rpm = 4,80 l/h 7000 rpm = 6,74 l/h 7900 rpm = 8,57 l/h Edited January 20, 2017 by Ivan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 Yes, they are from my website, genuine accurate and honest figures from a 130cm peszke prop. Fuel consumption recorded on an engine under thrust loads. Other engine manufacturers claims are not fully loaded or they just quote rpm and consumption at 30kg thrust, 30 kg thrust is not always level flight, that assumes a certain wing size. 30kg thrust is at about 4000rpm, which puts it at 2.25lph, I don't have that data to hand though. I average 3.5-4lph on an average flight with 23m wing at 88kg pilot. I can get that down to 3lph just flying slow trims and keeping a constant height. My level flight is 5000rpm on 125cm prop Jumping to a 150cm prop will get me down on that to nearer 2 lph. Reports from other pilots range from 3 to 5.5lph depending on their weight and wing size. So although the high rpm shows high fuel consumption it is perfectly normal for a 190cc engine. If you think about the walbro carb, we are 1 turn out on low and 1 turn out on high, nicely balanced. Thats stock setting which I run, it can be tuned to 50min and 50min for economy. I then wonder what other engines are burning that run the carb 1+3/4 turns on high.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chrisg547 Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 I see the Titanium NXL E-start + Clutch is on your website now. Anymore news to add to this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom-vince Posted February 11, 2017 Author Share Posted February 11, 2017 (edited) Yes, a little surprise, but not to say yet. Edited February 13, 2017 by custom-vince Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.