poz Posted April 19, 2017 Share Posted April 19, 2017 For the past couple of years I have flown a Pap Thor 250 under a 27m Niviuk Link, clocking up a couple hundred hours. Here are the numbers: Cruise rpm: 4800. Consumption 2.8 lph Speed (trims out) 28mph Me: 85kg (bare arsed) Machine (44kg with 6 litres) However, I recently got a new wing, well the same wing but in a 23m version which in reality is considerably less fabric. Cruise rpm: 4500. Consumption 2.3 lph Speed (trims out) 31mph Me: 86kg (bare arsed) I've put on a kilo recently Machine (44kg with 6 litres) Smaller wing much easier to launch and land. Very surprised with these numbers, I guess it's about parasitic and induced drag. Not sure which is more responsible for the better performance, but I have a feeling I'm going to be enlightened Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-bone Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Have you flown any other wings? I'm about to buy my first and I'm looking at the 3 that seem most popular, Roadster, universal, link.. Anything to add to sway my decision? Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poz Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 Hi Tom. Out of those 3 I have only flown the Link. My previous wing was a Revo 2 which I flew for 5 years and didn't have any bad experience apart from a glide ratio which was slightly better than a breeze block. Not entirely a bad thing as it's easier to predict where you will land, and if you have a tight space in which to come down, is essential. The Link is basically a PG wing so therefore has the opposite problem in that it doesn't want to come down. In a tight space with a warm field it's presented problems for me more than once. Hope this helps. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_k Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Hi Dan, impressive new numbers. Is the new wing a recent/modern re-design? If so it follows the increase in efficiency of modern wings. All good stuff, glad you are still enjoying yourself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morgy Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Poz. There could be many reasons why your numbers may not make sense.. If it is the Exact same wing with no Design changes.. The only things i would say would be different flying on that day, climbing harder, or higher. A few 100 rpm over the hour will change your figure a fair bit Are these figures from one flight?or average over X hours.... Did you weight the fuel in and then run out or weigh out left over fuel? I have noticed that different days will return different Eco figures with the same wing. The 250 is great with atmospheric changes unlike some other engines/carbs and can be tuned lean way past where other engines would go POP due to the great cooling, Doing this you do risk long term bearing failure.. Your figure are around the same figures my Mac fly 250 customers are reporting Circa 3lph flying sub 20m wings. My Viper 3 22m was 2lph @ 115kg all up, My speedster2 24m is 2.3-2.4lph and my Viper 4 18m is 2.35... Flying Faster with more agility when i want to play, and as an added bonus beating my old four stroke eco figures for around an extra 5kg added weight but with about 30kg's more thrust.. win win!!! 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.