Jump to content

Wings and power consumption


Recommended Posts

I have a plan.

I currently have here or for the use of....

a 23 Paramania Fusion

a 26 Paramania Fusion

a 26 Paramania Revolution

a 28 Paramania Revolution

a 27 Dudek Reaction

a 29 Dudek synth

a 29 Dudek Nucleon

According to the manufactures I fit in to the weight range of all of them so......

My plan,

Run my motor dry, Get a 1L jug, and fly each wing with the trimmers set to take off until it dies. I can do this in a span of 3 hours with help on the ground and I think it will be useful info for people who are XC mad.

It would be a good test because it will be the same motor, same pilot, same weather window, same petrol, and so on.....

Its not so much the actual number we are worried about, as the compact is not the best option for 'consumption' its more the leader board and the variation at the end.

Happy to have someone independent to record the results if it ads value to the test.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great idea.

I for one would love to have this info.

I wish we could carry out more up to date comparison tests.

It's times like this where I miss being in the UK 'cause I'd love to help out on something like this.

D'you fancy bringing it all over to Marbella and doing it over here 8):wink:

Good man for stepping forward :D



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest a standard setting for all tests as variation in consumption for climbing is huge.

That is, standardize your flying to be incredibly boring for those three hours, or whatever is required - and try to minimize influence from thermal climbing or sink. No min sink, no brake inputs aside from weight shift (pick a bank angle not to exceed) - lazy weight shift offset torque steer circles @ 300m are what I'm seeing as most manageable.

Something like:

1: Takeoff, full throttle to 1k

2: set straight and level cruise power

3: yawn and stretch whilst go juice, goes.

4: On engine out glide for spot landing

5: brake inputs only for flare

This is a great idea and Kudos for suggesting it, but without minimizing influences via input (and subsequent need to climb or descend) the variation across a single litre would be too high to offer an accurate wing winner?

I'm just raising the consumption variation flag and hope economy minded folk can offer their take on this to make it worth doing with trusted results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After this weekend I bet the '29 Dudek synth' drinks the most...

Herein lies the problem. The Synth wing section is optimised for the lower end of the speed range where it is alctually resonably efficient for a reflex. It is when it is pushed to full fast that it loses economy slightly quicker than the other typical reflex wings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Probably need to ensure nil thermal activity for this test for the results to hold credibility. Is yours set up to use every drop of fuel in the tank. Might pay to use a comp bottle if not.

Good luck. I eagerly await the results. Try to plot the wings speeds too if poss so we can see mpg's aswell as litres per hour.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gets quite strategic if you're flying as far as you can in a day. Good efficient wing (even if slower) with a well set up Simmo or something else efficient and geared correctly, will probably achieve the highest mileage. Look for less than 3 litres an hour burn rate at more than 25 mph. Might seem slow to many but if you fly low enough they can see you waving when they've landed to refuel. One or 2 extra refueling stops will eat away any speed advantage. Think of formula 1 racing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A wing's polar (flight curve) changes with loading so that can affect it's efficiency for a single trimmer setting.

A machine's combination of motor and redrive and prop is also not fixed in that it will offer different amounts of thrust based on the dynamic speed simply due to propeller efficiency.

That is: If you adjust your trimmers a "little bit" faster, you may well push your forward speed to a spot where your prop becomes more efficient thus increasing economy. I know that was the original goal to your question, but the accurate answer is - It depends.

A friend recently told me that in looking for his sweet spot for economy, he discovered there were two spots that gave him straight and level flight at different speeds. One was 'x' trimmer setting, and the second was full fast with 'x' amount of bar for the same engine rpm. It should be noted he was flying dual props in an X configuration and they were wide blades.

With the infinite variation in trimmer settings, it should be no shock that there are several ways to do things.

Hanging your feet below your seat versus straight forward using a foot strap will also add drag and kill economy, but it too has it's place. All variables among those not mentioned here.

Simon has proposed one liter burn would suffice to see variation in airtime / distance across wings.

Standardizing the pilot and motor are a great first step.

Dave's comp bottle suggestion might help in priming between flights too Simon, land - unclip, refuel, clip in and be off with a warm engine for each run. Another variable removed.

Trying not to derail the thread here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Truth be told,

On flyable days I am not getting the chance to fly myself for even an hour at the moment. I am busy with the training site of life.

Maybe the next fly-in?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Create New...