Author Topic: With motor-glider from Finland to South Africa  (Read 245 times)

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
I have flown a 109...
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2003, 03:27:52 AM »
... a Gröb 109A motor-glider! It was the second of four planes that I have owned. The plus points of a motor glider are: low cost (fuel consumption of about 10 litres per hour), maintenance is done on a Glider certificate of airworthiness - not the more expensive aircraft C of A). The disadvantages are the huge wingspan which makes some airport taxiways impassable, the low power output which makes for very slow climbs, and the fact that you will feel every ripple of turbulence. In France in the summer of 1988, I was bumming round in a MG. The low density of the air caused by the heat (30°+) made for very slow ascents, and a great tendency to overheat the engine. These are the reasons why I decided to add the Group A (landplanes) rating to my licence. I would imagine that flying down through Africa would have been a nightmare. IMO a MG would be entirely the wrong aircraft to use for such a trip.

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
With motor-glider from Finland to South Africa
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2003, 10:02:03 AM »
Background:
Those two guys were talking to each other what one could do with a glider like that.
Answer was "you could fly with it to the south africa".

More or less same same trip was done May 1932 by a Wäinö Bremer with a Junkers A50: From Helsinki to Capetown and back to Dessau, 30000km was flown within 232 flight hours.

More backgroud:
http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp?id=20010828IE17

Offline crowMAW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1179
Re: I have flown a 109...
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2003, 10:42:07 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
I would imagine that flying down through Africa would have been a nightmare. IMO a MG would be entirely the wrong aircraft to use for such a trip.

I think it depends on the motorglider.  I added my MG sign-off to my PPL-G in the Brazilian made Ximango with a liquid cooled Rotax 912A.  The prefered method for delivering one of these ships from the factory in Porto Alegre, Brazil (very southern end of the country) to the USA is a ferry flight of over 4000 miles!

http://www.ximangousa.com/who.html

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
With motor-glider from Finland to South Africa
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2003, 12:38:54 PM »
For an aircraft to be classed as a MG, the max enngine power is limited to something like 80-90hp. That is not much power when you need to make rapid climbs because you are surrounded by 10,000' mountains. Also in Africa, the hot conditions would reduce aircraft performance - climb rate could be half of what you might expect on ICAO standard day. And don't forget the overheating problem.

Offline crowMAW

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1179
With motor-glider from Finland to South Africa
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2003, 04:07:44 PM »
Hmm...the Stemme may not be a true motorglider by that definition since it has a 115hp engine.  Of course, different aviation authorities have different definitions of a motorglider.  In the US, the language is very vague.  If the aircraft's free flight does not principally depend on the engine and the pilot's intention is to soar, then the aircraft is considered a "self-launched glider".  Personally, I think that is a really lame definition, since I've seen video of a Pawnee tow-plane jump into a wave after glider release and shut the engine down!  Any airplane will soar with enough lift.

I think in the UK a glider is defined by the wing loading.  If the aircraft has an engine but is still below the wing loading limit then it is a motorglider.  Is that right?

But as far as flying a motorglider in mountainous regions, well, I would use the mountains to my advantage.  I mean this is still a sailplane and ridge lift or waves could likely be found to get the alt needed to pass.

Also, I hear you as far as density altitude, but I soar on very hot and humid days here in Florida in my Pilatus and I easily find thermals that can give me 300ft/min climb rates to cloud base.  I've never soared in Africa, but I'd imagine the conditions must be pretty similar to the southwestern US, which has some of the best soaring in the country.  The temp gradients from night to day produce some great thermals once the sun starts heating the ground.  The climb rate may suck until the motorglider can find a decent thermal, but after that who cares about the density altitude so long as mother nature is providing the climb rate.