[Ground Slammer]

I am too late to edit but the airfiol NACA-H-12 is actually NACA8-H-12.

[Bob Kuczewski]

... If you had done your home work you would not make such a foolish statement as the ones that indicate that you can't put a swept flying wing
PS-Larry Tudor "ain't" dead. Sorry if this seems hostile ...

One of the bad things I've seen on forums is the use of anonymous names when attacking or criticising others. We don't mind criticism, but it's not fair when it comes from an anonymous name. Forums get out of control when that's allowed. So if you don't mind, could you please let us all know your real name? Alternatively, with your permission, we could clean up some of the attacks in your post.

Also, I feel badly that your blog has been derailed, and I'm partially at fault. Your topic is worthy of a good discussion, and I'd like to help move it in that direction. A phone call might be helpful if you can find the time. Thanks.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I am too late to edit but the airfiol NACA-H-12 is actually NACA8-H-12.

No problem. I've made those corrections, but please check that I got it right.

If you need corrections like that after the 4 hour editing window, you can flag your post using the "Report" button. It will give you a window where you can describe the changes you want. You can also send me a Personal Message. You're also welcome to call me on the phone because I may go a day or two between visiting the forum.

I also cleaned up your language with two asterisks. We try to follow the traditional FCC guidelines (remember George Carlin's 7 words).

Our goal here is good honest and productive communication. The rules are designed to make that happen as best we can. It's always a work in progress, and suggestions are always welcome. Again, a phone call might be a good idea any time.

[Rick Masters]

Kinda reminds me of the Oz Report, which entered the Dark Ages of Hang Gliding forums.    

[Bob Kuczewski]

Kinda reminds me of the Oz Report, which entered the Dark Ages of Hang Gliding forums.    

We have been given lots of guidance by Oz and HG.org and USHPA ... on what NOT to do.

[Rick Masters]

I don't think all the reflex would be appropriate for a tailed glider.
-- By TjW - Sat May 13, 2017 10:29 pm
http://forum.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=35325

Please note that the airfoil that I am attempting is unreflexed- as I stated it is the Fledgling 2 B root section. Rick the Fledge2 root section is unreflexed- you shot this one off without doing your home work. If you had done your home work you would not make such a foolish statement as the ones that indicate that you can't put a swept flying wing reflexed airfoil in a tail dragger-that's just plain unqualified, ad lib, bulls**t and I'd like my readers to know it. - GS

I didn't say you couldn't do it.
I said you'd probably get lousy performance.

Well, you might want that 14:1 l/d but you probably won't get it using a flying wing airfoil on an unswept conventional wing.
Flying wings require more reflex and spanwise twist because they don't have a tail.
This screws up their l/d performance and there ain't no fix.
That's why there are no zero nada flying wings in sailplane competitions.- RM

[KaiMartin]

If you haven't already, I'd suggest a close look at the BirdGlider. http://birdglider.net/
This is the brain child of the creator of the website NestOfDragons.net .

The BirdGlider aims to hit a sweet spot somewhere between archeopteryx, swift and the goat.

• frame and parts made from aluminum rather than carbon to keep the cost down
• foot launch-able
• complete plans (1), assembly and even 3D model (2) available for free download from the website

---<)kaimartin(>---

(1): plans: http://www.birdglider.net/1371
(2): 3D model http://birdglider.net/news/3d-you-can-rotate-and-zoom-to-see-all-parts/ (requires a solidworks viewer)
(3): rendered video of the 3D model: https://youtu.be/W-YTXJ1fxvI

[Ground Slammer]

For those who read the Quickerus article, and those that have not, the Quickerus shows that with equal cord, span, taper, and twist it preforms equal to the IcarusV-but this is a moot point for my proposal. The 11 plus degrees of twist can be pulled way down now that the wing has a stabilizer-at this point it will exceed the performance of the parent wing. Also the stabilizer incidence can be reduced due to the contribution of the reflex- but this is a moot point for my proposal.---- So one can beat the performance of the parent wing.
Large aircraft that are so equipped will deflect their ailerons to negative settings after climb out-that is reflex the wing. This results in the aircraft speeding up while reducing fuel consumption. If the aircraft then reduces the stabilizer incidence it trims out with lower parasitic drag too. The negative flaps lowers the Coef.of lift and lowers the profile drag-the wing speeds up and cruses with less drag.
As I stated above this is a moot point for my proposal-this is because the B-6407-E is not a flying wing airfoil to begin with! The B-6704-E is a competition Nordic Glider airfoil. Nordic Gliders are very large R/C sailplanes-some with wing spans over 4 meters-larger than Hall Brocks little hang glider. Nordic gliders have a stabilizer and elevator in the normal rear placement. Steve Murry copied the B6704-E almost dead on for his Alpine. Murry put reflex only outboard on the Alpine. Klass Hill indicated that he was exposed to the B6704-E from flying Nordics and we also see that he may have modified it, but he copied Murray in using unreflexed sections in his root and midspan of the Fledge2. So I am placing a large model sailplane airfoil on a small ultralight sailplane. Two aircraft that operate with overlapping flight ranges.
I'm not building a BUG glider-I've already built a primary/secondary glider, a 1930's repro. As far as I know no one has yet to complete a Bird Glider or one ever flown. Maybe one has actually flown by now-it doesn't matter I'm not building a Bird Glider. I do welcome the inputs but-I'm building a Quicksilver---- Quick-Silver, the only hang glider that you can get replacements for most of the parts 45 years latter. I'm not going to have to build the whole tail group- just buy it! If I wanted a QS C I could buy the entire bird except the root tube! I think I might have to make two wires too.
When I convert to ultralight tow glider I don't want a unicycle, I don't want a taildragger, I don't want a drop cart ( I may play with that before I trike it though) I 'm going to need my wheels at the end of the flight, and my balloon tires, and my shocks (mountain bike springs and dampeners, very light) not to mention the steerable nose wheel and breaks. I don't want the latest just been put out stuff, I want 45 years of tested with 10's of thousands of units flying world wide with decades and decades of technical updates! I don't know what may be wrong with the other gliders but what was wrong with a Quicksilver has been found, and the corrective measures have been created, and tested, 10's of thousands of units worth! 4 changes to the HG phase of this project is enough-I want to leave Dave Cronk and Ronny Richards to do the rest of the work Bob Lovejoy started.
Rick Masters is right, a twisted reflexed wing is second best- that's why what I'm proposing is not a twisted reflexed wing-it's not a flying wing airfoil-it's a model sailplane airfoil, and it's a champ many times over-model sailplanes that are bigger than some hang gliders! I've looked at Eiffle, Eppler, USA, NACA and more and I didn't pull the [ B6704-E KH mod 1] out of a hat. Furthermore why is it that glider people think that each design MUST BE THE ABSOLUTE HIGHEST PERFORMANCE POSSIBLE or your work is held in contempt? If I wanted that I'd dope an Eiffle, yes the oldest of them all and still hard to beat-just like the B6704-E. So please, I have put a little time and thought into this, about 40 years on the QS Fledge 2 part and 55 years into glider design and building.
As for TJW---thank you for the full scale drawings and all your help on this project.
If any one has a connection to Dave Cronk please PM me if so.

PS- if you you wish to see an example of a modern B6704-E modified airfoil set up your double surface rogallo and say DUH! Ground Slammer

[KaiMartin]

I'm not building a Bird Glider.

I (deliberately) did not bluntly suggest you build a BirdGlider, but to look at it. Given the vast amount of research its inventor has but into existing glider constructions I'd expect the BirdGlider plans to contain some exemplary details. Think, the way ailerons are actuated, how the airfoil is supposed to keep its shape, the way fittings are done and stuff.

I do welcome the inputs but-I'm building a Quicksilver

Seems to me, it will be a Quicksilver with significant modifications. You hinted to change-up the trailing edge. How about ailerons? Do you intend to use ailerons at all? Some of the QuickSilvers out there seem to manage without:

Quick-Silver, the only hang glider that you can get replacements for most of the parts 45 years latter. I'm not going to have to build the whole tail group- just buy it!

Fair enough.

---<)kaimartin(>---

[Ground Slammer]

K-to be sure I have been looking at Bird and others and I hope it didn't seem I was not okay by your post. I been hit with so much Airchair and Bug that I think it doubles as a suppository I am short on time but add spoilerons to the craft you showed, and link the spoilerons to the swing seat-put the rudder on a standard foot pedals that also links to the front wheel as well as the rudder.
The spoilerons are a bit sluggish and work with dihedral (sp) but that craft you showed was subject to crosswind taxi rollover- so weight shift will be added to the spoileron roll input and I will dial down the dihedral- the main cause of this one problem with the QS Weight shift aka Quicksilver CM. The weight shift will also help if the craft tries to roll on taxi- plus weight shift works at zero airspeed, even negative airspeed.
No ailerons- this is to keep the AR high, and the wing clean, as it is a motor glider-- and dual deflection of the spoilerons for glide control and air breaks. A second actuator- two bicycle brake handles- spoilerons for the first 50% of the pull, then after 50% the wheel brakes start clamping. The lack of motor, hub, prop, ect will allow for the steering wheel, shocks, and brakes, with the rest of the savings I hope to put into fairings. The QS shown above is 150 pounds same as the ultralight glider limit. That QS has a 12HP so the 13HP electric may be enough in the final phase. More latter gota go.