Quintus Dumping Water

This morning Tilo Holinghaus sent me a nice thank-you note with this picture of the Quintus dumping. Looks like my new water-dump system is working ;-) Note 5 dumps per wing and two (three ?) dumps in the tail. Quintus is the successor to the Nimbus 4. Lange builds the 23-meter wing for the Quintus and Antares 23 (this wing is a stretched-span version of the wing of my Antares 20E). There should be 7 Quintus and 2 Antares 23 in the upcoming Uvalde world championships. Max L/D of 60 at 78 knots - should be adequate. -- Dave Nadler

  6 comments for “Quintus Dumping Water

  1. CrazySlovenian
    June 19, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    That looks nice!

  2. Gerard Robertson
    June 20, 2012 at 4:14 am

    From my aero engineer’s perspective, this is lovely. From the point of the sport, is this pricing the average pilot out of the market?

  3. June 20, 2012 at 7:33 am

    if by average pilot you mean a club member who flies a couple weekends a month in the summer, then yes. but that pilot has been priced out of the new glider market since ~ 1946

  4. andy
    June 20, 2012 at 11:37 am

    I think he means the pilot like myself, that is seriously into racing and cross country, but who makes 40,000 dollars a year. racing in the popular classes competitively is becoming more expensive whatever way you slice it. still is a pretty glider though, i love schempp-hirth, but if you ask me, 5 dumps from each wing is a little complicated K.I.S.S.

  5. June 20, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Well it can pretty easily be argued that the Open Class isn’t really one of the “popular” classes anyway. Sports (Club) Class, where it may be possible to race on a 40K/yr income, is much more popular.

  6. Lee Harrison
    June 22, 2012 at 11:20 am

    I assume the reason for the many dump valves is that the water is in segmented tanks along the wing, to control spanwise distribution of the mass. On these really long wings you don’t want the water (at partial fill) all “pooling” toward the center, as would inevitably happen if you had a wing with dihedral, and a single dump valve at the fuselage. Segmenting them also prevents spanwise transfer during “bad things” … like spins, big slips, etc.

    A competitive open class machine is far, far out of my personal budget … but it isn’t the dump valves that make them expensive.

    The problem of racing classes is well discussed by another post here at SC … and I don’t have a lot to add to that personally, except that I think the current handicap formulas are naive. I am saddened that the “world class” design has been a failure at generating a racing class, and wish I knew why. Part of the answer though is simple, particularly in the US: the PW-5 costs a LOT of money “for what you get” … particularly compared to a used Libelle 201. As a practical matter, the 201 sort-of “is” the reasonable one-design 15-meter glassbird … in the US at least.

    20 years ago there was a lot more enthusiasm for 1-26 class racing; that seems much diminished.

    The plain truth of the matter is that any new certificated sailplane design is very expensive; the economics of recovering the development, testing, certification and tooling push all such designs toward “the high end” because a low-cost sailplane would need to sell “insane” numbers to ever recover the development.

    The only way(s) around this are either to have such design(s) subsidized in some way “by the sport as a whole,” or to go to one-design classes which are experimental/homebuilt.

    The problem for two-seaters is even worse … a problem which is my particular rant … won’t repeat it.

Comments are closed.