I don't think there would be much aerodynamic difference, but in the end, if it's more than you need, the larger tail section would just be adding weight. I think the tube would be fairly straight-forward to make, and basically the APEtzxerz (man I hate typing that freaking long name and having to look it up all the time so I can spell it!), hereafter known as the Arc, pretty much has the tail tube tied into the D-tube leading edge and the fairing around the pilot. I'm thinking that shouldn't be too difficult to do. And the nice thing about it is you can build the wing, and the sling/seat, and test fly it before you put on the fairing.


Sure the other gliders are faster, but I'm guaranteeing that an Arc/CD can catch the small stuff the bigger/faster ships blow right through with nary a bump. Additionally, the low wing loading means that the micro-lift ships ought to seriously out climb ANY standard sailplane.

--- On Sat, 3/17/12, KarlS <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote:


From: KarlS <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: [Carbondragonbuildersandpilots] Re: CDII -fuselage
To: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Date: Saturday, March 17, 2012, 10:25 AM



I uploaded a photo. Not sure how many of you have studied the ULF-1 but this profile looks awful eerie.

groups.yahoo.com/group/Carbondragonbuild...inal&start=1&dir=asc

Would more fuselage side area be better for thermals and could you reduce the size of the vertical?

In my discussions with one of the ULF-1 pilots it was said there is not a sailplane out there that could out climb the ULF-1 in a thermal.

One of the drawbacks was when you left the thermal. The slow speed hurt you. Everyone else would go buzzing by.

Karl