Peter Sripol is at it again...

[proppastie]

Well, sure, as long as they don’t work for VW.


BJC

well the difference might be they were fined, and there was a huge stink.....I have not heard that happening with some of the specifications the Chinese advertise, leastwise some of the posts or links that have ended up here. Someone posted that there are sanctions for false advertisement in Germany....

 

[Bille Floyd]

any idea of cost?....would trust the KW numbers of the German way before would trust the Chinese .......

Around 2070-euro , and it weighs 4.7Kg ; but that quote is 10 months old.
If i go electric, then that is the motor i'll get ; along with the 140cm
folding prop they make for that devise. Controller, and DIY batterys
can be had cheaper, (for my budget) but they won't be as well made
and i won't get that awesome interface they make. I already have
a charger that will work. Got to finish paying for my New, (used) Atos
glider , first .

Bille

 

[nickec]

When I first saw the structure connecting the fuselage to the wing, from a TLAR perspective, I thought it undersize.



Milholland has seven tubes which appear larger in diameter than Sripol's.

Sripol used nine tubes with three being very small - maybe even 3 rods, not tubes.

Another difference is load paths. Milholland avoids the compression Sripol sees in the short horizontal tubes above his head.

I definitely agree that he seems to be shooting for quick and dirty, and good enough to get a good video without injury.

 

[Protech Racing]

Peter load tested To 5 G . The tubes must be OK. The Proof is in the pudding.

 

[tr7v8]

Main issue with DC at these levels is burns, shorting out a battery pack of these sizes will produce a huge amount of amps. Yup a 100VDC will kill you, 50VDC will if you get it wrong.
The issue with lowering the voltage is if you halve the volts, you double the current. At these levels of power that means even bigger, heavier conductors which cost big £££££'s & also are very heavy. Higher currents mean bulky, heavy seriously expensive connectors as well.
From an efficiency point of view I'd be trying to raise the voltage as much as possible.

 

[Vigilant1]

Peter load tested To 5 G . The tubes must be OK. The Proof is in the pudding.

Did he do that in another video? In the OP video he:
1)Didn't load the wings to 5G
2) He specifically mentioned that he did it in a manner that didn't test the load path above the cabin and to the cabin.

 

[TFF]

I think industrial electric vehicles are limited to 72 volts for safety. I don’t know how the electric cars grid the batteries, or if the speed control can have multiple inputs that are added internally. The RC electric jets are the biggest voltage user with their setup.

 

[pictsidhe]

well the difference might be they were fined, and there was a huge stink.....I have not heard that happening with some of the specifications the Chinese advertise, leastwise some of the posts or links that have ended up here. Someone posted that there are sanctions for false advertisement in Germany....

The UK is pretty hot on truthfulness in adverts, as are other European countries. I was somewhat shocked at what is OK in the USA.
Briggs eventually got in some big trouble for its hp numbers. It took a few decades of extracting the urine by a huge company, though.

DC safety. A DC shock is completely different to AC. It will freeze you. A few hundred volts DC is getting very, very dangerous. You will not be able to let go. I've had a few people tell me they had to wait for gravity to intervene. In the UK, 48Vdc is deemed safe. I treat 100Vdc like 480Vac

 

[BBerson]

Did he do that in another video?

No, my comment from before was a bit confusing. He said he loaded "900 pounds so not quite 4g" and "all on the foam". So the 5g was my guess at what the foam only had held because the foam was under discussion at that time.

 

[BBerson]

Sripol used nine tubes with three being very small -

Sripol weight is about half of Milhollands design for the public.

 

[pictsidhe]

No, my comment from before was a bit confusing. He said he loaded "900 pounds so not quite 4g" and "all on the foam". So the 5g was my guess at what the foam only had held because the foam was under discussion at that time.

How light is Peter and plane?

 

[BBerson]

He said non-lifting weight was about 100 pounds and his weight about 150 pounds. (my guess 125)

 

[pictsidhe]

He said non-lifting weight was about 100 pounds and his weight about 150 pounds. (my guess 125)

Short slim people have a big advantage! But fair play, that's a very light airframe.

 

[Tiger Tim]

Marginal and near-useless aircraft...

My beloved E-2 takes exception to that. Okay, it’s not mine mine but I treat it just the same. Plenty of people have said that about it and sure nobody flies the thing in any kind of wind, or any serious heat or cold, or with much of a load, but you should see the journey log entries in the late 1930s! It was used like an airplane. The owner back then thought nothing of taking air a couple hundred miles away in whatever weather he had, or loading up his two buddies, fishing poles, and a case of beer to head up to the nursing college for the weekend. Yeah, mishaps happened like the time he landed in strong gusts and the plane was overturned while taxiing in, but that just shows that the little airplane got used.

To be clear, I’m not picking on you specifically VB. It’s just that your short quote really concisely sums up a larger trend. That’s what you get for being good with words, I guess.

Sometimes I worry that the reason general aviation is shrinking is because we’ve all become snobs; nothing is ever good enough so we live with the fantasy of how much better we wish it was. Meanwhile Peter defines his mission (low and slow, short lifespan, sized for himself only) then builds the thing, just to have our jealous selves say his plane sucks.

 

[nickec]

Just to make clear: I have no interest in saying Sripol's most recent craft sucks. It is what it is. It does seem to fit his mission.

 

[BJC]

Peter load tested To 5 G . The tubes must be OK. The Proof is in the pudding.

What is the negative g limit load? (i.e., will it withstand even minimal turbulence?)


BJC

 

[pictsidhe]

I don't see Peter's aircaft designs as particularly good, let alone ground breaking. But what he is doing a fantastic job of, is opening up people to the idea that they can build themselves a little plane and fly it. I'm glad he went to Oshkosh for the already addicted people to see what he is about.

 

[Victor Bravo]

My beloved E-2 takes exception to that. Okay, it’s not mine mine but I treat it just the same. Plenty of people have said that about it and sure nobody flies the thing in any kind of wind, or any serious heat or cold, or with much of a load, but you should see the journey log entries in the late 1930s! It was used like an airplane. The owner back then thought nothing of taking air a couple hundred miles away in whatever weather he had, or loading up his two buddies, fishing poles, and a case of beer to head up to the nursing college for the weekend. Yeah, mishaps happened like the time he landed in strong gusts and the plane was overturned while taxiing in, but that just shows that the little airplane got used.

To be clear, I’m not picking on you specifically VB. It’s just that your short quote really concisely sums up a larger trend. That’s what you get for being good with words, I guess.

Sometimes I worry that the reason general aviation is shrinking is because we’ve all become snobs; nothing is ever good enough so we live with the fantasy of how much better we wish it was. Meanwhile Peter defines his mission (low and slow, short lifespan, sized for himself only) then builds the thing, just to have our jealous selves say his plane sucks.

Oh go ahead and pick on me, I haven't been "the bad guy" on an internet forum in a while

When I said near-useless, my intention was to say that it was not built for a long service life and it was likely very weather-limited. And as pointed out, it may only be good for a light person like Peter. I believe it would be seen as a very minimal/marginal aircraft when compared to other minimalist airplanes like the Legal Eagle or Airbike.

 

[BJC]

I believe it would be seen as a very minimal/marginal aircraft when compared to other minimalist airplanes like the Legal Eagle or Airbike.

Yup, not even in the same category.


BJC

 

[TFF]

I think some of the drug is flying something new built by his own hand. He doesn’t care if it flies 1000 hours. He is not looking to be an airline pilot building time. He does have to worry about running out of ideas and risk to start implementing bad ones to keep it going. At some point you do have to build a masterpiece, not just build. I think too he does not want to spend on hangaring a plane with insurance. He doesn’t fly enough to throw that money at it.