UltraVision glider. Unrestricted views.

[Gonzalo Garcia-Atance]

Hi everyone, I'm the designer of the UltraVision glider, which features an unobstructed cockpit to maximize the flying experience. When I flew along the crest of my local hills, I missed the ability to see beneath me, something I could do while walking. I found that the cockpit view was more restricted than the 360-degree view while walking !!!, motivating me to create the Ultravision. Currently, it's still in the project phase.
You can see some pictures on my Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/gonzalo.garciaatance/posts/pfbid09nNGqxoeKQiaapA6N83pZLjdziMGzfEugvTqqtSHAkepLRfftEanShQyMSXPM2Sjl?mibextid=s1bc9R
The widespread use of electric sustainers has reduced the “performance anxiety” caused by the limited ability to fly in poor weather conditions or the possibility of not being able to return to the airfield. Eliminated the “performance anxiety” with electric sustainers/selflaunchers, it makes sense to design gliders to maximize the flying experience, hence the unobstructed cockpit design. All gliders till now have been designed to maximize performance given the wingspan and the intended selling price, I believe a change of paradigm will come.
I've submitted a scientific article for peer review in Technical Soaring (OSTIV) on April 17, 2023, which includes detailed performance calculations for 18m and 13.5m wingspans and three certification strategies (CS-22 / JAR-22). The peer review is being handled by a top glider designer of a top glider company. However, the peer review process may take some time, as it's conducted by voluntary experts in the field. It is fair to say that the article might be rejected, but let's keep our fingers crossed!
I can't share specific calculation details yet, as that's contingent on publication. However, for an 18m wingspan with flaps, the estimated maximum glide ratio ranges from a 46 to 50, depending on grade of fuselage development and optimization.
Feel free to comment on the project, share it, and provide any feedback you may have. I believe that in 20 years time, a significant portion of gliders will adopt my design philosophy. The choice ultimately depends on your personal preferences and your demands when buying a new glider. For me, if given the option to fly the UltraVision with a glide ratio of 46-50 or a high-performance glider with a 56 glide ratio on a Saturday at the local field, I would choose the UltraVision most of the times.
Gonzalo Garcia-Atance, Aeronautical Eng., PhD.
Lecturer in Engineering (Aircraft Design and Stability)

[2G]

If you want "unrestricted views" just bail out - no canopy or fuselage to restrict your view!

Tom 2G

[Bret Hess]

I think your philosophy could work for a lot of pilots if you did get 46-50 glide ratio. Did you use your methods to do a comparison calculation of the glide ratio of a glider with a traditional fuselage, same wings?

[Eric Greenwell]

On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 4:00:44 PM UTC-7, Bret Hess wrote:
> I think your philosophy could work for a lot of pilots if you did get 46-50 glide ratio. Did you use your methods to do a comparison calculation of the glide ratio of a glider with a traditional fuselage, same wings?

My concern is crash safety: it appears the pilot is much more vulnerable than in a conventional cockpit. A fence might be deadly, but even a soft, plowed field or a water landing might not go as a conventional cockpit.

[Mark628CA]

Did you use your methods to do a comparison calculation of the glide ratio of a glider with a traditional fuselage, same wings?

No need to. Just imagine a JS-1 with a fuselage like an overgrown 2-33. I bet you could get performance all the way up into the low 30s.

And I want to hear Alfred Spindelberger's comments when he is asked to build a Cobra trailer for this monstrosity.

[Eric Greenwell]

On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 12:15:00 PM UTC-7, Gonzalo Garcia-Atance wrote:

I suggest you build a Condor model for your glider that works well with VR goggles. That might give people the visual experience of flying the UltraVision glider. I think most of us have a hard time imagining what it might be like, and a Condor model would really help.

[Gonzalo Garcia-Atance]

Hi everyone, thanks for answering in this group ,I have received many valuable feedback from many sources such as this Google Groups, Facebook, Facebook Groups and Youtube. This will inform future developments of the sailplane . Here you have a link with high resolution images and orthogonal views of the Ultravision glider.
https://clok.uclan.ac.uk/49139/
Regards
Gonzalo

[Eric Greenwell]

The "Crash landing conventional vs UltraVision" image suggests the UltraVision provides more protection than a conventional glider, at least in the situation shown. A more realistic situation would show the conventional glider landing tail low (tail wheel as low as the main wheel), putting the cockpit higher, and many gliders (like my ASH26E) have landing gear that extends the wheel completely, so the cockpit is even farther from the ground.

A more serious situation is an impact angle that the causes the nose to contact the ground first (from a spin or stall, for example). It's not clear the UltraVision could offer the same protection as the conventional cockpit without significantly more structure and weight. Even worse, hitting a barbwire fence (or similar) would likely have a much worse outcome in the UltraVision.

An interesting design issue is making it possible to jettison the canopy during an inflight emergency exit.

[Bret Hess]

On a nose-first crash I think for a lot of impact angles the design could be better than conventional gliders. With the pilot and the "pilot pod" not in line with the wings and tail (with a big moment arm vs those parts), it seems more likely to get energy/momentum absorbed or deflected from the pilot by the pod separating from the wings and tail.

In any case conventional gliders are the shape they because of their purpose (racing or long distances). This design could have a different purpose.