Discover the sky in electriflying ways | Atos Wing by AIR 

Do that all the time in my Silent2 Electro.

The wing is actually a rigid hang glider wing, the fuselage is built around it.

What do you mean by "would have loved hang gliders but for their danger"? I flew hang gliders in the 80s and 90s. Back then a high performance flex wing was a pig to control in roll. Modern flex wings have come a long way since then and even some of the highest performing flex wings are quite roll responsive even in VG on mode. If you want roll controlled by moving surfaces you can just spend 3-4 times more and get an Atos VR rigid wing.

Игорь привет! Ролик просто шикарный! Хоть я и не фанат планёров, но что красиво то красиво.

@@deltaangar Это, да, коллега :) Я после Свифта стал фанатом мира малых скоростей. Свой кайф

Than you are better off with a real (electric motor-)glider like the Lak-17 FES: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vcPCLPyXOYE.html

Can you roll (barrel or axial) this powered glider with spoilerons?

Considering that your typical HG pilot isn't so familiar with adverse yaw and that this is single-pilot operation only, spoilerons are probably the smartest move. And while I cannot say "how" effective, they're certainly going to do a lot more for you in a spin if you try and roll against it, and at least not likely make the problem worse because you aren't leveling them like you need to with ailerons. They're also trying to meet a specific weight class of 120 kg empty. Ailerons require more structure and weight to accommodate the greater lift and twisting they provide: spoilerons simply reduce the lift and add a little bit of drag on one side. All in all, for being friendlier to 3-axis neophytes, for not having to completely reinvent their proven wing designs (increasing market access and reducing cost,) I think spoilerons are a good compromise for the little bit of effeciency loss and less authority that ailerons might have added. If that's what you desire, though, the Rupert Archaeopteryx is available... and the electric one will set you back $108K or more.😁

Really nice video

The video was shot in autumn 🍂 No thermals 🤷‍♂️

@@avigator Please pardon my insolence. It’s clearly noticeable it was not a prime T day. I get the same frustrating feeling when I which videos of costumes of there home built Sonex XENOS motorgliders ( gas power that is ) put- putting along under power on most of the flights! How’s a prospective costumer supposed to judge aircraft soaring performance when the engine is running. Many questions on your design adaptation on the Atos….. like is the wings center section still it’s original folding connection mechanism? Will Atos or anyone finally design the same basic wing with out the added complexity of the mechanical fold process??? I would be most fine with a plug in wing sail plane concept ! I also feel that it’s present control process and configuration is more suited to weight shift and rather see it adapted on an electric trike. Watching how delicate yours looked on the ground opperations made me cringe ;-)

my rough calculation of l/d using the min sink@60kph is 25:1, maybe better

@@licencetoswill aren't min sink speeds and the L/D speeds different? What is the formula that you are using?

glider pilots wear their "ballistic recovery systems" on their back :)

It does have a ballistic recovery system. Mandatory for UL

my rough calculation of l/d using the min sink@60kph is 25:1, maybe better

Press report from 2019 says 28:1

Can a classified ultralight have an enclosed cockpit!

25-1

unlikely!

I'd think this might be able to sneak in as a Part 103 without FAA certification. It's roughly 120KG, I'd imagine the electric motor is more for climb than speed. Part 103 means it's a 'vehicle' not an airplane, doesn't require a license to fly in USA. The only problem is it doesn't really look like the tube/wire/dacron noise machines that part 103 appears to target, so you might get ramp checked to verify you're flying within part 103.

@@sammarmon3965 @Clever Name Too fast for part 103. It should qualify as a powered fixed-wing glider under AC 27.17-2A

I don't know but I saw somebody say 30:1. Not sure about that.

@@montanalrl6622 my rough calculation of l/d using the min sink@60kph is 25:1, maybe better

it is a HG wing put on a glider fuselage

Not quite. Although they share a lot, they are not the same

@@airatos1019 I suppose total weight means stronger structure and changes at the root? But it would be amazing to have a 2 in 1 that works as a tandem HG wing.

@@ericoschmitt not really feasible, IMO

@@BlueMax333 Agreed. The take off and landing speed are too great for foot launch and landing with this set up even without the added weight of the motor and fuselage. I really do LOVE this iteration though! It's fantastic and I really wish that one day I can afford the place to take off and land with a proper hanger to house it. I am working on that now and I am not particular in the ultralight I get. However, I hope that it can soar as I love finding thermals and getting a free ride from them.

$1000000.00 :o)

@@lesp315 a million?! Seriously, I was thinking $100k maybe a little more, that’s ridiculous

Even 100k sounds like too much

Definitely under 100k

Nein. Die Flügen sind speziell an den Wing angepasst. Einer der vielen Gründe, ist die deutlich höhere Lastanforderung, welche der Flügel aushalten muss.

@@airatos1019 Durch das Leitwerk sollte der Flügel auch mit deutlich weniger Schränken auskommen, so dass sich die Leistung auch noch mal verbessern sollte, oder?

How much is the price?

@@deltaangar Local aircraft magazines quote it around 56.000€

A few posts earlier said 25:1

Yeah, that's from he music xd