Home Contact Sitemap login Checkout
STOLSPEED Pty. Ltd.
 


STOLSPEED Pty. Ltd.
  • Home
  • Shop
  • Vortex Generators
    • Vortex Generators
    • Benefits Vortex Generators
    • How VGs Work
    • Design Stolspeed VGs
    • Flight testing
    • Slats vs VGs
  • Testimonials
    • Testimonials
    • Zenith 801
    • Zenith 750
    • Zenith CH 701
      • Zenith CH 701
      • Placing the Stolspeed VGs on the 701
      • Origin 701 design
      • Comparison 701/Savannah
    • Zenith 601
    • Techam P-96
    • Sport Cruiser
    • Sonex
    • Skyranger
    • Savannah
    • RV 6
    • Rans S7
    • Rans S6
    • Piper PA-22/20-180
    • Pazmany
    • Motorcycles
    • Long Eze
    • Lancair legacy
    • Lambada
    • Kolb
    • Kitfox
    • KIS4 Cruiser
    • Kelleher Lark JK-1A
    • Just Aircraft Superstol/Highlander
    • Jodel
    • Jabiru
    • Glasair Sportsman
    • Foxcon Terrier 200
    • A22 Batfox
    • Fisher Dakota Hawk
    • Cub
    • CTSW Flight Design
    • Bushcat / Cheetah
    • Bush Caddy
    • Breezer
    • Bearhawk
    • Belite Ultracub
    • BD-4
    • Avid Flyer
    • Allegro
    • Australian Lightwing
    • A22 Valor FoxBat
  • Installation
    • Installation
    • Positioning - wing
    • Placement - Horizontal Stabilizer
    • Positioning - vertical fin
  • Meet JG
  • FAQ
  • Contact
Home/Testimonials/Just Aircraft Superstol/Highlander Print This Page
Stolspeed VGs installed on Highlander / Superstol

Thanks for the VGs. They lowered my stall speed by 2 knots and dramatically improved the elevator and rudder in slow speed flight.

I ended up winning the OZ STOL 2021 with our SuperSTOL XL VH TWL, thanks to your VGs among other things.

Harry
NSW, Australia


Highlander

John, I wanted to finally get a testimony that you can use on your webpage. This is regarding the Just Highlander. Equipment includes 26 inch bush tires and no major modifications to the structure and design, in a tail wheel configuration, and 90 mm placement on the horizontal standard stabilizer undersurface. That was not changed during the testing. The engine is a 100 hp normally aspirated Rotax engine.

The testing was done before wing cuffs were applied to the leading edge of the wings, which helped to stabilize the stall into a very general falling leaf type of altitude loss, but not a sudden loss of control. The placement of your VGs was at 5 percent chord, placed at 60 mm repeat distances throughout the entire wing, including across the fuselage for what it is worth. I misread the instructions (60 mm spacing for the first 3 feet outboard wing and then 90 mm), which was meant to prevent adverse wing stall characteristics. More on that later.

The numbers that I achieved were without the wing cuffs. However, now I have added those, and they have done nothing but improve the handling characteristics, but not the speeds that I have noticed. Here are the results:


Original POH (No Vortex) With Vortex Generators
Vs 31 knots 21 knots with power


24 knots no power
Vso 28 knots 17 knots with power


31 knots no power
Vx 46 knots 49 knots
Vg 57 knots 44 knots

The figures that I have great confidence in are the stall speeds with power on and power off. That is where it made the most remarkable difference. It is such a drastic improvement, I wonder how good the POH figures were originally when the builder tested the aircraft.

However, the difference in handling and stability that I noticed, even before I actually went to the POH to find numbers recorded, was drastically improved. I do not have an explanation as to why I got better performance on the glide speed, nor can I explain that variability in the best climb numbers.

In summary, the STOLSPEED VGs turned this airplane into the most docile and easily handled STOL setup I have flown. There are notable inaccuracies in my data in that the cuffs slightly increase the chord length, which makes the placement greater than 5 percent. It is important to point out that in my power on stall, the attitude is so high I am basically hanging on the prop. So this requires the placement of the VGs to be more forward to hold the airflow on the wing.

It certainly did not hurt the overall performance at cruise, where I did not notice any difference. Am I going to change the placement on the inboard wing to 90 mm as you recommend on your webpage? I am really torn on that one. I do not know how I can improve the characteristics over what they are now. So for now, I am just leaving things the way they are.

John, I want to thank you again for all the help you have given me and the countless other aviators out there flying much safer and enjoying low and slow attitudes.

Blue skies and tail winds to you
David


Policies
Built on ShoutCMS