I finally did some definitive testing on the changes associated with flying with the pods. Up to now, my impression had been a seat of pants "can't tell the difference." I did it in early morning air and almost no wind, First 3 runs at WOT until the airspeed stabilized, then 3 stall series, each approached at the same gradual slow down and same engine RPM (3500 on the Rotax, almost idle!) then 3 landings. I did this with the pods off, and then with them on just a few minutes later. I used my GRT MINI digital ASI. In order to best illustrate the findings I broke the results down into percent of change.

0.0........That's right, exactly the same top speed, to the same half a mile per hour, and exactly the same stall speed. The difference on landing is there, but real slight, I seem to be able to hold it off a bit longer in the the three point, WITH the pods, even though the inflight stall series showed exactly the same, it just feels a tad more floaty when in ground effect and right at the nats ass before a full stall.

These are accurate tests, though I find it hard to believe myself and I sure wouldn't blame others if anyone wants to call BS, hey I'm just the test dummy and I report the facts as I find them.

The first carbon ones coming out of the mold.
[URL=http://s649.photobucket.com/user/simkot/media/PODS2%20010_zpsbt0dlnoo.jpg.html][/URL]

After researching the formula for finding the volume of a ellipsoid, I said screw that, and simply filled them with water. 32.5 gallons, (counting the nose cone)each. That's 7507 cubic inches, each

courierguy wrote: After researching the formula for finding the volume of a ellipsoid, I said screw that, and simply filled them with water. 32.5 gallons, (counting the nose cone)each. That's 5428 cubic inches, each

Nope. One gallon = 231 cubic inches. 32.5 gallons would be 7507.5 cubic inches or 4.34 cubic feet. Thanks Tom!

I hit the wrong button on the calculator Marcus, a long day! I edited my post to make it look like you're calling me out on .5 of a cubic inch, picky, picky Seriously, thanks for the correction.

That nose cone was counted, as I said, as it is real handy for smaller things you need to get at frequently. I need to pack more gear I guess as flying XC with loaded pods and a empty main baggage area is somewhat pointless, though the last few flights have been productive in showing the pod concept is viable. If I was on a multi week XC, the extra room would be very handy, or had a passenger who enjoys 6 hr legs in a small airplane, most don't.

Your tests are most likely valid. When you are trying to fly slow having more drag is not always a bad thing. With more drag you use more RPM that puts more air over the wing and tail = flying slower/better control. If having a low drag aircraft make it fly slower than next year everyone at Valdez would have wheel pants!!!
DENNY

6 hour legs? What about pee breaks, Depends I guess.

That's what the Gatorade bottle is for.

Bump for an R&D update?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Joel Milloway is in production of his pods, in between all his other projects. I noticed a pair about ready to go out the door a couple weeks ago when I stopped by. Super workmanship, he does it all himself. Like a lot of one man small operations, be ready to wait just a bit, I don't believe he is making them in advance and has them just sitting on a shelf, he is too busy with prior obligations.
:
[email protected]

Looks sweet.

Thinking a bit outside the box is what Joel does often. These things really can make a difference for us with the smaller planes. I still find it hard to believe the apparent loss of performance with them, and the super quick detach is nice too. Just pop them off and unload them later.