Guy Alcala wrote:

--cut--

"The Crusader's wing answered the problem of pilot visibility in a supersonic
a/c while keeping low canopy drag. Without the tilted wing, a carrier pilot
would be forced to sit higher in order to see flight decks and signal officers
due to the high AoA of a normal fixed wing, and attached fuselage, at landing
approach.

"Under the above conditions, a large canopy would be required for adequate
visibility.

CVA aerodynamicists found that the required canopy size would
increase drag at supersonic speed by some 35%, so another solution was
required.

Good God!...35% you say!, So it would seem that this following
statement could use some editing then?.

In other words Gord, the variable incidence
wasn't designed to give the F-8 "less drag
for high speed operation,"

--cut--


[skipping a bit] "Tilting the wing upward during landing maneuvers allowed a
relatively slow landing speed, yet kept the F-8's fuselage at an AoA of about
5.5 deg. rather than 12.5 deg. as required with its wing down."



Guy, can you expound on that a little? I can't see how the angle
of the fuselage (AoI?) has any effect on the 'landing speed'.

The only thing that the variable AoI mechanism does (essentially
- as far as I can see) is to tilt the fuselage to 5.5 deg vice
12.5. (I think the camber is changed as well - but that's a
different story)

I certainly agree with your other statements here...and thanks
for the research...interesting a/c.








OK Mike, tell me how that would occur. The wing doesn't care whether
the fuslage is aligned with it, is hanging down a bit from a hinge,
like an F-8, or is hanging underneath it by a flexible coupleing like
your trike. An F-8 will stall at the same EAS wing up or down, flap &
slat settings being the same. There's no extra lift. As far as the
wing is concerned, the Clmax, and the Angle of Attack required to get
it, is the same.

Now, if you're trying to say that, with a Crusader's wing up, it can
reach that Angle of Attack with a lower fuselage angle, than you are
in violent agreement with the rest of us.

Also, if you peddle back to that website that you posted depicting
a close-up of the Crusader's wing in the raised position, you will
clearly see how the raised portion of the wing assembly directly
above the fuselage is flat as a sheet of plywood and protrudes
right into the relative wind -- effectively functioning as a speed
brake.

Irrelevant as far as lift is concerned. And if they needed a Speed
Drake, they'd have designed the speed brake differently. (The F-8's
board was under the fuselage, much like an F-100's, and couldn't be
used for landing.)

snip

I suppose that the extra drag might come in handy to keep the engine revs
during the landing apporach a bit higher in lieu of usable speed brake(s) (the
J57 was certainly better in spool-up time than the preceding generation of jet
engines, but it wasn't all that quick). However, the wing was also up for cat
shots, and the extra drag would be counter-productive then. I suspect the
flat section had more to do with the center section being a fuel tank than any
other purpose. I have a vague memory that the reason for it was discussed
over on r.a.m.n. in the not too distant past by one or more of the former F-8
jocks there, so if anyone wishes to pursue the reason for it further, they may
wish to post a question there.

Guy

--

-Gord.