The term 'flying wing' is newspaper bafflegab. All wings fly even if they
are attached to an aircraft that has a tail. I once read that Jack Northrop
was appalled by the term but accepted it when the newspapers wrote favorable
articles about his designs.

Aerodynamic texts seem to use the term 'tailless aircraft' to describe any
aircraft whose elevator function is integrated into the wing. This is
distinct from the fin and rudder which can be retained as in the ME-163. If
the aircraft is small and uses a high aspect ratio wing, it needs some sort
of fuselage or nacelle to contain the pilot as in the case of Jim Marske's
gliders.

Northrop and the Hortons dreamed of eliminating everything but the wing
itself. Their designs would probably have been better if they had made a
concession and used winglets.

Bill Daniels

"BernadetteTS" wrote in message
...
What is the difference between a flying wing and a tailless airplane? Is
there a difference? Just wondering after reading the post about the
monarch glider a few weeks ago. Where would an ME-163 be classified.
Does an F-106 or B-58 delta wing count as a tailless airplane?

Thanks
Bernadette