Thanks Kevin.

Other than the stall info, wing loading is pretty much the same as blade
loading in helicopters. I guess that is why the Blackhawk is so stable in
the rear. The tailrotor produces something like 10% of the total lifting
force for a given gross weight. That is a lot of lift for those little
paddles back there. But they are spinning quiet fast.

Fred

"Kevin Horton" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 02:59:51 +0000, Frederick Wilson wrote:

I was reading my EAA book and one of the articles spoke about wing
loading of the Glassair III. What is the significant of this? Does it
lessin the amount of turbulence you feel compared to an airplane of
equal size/weight with low wing loading?

Thanks,
Fred

Imagine that you have two aircraft that weigh the same, one with a high
wing loading, and one with a low wing loading, flying the same speed
through the same up-drafts and down-drafts. The angle of attack changes
instantly as the aircraft penetrates into the up-drafts and down-drafts.
Both aircraft are going the same speed, so the amount that the angle of
attack changes is the same. But, the aircraft that has a lower wing
loading will experience more g in the bumps, because the bigger wing will
have a larger change in the amount of lift developed due to that change in
angle of attack.

So, if everything else is the same, the aircraft with the higher wing
loading will have a smoother ride in turbulence. Now, if everything else
is the same, it will also have a higher stall speed, use up more runway
during take-off and landing, and be more likely to kill you if you have to
do a forced landing. Nothing in life is free.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/