High or low wing?

"David Megginson" wrote in message
. rogers.com...
tony wrote:

Draining fuel from a highwinged airplane is easy to do, visually
checking fuel
levels is easier in a low winged one.

High-wing pilots have permanent dents in their foreheads; low-wing pilots
have permanent mud and grease stains on their knees.


You can always spot a Cessna pilot by the row of diamond shaped scars on his
forehead.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:KCpnc.11372$536.2196107@attbi_s03...
Ever heard of the McDonnell F-15?

Neither the F-15 nor the F-14 are "high wing" aircraft.

Most of the fuselage, and all of the cockpit, are above the wing.

Almost none of the fuselage is above the wing.

I wonder, for equal performance, if low winged airplanes aren't a bit more
efficient? My Mooney (an M20J) is really clean, I file for 150 kts (and get it)
while burning less than 9 gph at reasonable altitudes, and I don't know of a
high winded airplane that does that.

As for crosswind landings, the ground effect in a low winged airplane is much
more pronounced, I'm not sure they are easier in general to land. Its stalling
speed really increases dramatically from 5 feet AGL to 6 inches AGL. Of course,
touching down on the upwind wheel first puts that wing even closer to the
ground.

So, I recognize many of the disadvantages of low winged airplanes, but there's
this. In my particular one, thinking the thought and having the airplane
respond as if it was clairvoyant is something I've not found in high winged
airplanes (or other low winged ones, for that matter). Maybe it has more to do
with flying the same airplane for a long time.

Nah -- it's a Mooney.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Jay Honeck wrote:

Being a doctor, one would think that you'd be attracted to the studly
low-wing Beech Bonanza,

Ah, yes ... the old "fork-tailed doctor killer".

F33A....nyaa, nyaa, nyaa!!!

"Ray" wrote in message
...
Okay, so all kidding aside, what are the issues between high and low
wings?
I know that in terms of flying, there are very few differences between
your
average Cessna and Piper, but for higher performance aircraft, what are
the
aerodynamic/design tradeoffs?

For example:

Why are most of the more expensive private aircraft (cirrus, pilatus,
pretty
much all multi engine and jet) low wings?

Good thing you said "pretty much", since I co-pilot a Jetprop (Twin
Commander) which is a high wing. :~)

I saw one on the highway the other day. It didn't seem to work too well,
though. Guess that's why there were all those tow trucks there to help it
along.


"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
. ..
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
There are no low wing birds.

Yeah? Well there's no such thing as a high-wheeled truck, either!

Wonder why that is?

--
Jim Fisher

tony wrote:

As for crosswind landings, the ground effect in a low winged airplane is much
more pronounced, I'm not sure they are easier in general to land.

The funny thing is that that's not the case for a Cherokee, at least not the
ones with the semi-tapered wing. I had some trouble transitioning from the
172 to the Warrior because I was used to the 172 gliding forever in ground
effect, while the Warrior will drop like a brick as the airspeed decays. I
don't know exactly what the aerodynamic explanation is -- perhaps the
Warrior has a slightly higher wing loading -- but I've heard of the same
experience from many other first-time Cherokee pilots as well.

The solution (for anyone interested) is either (a) add some power in the
flare to keep the nose up, or (b) keep your approach speed right to the
flare, rather than beginning a gradual roundout higher up like you would in
a 172.

I wonder if you're noticing the different ground-effect behaviour with the
Mooney not because the wings are low, but because the Mooney is such an
amazingly clean plane. I personally lust after a Mooney 201, which would
give me 165 ktas burning only a couple of GPH more than my Warrior at 126 ktas.


All the best,


David

"Capt.Doug" writes:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message How so?

Just ask Mother Nature. Ever see a low-wing bird?

No. Ever seen a bird with fixed-geometry wings? A bird driven by a
propellor?
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Photos: dd-b.lighthunters.net Snapshots: www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"Jay Honeck" writes:

As to the "doctor killer"...I think that applies more to the
egotistical specialties like surgery, and I'm just a poor country
radiologist.

Good one! ;-)

Actually, most doctors make great pilots. What kills 'em is the fact that
they are too busy to stay current, and they end up flying into conditions
that they are no longer able to handle.

And they're more likely to be able to afford more airplane than they
can fly than most of us are.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Photos: dd-b.lighthunters.net Snapshots: www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

And they're more likely to be able to afford more airplane than they
can fly than most of us are.

That must have been before universal health care (in most rich countries)
and HMOs + sky-high malpractice insurance premiums (in the U.S.). General
practitioners are not exactly lining up at the food banks, yet, but they're
hardly the ones with the big houses or new cars any more, and they probably
won't be the ones buying the new glass-panel contraptions.

On the other hand, a lot of people in tech made a lot of money before the
dot.com bubble burst, and many of those people now have (a) a lot of money
saved and (b) a lot of unexpected free time on their hands. I think that a
more appropriate name from the newer composite planes like the SR-22 would
be the one in the subject line.


All the best,


David