A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

max altitude and Mach 1



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #5  
Old May 15th 04, 02:16 AM
Peter Stickney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Scott Ferrin writes:


Sorry for the long answer. That sometimes happens with short
questions.




Maybe you could answer a question I've had for a long time. If you
look at the SR-71's inlets from the side they seem to be pointing
somewhat down. I took this to mean that since it seems you'd have to
have the inlet lip on a circular inlet perpendicular to the airflow to
maximize it's efficiency, that at cruise speed and altitude the
Blackbird would be flying at an angle of attack such that the inlet
lip would be at 0 degrees AOA. At that angle the exhaust would exit
in a somewhat downward direction. So my question is is that setup to
maximize the altitude potential (because thrust would be directly
aiding lift)? Do ALL aircraft fly at a certain angle of attack at
their maximum altitude? Is the only reason you see these things on
the Blackbird because it's designed to spend most of it's time in
those conditions? Would a Blackbird's max altitude also be at Mach
0.9?


Well, I'll try - Yes, an A-12/YF-12/SR-71's inlets do face down a bit,
and the reason is to present an inlet face perdenicular to the
airflow, as much as possible. The Blackbirds were intended to cruise
right at the edge of what was possible for an airplane that could also
take off & land, back in the late 1950s. They needed to squeeze every
mit of efficiency out of the airframe & powerplant (Which can be hard
to tell apart, on an SR), and the airplane was intended to get itself
to one point in its flight envelope and stay there. (Mach 3.2/80,000'
or so, around 375 KEAS) At that EAS, an for teh weights that would be
expected, the Angle of Attack range would be predictable, and so it
was dialled in to the inlet design. This maximizes the inlet
efficiancy, and helps alleviate the possibility of the inlet getting
dicombobulated with the complex series of shock waves that it uses to
allow for the maximum pressure recovery. Consider how much of a
problem inlet "unstarts", where the shocks got all tangled up & the
inlet system stopped properly supplying air to the engine, were in the
early stages of the program. Then think about how much worse it would
have been with the inlets getting an uneven flow. Very Ugly Indeed.

While thrust vectoring with AoA does occur, (A good example would be
the F-104. I was told by a CanForce CF-104 pilot that the best way to
ensure a hard landing was to pull back on the throttle during the
flare - the AoA was high enough that a fair chunk of hte airplane's
weight was riding on teh vertical component of the thrust), I don't
think that that was a factor. The angle's too small for there to be
much of a vertical component to the thrust. It might have an effect
on cruise trim, though.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Space Elevator Big John Home Built 111 July 21st 04 05:31 PM
Variable geometry intakes Boomer Military Aviation 17 April 12th 04 10:42 PM
CIA U2 over flight of Moscow John Bailey Military Aviation 3 April 9th 04 04:58 AM
WeserFlug P.1003 Compared to V-22 Osprey robert arndt Military Aviation 29 December 2nd 03 07:23 PM
Me-262, NOT Bell X-1 Broke SB First robert arndt Military Aviation 140 October 10th 03 09:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.