![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hobo wrote:
If low wing loading is so important to a fighters maneaverability why don't all fighters have big wings and thus low wing loading? What are the drawbacks to big wings which make low wing loadings rare? Aerodynamic drag. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hobo wrote:
Chad Irby wrote: Aerodynamic drag. So if the F-15 had high wing loading it would be a Mach 3 rocket? Hard to tell. You *can* have planes with higher wing loading that have a better turn radius (the WWII Messerschmitt 109). The aspect ratio of the wing is very important here, too. But if you keep everything else the same, you reduce drag (by some amount) while also increasing the turn radius (by some amount). -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:39:55 -0700, Hobo wrote:
If low wing loading is so important to a fighters maneaverability why don't all fighters have big wings and thus low wing loading? What are the drawbacks to big wings which make low wing loadings rare? TIA Increased drag, a lot of increased drag. Al Minyard |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Chad Irby wrote in message ... Hobo wrote: Chad Irby wrote: Aerodynamic drag. So if the F-15 had high wing loading it would be a Mach 3 rocket? Hard to tell. You *can* have planes with higher wing loading that have a better turn radius (the WWII Messerschmitt 109). The aspect ratio of the wing is very important here, too. Yes, but I've heard that Bf-109 was "bleeding" speed in turn much faster than, f.e, Spitfire, so the Bf pilot had to "ease" on the stick. Something like F-104 or MiG-21 behavior (although MiG-21 is loosing speed due to dynamic drag of the delta-wing, not wing loading). But if you keep everything else the same, you reduce drag (by some amount) while also increasing the turn radius (by some amount). Bf-109 had ot from both worlds, it seems. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. Nele NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:39:55 -0700, Hobo wrote:
If low wing loading is so important to a fighters maneaverability why don't all fighters have big wings and thus low wing loading? What are the drawbacks to big wings which make low wing loadings rare? TIA Also, high aspect wings generate huge bending moments under high G. The weight of the necessary structure would kill any performance gains. Ross "Roscoe" Dillon USAF Flight Tester (B-2, F-16, F-15, F-5, T-37, T-38, C-5, QF-106) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Nele_VII" wrote in
: Chad Irby wrote in message ... Hobo wrote: Chad Irby wrote: Aerodynamic drag. So if the F-15 had high wing loading it would be a Mach 3 rocket? Hard to tell. You *can* have planes with higher wing loading that have a better turn radius (the WWII Messerschmitt 109). The aspect ratio of the wing is very important here, too. Of course the 109 had automatic leading edge devices to allow for better performance at high AOA. Surprised no one has mentioned this. Basically speeds up airflow over the wing, re-energises the boundary layer and delays the onset of separation. Gives a higher CL and thereby tighter turns. IBM __________________________________________________ ____________________ Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - FAST UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD - http://www.uncensored-news.com The Worlds Uncensored News Source |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Hobo wrote: If low wing loading is so important to a fighters maneaverability why don't all fighters have big wings and thus low wing loading? What are the drawbacks to big wings which make low wing loadings rare? As many will observe, there is always a compromise between drag/lift/speed. The best dogfighting wing plan/airfoil makes for a lousy supersonic or economic cruise arrangement. There are ways to make larger wings somewhat less draggy (swing wings/thin but very "flapped" or variable airfoil wings) but even then there is absolute wetting area drag which will still get you in those cases. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Props and Wing Warping... was soaring vs. flaping | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 0 | September 29th 03 03:40 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Flexible Wing Flight | patrick timony | Military Aviation | 6 | September 16th 03 03:28 PM |
Can someone explain wing loading? | Frederick Wilson | Home Built | 4 | September 10th 03 02:33 AM |
Wing Extensions | Jay | Home Built | 22 | July 27th 03 12:23 PM |