Aerodynamics

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

I am just having fun here. So,,,

Does anyone know how the designers make it possible for a light airplane, like a cessna, flight straight without the engine torque costantly rquiring you to hold a lot of rudder and aileron?

It has something to do with the engine mounting and the Vert. stab.

RadarMan · Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:37 pm Post subject:

Have you noticed that with SOME of the small tail-draggers as I move the throttle to full and let it taxi, when it reaches a fast speed it slowly lifts off and climbs to it's maximum altitude without me ever touching the stick, ever!
Well balanced and good flight dynamics, probably.

Ask Riclo.

Radar

_________________

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

I was asking if ANYONE else knows!!! If you take off an aircrafts cowling, and look from the spinner towards the rear, along the aircrafts centerline, you will know!!!!!! It is cool!!!!

Yeah, it causes a little drag, but not as much drag as if you had to hold rudder to counter the torque and such.

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

Yeah RadarMan, planes are ballanced this way.

2 years ago, this mechanic was running up a piper cub or some plane like this by ,,, he tied the tail down so that he could run the engine at power without being in the cockpit. Hit with Chair

Well!!!! The tail hold gave way and the airplane zoomed off, Doh!

took off and flew for 25 miles before crashing!!!!

I wonder what happened to his license? Banned

Fire_Emblem_Master · Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:25 am Post subject:

Elkin....I DONT HAVE A PLANE THAT I CAN JUST YANK OFF THE COWLING ON AND LOOK AT!!!

So, can you tell me why they stay straight?

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

Yes SIR!!!!

The engine is mounted offset,, crooked. Ya. gotta see it to appreciate it.

The vertical stab is crooked,, offset too.

How about this one?!?! Why can the Wright flyer gain altitude past about 30'? (The lack of engine power, although is a consideration, is not the answer).

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

Ground effect

Fire_Emblem_Master · Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 12:45 am Post subject:

heh, i'm kidding with ya. But that is really neat how it's offset like that.

Thanks for the info.

I got the WF around 100 feet at one time when i was doing the english channel challenge, i think that's waht it was...dunno tho!

Razz

i'm confused!@

Elkinallen · First Officer Joined: Sep 24, 2004 Posts: 446

Ground effect is like the air hockey puck. Not exactly that simple though. But it is the ,,,, somewhat of the same thing. Has to do with drag and the way the air circulates off the wingtips and flows off the back of the wing.

See ya in a few days FEM.

Riclo · Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:55 am Post subject:

Aloha, Ok! I will stay out of questions like this, but Elkinallen, you must keep this up. It's good for the grey matter. Maybe you wil come up with something I don't know. (that won't take much Wink

) Anyway keep up the good work, there nothing like tasking the Big muscle. Ric
_________________
The meaning of Life: Live it, Enjoy It!

Elkin · Guest

Riclo!!! Why do you not want to play? Anyway I want you to with this one.

Anhedral vs. dihedral I know why the one is chosen over the other does anyone else?!?!?!

But What I cannot figure out is why Russian low wing airliners have anhedral!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?

Riclo, or anyone?????????

For instance when I fly the TU-154, and I get too slow, it gets into a sort of dutch roll that is true to a wing/fuslage arrangement as such.

Elkin · Guest

This old man told me a story. He was flying a DC-4 using it as a crop sprayer. They got too low and a wing tip hit the ground. The aircraft went up, he pulled up, but the wing broke off right at the fuselage. First the airplane rolled away from the separated wing and then began rolling into the separated wing side. Why did it do this?

Bye the way, the aircraft bellied into the ground and no one was injured.

Riclo · Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:05 am Post subject:

Aloha Elkin, Now what I meant is that I should refrain from answering to quickly if it is an answer that I know, as it would give some the chance to look it up and learn. But all that aside, I would be happy to join the gang in these endevours. To start off, I am checking on the first Question(got me me there) As for the second it has to do with weight and lift, in that order as the wing broke off, the weight of the other wing took over and pulled it to one side and then as the wing tried to do what it was designed to do, that is lift, it rolled back, but the weight of the Body acted with the wing, i.e. the wing lifting as the body dropped, hence the reported belly landing. This action can be seen on an old history channel film of a second WW bomber getting hit by a falling bomb and severing the wing from the body. Ric
_________________
The meaning of Life: Live it, Enjoy It!

Elkin · Guest

Right you are about the wing separation Q!!!! Good to 'see' you again

Notice a 747 has dihedral. A C-5 has anhedral. If a C-5 had dihedral, the ailerons would not be strong enough to roll the aircraft. Because the increasing lift of the wing that is being banked down begins to gain more lift as it's planform becomes parallel with the earths surface (Gravity). On top of this!!! The banking action literally has to lift the fuselage (Tilting it like a pendulem) away from gravity.
The anhedral does the opposite. When banking, the wing that is being banked 'down' loses lift and the other wing gains lift as it's planform becomes more parallel with gravity. The result it more lift on the outside wing to 'lift' the underslung fuselage away from a straight down gravity held position. Very Happy

...... cont.

Elkin · Guest

Cont...

If a 747 had anhedral, it would not be able to bak for the same reasons. Because the fuselage is on top of the wing, as soon as the airplane starts to bank, the fuselage starts to 'lean' over and tip. It's weight tips contributing to the roll of the aircraft. As the aircraft continues to roll, the wing that is being banked into gains more lift as the wings planform becomes level with 'gravity'.

Fighters that have anhedral have there fuselages on top of the wing. When the plane banks; the wing that is being banked down loses lift, the other gains lift, the fuselage tips,,,,, all for a FAST roll rate!!! Yeah, it contributes to instability but a fighter needs this!!!

So?!?! Why do the Russian planes have the 'unstable' arrangement?

My guess is that,, they were made to be converted into military. Its basic design has less drag, and it is structually stronger for unimproved surface ops. Russian planes are made with massive gear for this reason. Confused

	Create an account	Home · Topics · Your Account · Forums · 3D Glasses · Flightsim Downloads