Blended wing bodies and sailplanes...?

[Robert Bates]

Watched a few shows on Discovery Wings this weekend that were discussing the
superior lift and handling of a blended wing body (BWB) design over a flying
wing and traditional wing/fuselage design. Superior lift? Hmmm...

Does anyone know of a BWB sailplane out there, or any research on one? Did
a Google search and found nothing... Figure with the amazing weight savings
composite sailplanes out there like the SparrowHawk have demonstrated, a BWB
could probably be designed that would not have the weight penalties a larger
lifitng body would require using traditional sailplane materials like
aluminum or fiberglass.

Just curious...

--

==========
Robert Bates
Austin, Texas - USA
http://home.austin.rr.com/robsplace

[John H. Campbell]

perhaps the Burnelli and Bowlus troup carrying glider projects of WWII.

[JJ Sinclair]

The concept sounds interesting. By blending the wing into what would otherwise
be the fuselage, the wing/fuselage interference is eliminated and thereby
saving considerable drag. The glider trailer would be something to behold
though, with a height of say, 10 foot? Note, the Genesis fuselage is 15 foot
long. BWB assembly / disassembly, anyone?
JJ Sinclair

[chris]

"Robert Bates" > wrote in message >...
> Watched a few shows on Discovery Wings this weekend that were discussing the
> superior lift and handling of a blended wing body (BWB) design over a flying
> wing and traditional wing/fuselage design. Superior lift? Hmmm...
>
> Just curious...

My guess is that a Blended Wing Body is a superior trade off if you
have a huge fuselage - as is the case for a large cargo jet such as a
C-5 or a big passenger jet. This allows the huge fuselage to also
generate lift, it appears to have a lot more wetted area.

chris

[Bob Kuykendall]

Earlier, "Robert Bates" > wrote:

> Watched a few shows on Discovery Wings
> this weekend that were discussing the
> superior lift and handling of a blended
> wing body (BWB) design over a flying
> wing and traditional wing/fuselage design...

The way I understand it, BWB works best for carrying payload that you
are at liberty to distribute spanwise. I think that glider pilots
generally prefer to be more discrete...

Bob K.

[J.M. Farrington]

Look into the ships built by the Horton Brothers.

John

"Robert Bates" > wrote in message
.. .
> Watched a few shows on Discovery Wings this weekend that were discussing
the
> superior lift and handling of a blended wing body (BWB) design over a
flying
> wing and traditional wing/fuselage design. Superior lift? Hmmm...
>
> Does anyone know of a BWB sailplane out there, or any research on one?
Did
> a Google search and found nothing... Figure with the amazing weight
savings
> composite sailplanes out there like the SparrowHawk have demonstrated, a
BWB
> could probably be designed that would not have the weight penalties a
larger
> lifitng body would require using traditional sailplane materials like
> aluminum or fiberglass.
>
> Just curious...
>
> --
>
> ==========
> Robert Bates
> Austin, Texas - USA
> http://home.austin.rr.com/robsplace
>
>

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
(chris) wrote:

> My guess is that a Blended Wing Body is a superior trade off if you
> have a huge fuselage - as is the case for a large cargo jet such as a
> C-5 or a big passenger jet. This allows the huge fuselage to also
> generate lift, it appears to have a lot more wetted area.

NZ's CT/4 Airtrainer is a 2-seat piston powered basic trainer reputed to
get something like 20% of the lift from the cockpit canopy. It's in
service in NZ and Australia and also Hong Kong and Thailand.

http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/atrainer.html

Those who were at the '95 Worlds in Omarama may recall an aerobatic
display by an RNZAF team in CT/4s.

-- Bruce

[Nyal Williams]

At 18:12 22 December 2003, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>In article ,
> (chris) wrote:
>
>
>NZ's CT/4 Airtrainer is a 2-seat piston powered basic
>trainer reputed to
>get something like 20% of the lift from the cockpit
>canopy. It's in
>service in NZ and Australia and also Hong Kong and
>Thailand.
>
> http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/atrainer.html
>
Wow! At what price in drag??????????

[Mike Borgelt]

On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 07:00:59 +1300, Bruce Hoult >
wrote:

>In article >,
> (chris) wrote:
>
>> My guess is that a Blended Wing Body is a superior trade off if you
>> have a huge fuselage - as is the case for a large cargo jet such as a
>> C-5 or a big passenger jet. This allows the huge fuselage to also
>> generate lift, it appears to have a lot more wetted area.
>
>NZ's CT/4 Airtrainer is a 2-seat piston powered basic trainer reputed to
>get something like 20% of the lift from the cockpit canopy. It's in
>service in NZ and Australia and also Hong Kong and Thailand.
>
> http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/atrainer.html
>
>Those who were at the '95 Worlds in Omarama may recall an aerobatic
>display by an RNZAF team in CT/4s.
>
>-- Bruce


The BD4 we fly gets 13% of its lift from the fuselage which just
happens to be about what the missing bit of wing would produce.

Mike Borgelt