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 » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

High wings and structural strength



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 23rd 06, 09:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default High wings and structural strength


Mxsmanic wrote:
Dylan Smith writes:

Funnily enough, a sturdy metal beam across the fuselage (usually two -
one at the front, where the main spar attaches, and one at the rear).
Windows can still be put in the roof. For a light aircraft 'sturdy'
doesn't mean 'massive'.


It sure is hard to see anything in photos.

Are high-wing designs stronger, weaker, or about the same as low-wing
designs? Do they have cost or safety advantages/disadvantages?


*** On a strut-braced high wing airplane, the wing, the strut, and the
fuselage form a triangle, which is inherently a strong shape. With a
low-wing airplane, the same
loads have to be borne by a spar inside the wing. The lift is trying
to bend the
spar.

Another advantage of high-wing airplanes is that they require less
dihedral, because the fuselage center of gravity is below the wing.

OTOH, the struts are draggy. Don't know if they're more or less
draggy than
the thick wing root that you have to have without them.

- Jerry Kaidor

  #22  
Old November 23rd 06, 11:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,130
Default High wings and structural strength


wrote:

*** On a strut-braced high wing airplane, the wing, the strut, and the
fuselage form a triangle, which is inherently a strong shape. With a
low-wing airplane, the same
loads have to be borne by a spar inside the wing. The lift is trying
to bend the
spar.

Another advantage of high-wing airplanes is that they require less
dihedral, because the fuselage center of gravity is below the wing.

OTOH, the struts are draggy. Don't know if they're more or less
draggy than
the thick wing root that you have to have without them.


The struts are draggier. The strut generates drag, and the
attachment points generate even more; that's called "interference
drag." On a strut-braced low-wing that drag can foul up the boundary
layer pretty good.
The low-wing airplane's strut has to be more massive than the
high winger's because it has to resist buckling. Even then, "jury"
struts are often employed to maintain position of the centre of the
strut to prevent buckling under load. High-wing airplanes like the Cub
and Citabria have those jury struts as well to improve the negative G
figures.
Typical strut-braced low wing airplane:
http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgur...lr%3D%26sa%3DN

Another one:
http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/3520L-1.jpg

The cantilever wing isn't all that thick. The structure within it is
much heavier.
http://www.aircraftdoorseals.com/ima...ssna%20210.jpg

 




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
terminology questions: turtledeck? cantilever wing? Ric Home Built 2 September 13th 05 09:39 PM
Control Reversal in WWII Eunometic Military Aviation 14 June 27th 04 01:03 PM
Avoiding Vne K.P. Termaat Soaring 120 April 7th 04 07:56 PM
Discus CS grounded in France Marc Till Soaring 47 September 20th 03 10:09 AM


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


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.