![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The Vought F8 Crusader was the only production military aircraft I
know of with a variable incidence wing. This feature was used to improve pilot visibility on take off and landing, a critically important thing for a carrier plane; several aircraft such as the earlier Vought Cutlass and Douglas Skyray had the nose and cockpit greatly revised in production versions for better visibility. In operation off land bases, did the variable incidence wing have any disadvantages? Did the approximately 7 degree wing incidence cause any noticeable increase in drag during the take off run? In landing, did the wing produce undesirable continued lift after touch down that reduced braking action? Was it possible or practical to level the wing after touch down to kill the lift, similar in effect to extending spoilers on some aircraft? Thank you, Peter Wezeman anti-social Darwinist |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Also, the A-7 had a variable incidence wing.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
theref wrote:
Also, the A-7 had a variable incidence wing. No it didn't. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... theref wrote: Also, the A-7 had a variable incidence wing. No it didn't. Damn. You are correct. I guess I stared at F-8s too long. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I flew the F-8D out of Miramar in 1965 when Tooter Teague and I talked our
respective C.Os (VF-121 and VF-124) into cross training. The F-8 exceeded the F-4 in one in-flight characteristic only. It had a superb roll rate. It was a joy to fly when cleaned up. But with the gear down and the wing up, it was a truck. It was terrible. And that explained the high F-8 accident rate among carrier pilots in those days. The problem in landing the F-8 wasn't so much due to the variable incidence wing. It was the power plant. On my first touch-and-go everything was great at the 180. Then passing the 90 I got slow so I added some power. I got slower, so I added more power. At the 45 I was suddenly very, very fast. I damn near pulled the power back to idle. I was driving an unstable truck. I loved the F8 when the wing was down and the gear up. I hated it when the gear was down and the wing was up. I hate to contemplate what the a/c would have been like without the variable incidence wing. Cdr John Newlin, USN (Ret.) wrote in message ... The Vought F8 Crusader was the only production military aircraft I know of with a variable incidence wing. This feature was used to improve pilot visibility on take off and landing, a critically important thing for a carrier plane; several aircraft such as the earlier Vought Cutlass and Douglas Skyray had the nose and cockpit greatly revised in production versions for better visibility. In operation off land bases, did the variable incidence wing have any disadvantages? Did the approximately 7 degree wing incidence cause any noticeable increase in drag during the take off run? In landing, did the wing produce undesirable continued lift after touch down that reduced braking action? Was it possible or practical to level the wing after touch down to kill the lift, similar in effect to extending spoilers on some aircraft? Thank you, Peter Wezeman anti-social Darwinist |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 14, 2:17*am, "John Randolph" wrote:
I flew the F-8D out of Miramar in 1965 when Tooter Teague and I talked our respective C.Os (VF-121 and VF-124) into cross training. The F-8 exceeded the F-4 in one in-flight characteristic only. It had a superb roll rate. It was a joy to fly when cleaned up. But with the gear down and the wing up, it was a truck. It was terrible. And that explained the high F-8 accident rate among carrier pilots in those days. The problem in landing the F-8 wasn't so much due to the variable incidence wing. It was the power plant. On my first touch-and-go everything was great at the 180. Then passing the 90 I got slow so I added some power. I got slower, so I added more power. At the 45 I was suddenly very, very fast. I damn near pulled the power back to idle. I was driving an unstable truck. I loved the F8 when the wing was down and the gear up. I hated it when the gear was down and the wing was up. I hate to contemplate what the a/c would have been like without the variable incidence wing. Cdr John Newlin, USN (Ret.) Thank you for your reply. Judging from photographs of the Crusader with the wing in its high incidence position, it appears that the rather bluff front of the wing center section might generate a turbulent wake that could impinge on the wing with possible adverse effects. Does anything in your experience support or contradict this? How did handling with the wing up compare with handling at the same speed and angle of attack with the wing down? Thank you again, Peter Wezeman anti-social Darwinist |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14 July, 02:20, wrote:
The Vought F8 Crusader was the only production military aircraft I know of with a variable incidence wing. This feature was used to improve pilot visibility on take off and landing, a critically important thing for a carrier plane; several aircraft such as the earlier Vought Cutlass and Douglas Skyray had the nose and cockpit greatly revised in production versions for better visibility. In operation off land bases, did the variable incidence wing have any disadvantages? Did the approximately 7 degree wing incidence cause any noticeable increase in drag during the take off run? In landing, did the wing produce undesirable continued lift after touch down that reduced braking action? Was it possible or practical to level the wing after touch down to kill the lift, similar in effect to extending spoilers on some aircraft? Thank you, Peter Wezeman anti-social Darwinist The Supermarine Dumbo was built and flown with a variable incidence wing but did not enter production. Guy |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 16 Aug, 18:03, guy wrote:
On 14 July, 02:20, wrote: The Vought F8 Crusader was the only production military aircraft I know of with a variable incidence wing. This feature was used to improve pilot visibility on take off and landing, a critically important thing for a carrier plane; several aircraft such as the earlier Vought Cutlass and Douglas Skyray had the nose and cockpit greatly revised in production versions for better visibility. In operation off land bases, did the variable incidence wing have any disadvantages? Did the approximately 7 degree wing incidence cause any noticeable increase in drag during the take off run? In landing, did the wing produce undesirable continued lift after touch down that reduced braking action? Was it possible or practical to level the wing after touch down to kill the lift, similar in effect to extending spoilers on some aircraft? Thank you, Peter Wezeman anti-social Darwinist The Supermarine Dumbo was built and flown with a variable incidence wing but did not enter production. Guy- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - link he- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Type_322 I would not however call it unsuccessfull, Supermarine had so much Spitfire work on that they did not have the design capability to work on the Dumbo too. Guy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Skybolt Tail Incidence Question | Scott Rodriguez | Home Built | 1 | November 20th 05 07:44 PM |
Skybolt Tail Incidence Question | Scott Rodriguez | Aerobatics | 0 | November 4th 05 04:16 PM |
Better GPS, Flight Computer, Variable Wing Geometry, abililty to Self-Launch | Stewart Kissel | Soaring | 7 | May 2nd 05 06:02 PM |
Variable geometry intakes | Boomer | Military Aviation | 17 | April 12th 04 09:42 PM |
want variable pitch prop | Ray Toews | Home Built | 5 | October 7th 03 09:59 PM |