Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T22:48:48.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aerodynamic and Structural Features of Tapered Wings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

G. V. Lachmann
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During the last four or five years a remarkable evolution has taken place in the policy of aircraft design. Its ultimate aim is to reduce the aeroplane to the simplest possible form offering the least resistance to the air. This process of eliminating any structural members which are not necessary for the production of lift and the housing of passengers or military load has automatically led to the adaptation of the fully cantilever monoplane with retractable undercarriage (Fig. I). The final logical result of this evolution is, of course, the flying wing with the engines, passengers or military load housed inside, thus suppressing such components like the fuselage and the tail unit which at the moment are still causing a non-productive addition to the total drag. There are still certain difficulties which will prevent us from achieving the ideal of, say, a mere flying wing, and our present compromise solution consisting of a tapered cantilever wing, a streamlined fuselage and a cantilever tail unit will probably persist for some time to come. The next step in suppressing parasitic drag will, therefore, consist in a still greater refinement of fuselage design and in eliminating outside engine nacelles by using engines buried inside the wing.

Type
Proceedings
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 41 , Issue 315 , March 1937 , pp. 161 - 237
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

1. Jacobs, Eastman N., Ward, Kenneth E. and Pinkerton, Robert M.. “The Characteristics of 78 Related Airfoil Sections from Tests in the Variable Density Wind Tunnel.” N.A.C.A. Report No. 460, 1933.Google Scholar
2. Roxbee Cox, H.. “Stiffness of Thin Shells.” Aircraft Engineering, Vol. VIII, No. 91, Sept., 1936.Google Scholar
3. Glauert, H.. “The Elements of Aerofoil and Airscrew Theory.”Google Scholar
4. Lotz, I.. “Berechnung der Auftriebsverteilung beliebig geformter Flugel.” Z.F.M. 1931, page 189; also Shenstone, B. S.. “The Lotz Method for Calculating the Aerodynamic Characteristics of Wings.” Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, May, 1934.Google Scholar
5. Fage, A.. “On the Theory of Tapered Aerofoils.” R. & M. No. 806.Google Scholar
6. Jurieff, B. N.. “The Aerodynamic Characteristics of Wings of Arbitrary Plan Form.” Vestnik Vozdushnogo Flota, No. 2, Moscow, 1923.Google Scholar
7. Tani, Itiro. “A Simple Method of Calculating the Induced Velocity of a Monoplane Wing.” Report No. 111 of the Aeronautical Research Institute, Tokyo University.Google Scholar
8. Crean, J. R.. “Mean Aerodynamic Centre and Chord.” The Aircraft Engineer, April 30, 1936.Google Scholar
9. Glauert, and Gates, . “Characteristics of a Tapered and Twisted Wing with Sweepback.” R. & M. No. 1226.Google Scholar
10. Anderson, Raymond F.. “Charts for Determining the Pitching Moment for Sweepback and Pitch.” N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 483.Google Scholar
11. Mathias, G.. “ Einfluss der Flugelumrissform und der Querruderabmessung auf die Quersteuerbarkeit beim Eindecker.” 242 Report of the D.V.L. D.V.L. Jahrbuch 1931. “ Querruderform und Querruderwirkung.” Addition to Report No. 242, D.V.L. Jahrbuch 1932.Google Scholar
12. Weick, Fred E. and Wenzinger, Carl I.. “Wind Tunnel Research comparing Lateral Control Devices, particularly at High Angles of Attack.” IX. Tapered Wings with Ordinary Ailerons, N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 449, 1933.Google Scholar
13. Batson, A. S. and Irving, H. B.. “Preliminary Note on Rolling Experiments on Tapered Wings with Brake Flaps.” Report S. & C. 715, Stability and Control Sub-Committee. Aeronautical Research Committee, October, 1935.Google Scholar
14. Millikan, Clark B.. “On the Stalling of Highly Tapered Wings.” Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 5, March, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Gray, . “Flight,” Sept. 3rd, 1936; July 23rd, 1936; July 16th, 1936.Google Scholar
16. Locke, C. N. H.. “Flight,” August 27th, 1936.Google Scholar
17. Hueber, J.. “Der verwundene Trapezflugel.” Z.F.M. 1933, page 307.Google Scholar
18. Lombard, A. E.. “Technical Developments of the Curtiss Wright Coupé.” Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences.Google Scholar
19. Helmbold, H. B.. “Uber die Berechnung des Abwindes hinter einem rechteckigen Flugel.” Z.F.M. 1925, page 291; also Fuchs—Hopf—Seewald “Aerodynamik,” page 222.Google Scholar
20. Hibbard, Hall L.. “Developments and Trends in High Speed Aircraft.” Paper read before the “Vereinigung fur Luftfahrtforschung,” Berlin, October 11th, 1935.Google Scholar
21. Morgan, M. B. and Ellis, D. L.. “Wind Tunnel Tests on Slotted Flaps on a Low Wing Monoplane.” Report B.A. 1250, November, 1935.Google Scholar
22. Wenzinger, Carl I.. “The Effects of Full Span and Partial Span Split Flaps on the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Tapered Wing.” N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 505, 1934.Google Scholar
23. Lachmann, G. V.. “Control Beyond the Stall.” Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, 1931.Google Scholar
24. Woodward Nutt, A. E. and Hafton, P. A.. “Full Scale Tests of the Hendy Heck.” Report No. B.A. 1243. Handley Page Bulletin, September, 1936.Google Scholar
25. Platt, Robert C.. “Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Wing with Fowler Flaps, including Flap Loads, Downwash and Calculated Effect on Take-Off.” N.A.C A. Report No. 534, 1935.Google Scholar
26. Fowler, Harlan D.. “The Fowler Wing Flap.” Aircraft Engineering, September, 1936 also Aero Digest, September, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar