Re: Projected main wing area

From: Bill Gowen <b.gowen_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 22:53:23 -0400

I originally got into using flat wings because they were simpler to make. The original thinking was that the tip plates would serve the same function as dihedral. Later I became aware of a possible increase in span efficiency by using tip plates. I don't think anyone has proved or disproved this notion as regards our models, but there has been a lot of work done with tip plates on MAV's with positive results. MAV's are limited to a 6" span (I think) which makes them REALLY low aspect ratio. I'm not an aerodynamicist so any explanation I tried to give for how tip plates work would probably be bogus. Two examples of flat wing/tip plate models that have done well are Steven Richman's LPP that holds the Cat IV national record and my F1M with a Cat IV world record applied for. There may be others I'm not aware of.

I'll put some flat wing SO pictures in a separate folder.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: calgoddard
  To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 7:43 PM
  Subject: [Indoor_Construction] Projected main wing area


  If only the projected main wing area counts in determining lift, what
  advantage is there to using a flat main wing (except for camber) with
  vertical tip plates?

  Bill, can you post a picture of one of your SO planes with this
  configuration?

  Thanks.



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Thu Aug 09 2007 - 19:53:29 CEST