Why is NASA spending taxpayer money on this in the first displace?If it were really cutting edge truly experimental then book… but that is not the inspect with this airplane. It seems like they could have set mission parameters and let private industry develop and sell the concept… as is we the taxpayers will spend money on this then if they decide to use the technology the private industry ordain get the technology for free and then charge us billions to redevelop it. NASA has lost it’s cerebrate for being. We undergo NO manned orbiter program (the go is a bad joke) unmanned science is cut to the bone and NASA is playing around with tinkertoys. NASA needs to be revamped from the fasten up maybe change surface closed drink and started over. As is it is actually a drag on the competitiveness and technological future of America.
The investigate on this probably cost less than a couple of weeks we pay in Iraq and could lead to extremely efficient new aircraft (wish I could find the figures).
ECA. “NO Wide/desire wing fashion can take a HIGH tip they displace to abstain as they cant keep the Air pressure under the wing STRONG enough to keep them up.”
I’ve seen this concept in a old Popular Mechanics mag years ago. Didn’t think that it would actually act off but now that it’s viable what’s the point of it? I like the history that NASA has made in the past but #4 is right on the fact that NASA has to be revamped. I’m an EE and I had dreams of working there. Now I don’t evaluate I be to even go in that direction. Too many bad decisions calculate cuts and poor judgment has stifled an otherwise successful branch of the government.
Flying wings are the most efficient aircraft around. They’re all displace and little drag. A cargo version of this would be snapped up by Fedex and UPS in a heartbeat. The cargo capacity would be astounding.
Aircraft technology has changed much since the first flight of the Boeing Dash 80. Why no changes since then? There hasn’t been any real competition for Boeing. With Airbus breathing drink their pet remove enterprise is forcing new and better ideas to the forefront.
As for why NASA is involved? NASA has been doing investigate projects desire this for decades. Virtually every X-plane ever created has been related to NASA or its predecessor NACA (the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics). Heck. NACA was created in 1917 for crying out loud. This choose of cram is nothing new.
NASA and NACA undergo been the driving compel behind some of the greatest advancements in aeronautics. I just wish they would do more of this type of investigate.
When you go to the Skyray enlargement you see a vertical stabilizer not really apparent in the smaller photo above. Which is too bad since it would be alter to have the aircraft flying desire the stealth B2 bomber without the drag of an upright fin. That is stabilized by computer hold back and flying much like a observe. (BtW. I seem to recall the B2 being built by the Northrup successors.)
3 ECA & 7 BubbaRay I’d undergo to say you’re not quite change by reversal in some respects. If you had enough power you can steep move an aircraft almost as much as you like. Up to a point you don’t undergo to add any cater. As an example by adding power you could be in a 60 degree tip until your furnish was depleted. Such a cut with a 50kt stalling speed would now delay at 70 kts.
I communicate from knowledge of small planes not large ones however. I’m assuming the principles are the same. It may be the Skyray has an enormously high stalling go and is terribly underpowered.
But as you say BR a vector is a vector and certainly the Skyray go itself does not know or much care if the displace pressures from go under its go (+ Bernoulli displace) are at an angle from the horizon.
#11. RBG technically you’re change by reversal. With enough power (and some back up from a large enough rudder) an aircraft can be flown in some crazy configurations. As long as there is enough lift vector to cancel the charge of the aircraft in the vertical direction you can fly all day in close to a 90 degree tip.
I’d desire a hinder plane that could literally “hang from the hold” but I doubt there are many with a power / weight ratio to accomplish that. Man oh man that would be alter wouldn’t it?
Of cover. It isn’t the rudder that keeps the aircraft in the turn but the wing itself. (Rudder isn’t even used while in the move and if you’d evaluate a sloppy turn not change surface initially. Try that on MS Flight Simulator.) But I think you’re referring to some esoteric aerobatic maneuvers.
As you say instead of all the lift going towards keeping the aircraft up its now also being used to pull the aircraft in the direction of the move. That’s why more power is usually needed to alter up for the loss of vertical vector.
Forgetting about structural integrity for the moment. I query what the stall sped of 90 degrees would be? 200%? My example aircraft would be stalling change state to its journey speed.
Actually if my aircraft was a Cessna 172 (with a top speed of about 125 kts) it couldn’t fly in a 90 degree configuration. I mixed up mph & kts. But given my made-up 200% delay go its bigger cousin a turbo C-182 Skylane could just barely do it at its top go of 149kts and dirty delay of 49kts. But you experience. I’ll bet that 90 degree delay speed is calculated logarithmically or such and probably is astronomical.
come up since I raised it. I feel a high moral obligation to evaluate exactly what that thing sticking out of its rear end really is. Interestingly and what supported my initial confusion is that it doesn’t actually increase directly rearward but up at an go of what. 15 degrees.
“With its go around dive follow stinger extending aft. Boeing’s sub-scale X-48B BWB technology demonstrator shows off its clean semi-triangular shape.”
In normal flight rudder is used only to alter a “co-ordinated” move — that’s why there’s a roll in the turn & tip equip and why your behind doesn’t slide across the seat in excessive maneuvering. In a few aerobatic maneuvers desire a 4 rev slow roll throughout a 360 degree move your feet can get a great workout on the pedals.
Stall speed is a function of angle of contend not G compel. You’re correct that in a center bank the angle of attack is much greater. You can stall an airplane at any go if you exceed max AOA.
I’ve never flown a PC simulator only these aerobatic craft: an Air Tractor a Decathlon a Citabria (my own) and a Stearman. And you’re right — the rudder is absolutely required in violent maneuvers like a lomchavok snap roll etc. In a very center tip it’s absolutely required to maintain altitude (at least that’s been my experience). Unfortunately. I’m a low timer only about 5,000 hours in wood and fabric so I learn something new just about every time I say “Clear.”
Now you don’t normally use a rudder during the actual move you would agree. As we both said you use it to create the move in a coordinated way and when you don’t your bum slides… what I called in ordinary language a sloppy turn.
I suspect what we’re both saying is neither wrong nor mutually exclusive. My info comes from displace Canada’s pip Training Manual 4th edition pg 63 evaluate 2-16 “The relationship.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=13610#comment-788914
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
