Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 09:29:39 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.227.33] (HELO hawaii.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.5) with ESMTP id 1981814 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 22:01:24 -0500 Received: (apparently) from IIPMOBILE ([24.161.141.153]) by hawaii.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:01:22 -1000 Reply-To: From: "IIP" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: wing loading X-Original-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:02:44 -1000 Organization: IIP X-Original-Message-ID: <005a01c2bab0$4037bbc0$6501a8c0@hawaii.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal X-Original-Return-Path: IIP@hawaii.rr.com Hamid: That statement came from at least two people at Lancair when I was questioning whether the issue was not so much takeoff GW, but landing GW. I don=92t know the configurations they were talking about, = but I suspect they do all sorts of things to their own airplanes while testing. Anyway, that=92s where the comments came from. Scott/Gary/Mike: You are still talking circles around me (not hard to do!). Gary states that there are two types of effects of wing loading which have nothing to do with each other. Structural and aerodynamic effects. But then he says, "How strong the wing is has no effect on the flying qualities and vice versa." My intellectual death spiral got tighter. Isn't wing loading a measure of strength? Mike says wing loading relates to stall speed and turbulence. Getting closer. Scott says it=92s Vno and Va related. Hmmmm. Scott also talked about "ride". Isn't this more a function of how the wing is built than its structural strength? Why do I keep hearing knowledgeable pilots talking about how a plane flies in the same breath as "wing loading"? "Man, that sucker was HIGHLY wing loaded!" Sounds more like something a design engineer might brag, rather than what you would hear from a pilot.=20 As I said, I flunked Engineering. If I make a wing out of solid steel, it is going to have =93wing loading=94 of probably a million pounds. If = I throw 5 million horsepower at it so it will actually fly (?), how does the fact that I have the highest wing loading in the history of flight have anything to do with flight characteristics. That plane is going to be a "lead sled" because it IS a lead sled! Someone questioned what I mean by =93flight characteristics=94. There are many, but if I could = just understand the relationship of wing loading to stall speeds, I'd be happy. We had a model airplane once. It crashed and we fixed it. In doing so, we made the wings stronger. Did we change the stall speed? I'm not trying to prolong an academic discussion. My only objective is to understand IF and HOW the static "wing loading" test limit of the IV wing (12,000 lbs.) relates to critical flying characteristics when increasing actual GW. Does the fact that it's "highly loaded" make it more or less flyable at advancing GW's? I'm just not making the leap from a structural calculation to flying aerodynamics; from strength to shape, if you will. Sorry. Thanks for all the feedback. I hope I'm not totally alone in my confusion. Brian Barbata BTW, is the relevant load 12K or 24K? Kind of important!