Is elliptical wing superior to the regular profile in term of aerodynamics?

[GrauGeist]

Or, to appear to have superior internet intellect that is indisputable among the unwashed:
FACT !!

 

[BiffF15]

Or, to appear to have superior internet intellect that is indisputable among the unwashed:
FACT !!

Or "arguing " about a certain airplane code named "The Groundhog"…

 

[GrauGeist]

Or "arguing " about a certain airplane code named "The Groundhog"…

That particular thread was "interesting", to say the least.

 

[BiffF15]

That particular thread was "interesting", to say the least.

Plus redundant AND repetitive…

 

[GrauGeist]

Plus redundant AND repetitive…

FACT!!

 

[OldGeezer]

This exact question came up when I was studying aerospace engineering, half a century ago. I don't have my textbooks or notes anymore, but this is a good summary from what I recall: What is the optimum design: elliptical lift distribution or elliptical span loading parameter distribution?

 

[rinkol]

How many are you making? What is technology available to you (airfoil, structure and construction)? What is your work force skilled at? How much space do I have to work in?

Aside questions: How much power do you have? What is the plane to be used for?

If I'm only building 100 Hurricane/year over next 3 years, my work force is skilled at building up airfoils using little wood pieces and Hurricane will be replaced by Tornado/Typhoon by year 4, one type of construction might be cheaper.

If I'm making 1,000 Mustangs/year for next 5 years, my work force is skilled at stamping sheet metal, and I have the whole back 40 in beautiful California sun, then another would be cheaper.

There is the further issue that elliptical wings have complex 3D curves that would make it very difficult to achieve a sufficiently accurate profile needed to make an effective laminar flow wing.

 

[tomo pauk]

There is the further issue that elliptical wings have complex 3D curves that would make it very difficult to achieve a sufficiently accurate profile needed to make an effective laminar flow wing.

Where to the wing designs from Tempest and Sea Fury stand with this?

 

[pbehn]

How many are you making? What is technology available to you (airfoil, structure and construction)? What is your work force skilled at? How much space do I have to work in?

Aside questions: How much power do you have? What is the plane to be used for?

If I'm only building 100 Hurricane/year over next 3 years, my work force is skilled at building up airfoils using little wood pieces and Hurricane will be replaced by Tornado/Typhoon by year 4, one type of construction might be cheaper.

If I'm making 1,000 Mustangs/year for next 5 years, my work force is skilled at stamping sheet metal, and I have the whole back 40 in beautiful California sun, then another would be cheaper.

In fact truth is stranger than fiction. The Hurricane had two wings. The first type was little changed from the bi plane era and covered with fabric and dope. This allowed the hurricane to be produced and pilots trained, squadrons expanded while Hawkers worked on making a stressed skin wing which was then quickly fitted to all Hurricanes in the field.

 

[GrauGeist]

In fact truth is stranger than fiction. The Hurricane had two wings. The first type was little changed from the bi plane era and covered with fabric and dope. This allowed the hurricane to be produced and pilots trained, squadrons expanded while Hawkers worked on making a stressed skin wing which was then quickly fitted to all Hurricanes in the field.

And let's not forget the Hillson FH.40 Hurricane.

 

[pbehn]

And let's not forget the Hillson FH.40 Hurricane.

Was any idea too daft to try just the once?

 

[SaparotRob]

Nuts and chewing gum together at last!. Homer J. Simpson

 

[special ed]

A controlline F.A.I. team racer from the 1960s.

The article says he flew this model in competition over five years with stock engine only fine tuneing the airframe.
He was quite successful.

 

[Graeme]

Kalinin was rather fond of elliptical wings.

Konstantin Kalinin - Wikipedia

 

[SaparotRob]

I like his design of its landing gear.

 

[drgondog]

Pennies per airframe difference: the jigs and molds would be slightly more for elliptical planform and there would be slightly more waste (aluminium comes in rectangular sheets or roll)

As P pbehn notes: Spitfire's wing is expensive because is: a. complicated, b. elliptical & c. constantly changing. A & C are the cost killers. But that complicate spar allowed the Spitifre Mk. 1 to be light enough for a Merlin E, yet able to be strengthened for a Seafire 47.

I would pretty much doubt 'pennies to the airframe' of tooling, fabricating, and QA for a curved trailing edge and non linear changes in rib chords - as compared to straight taper - then complicate the process once again, building multiple wing designs across several plants.

 

[GregP]

The marginal gain in performance was more than offset by the PITA of manufacturing.
Supermarine went to a regular wing for the Spitfires successor.

The Spiteful and Sefanf together combined for a whopping production of 37 total aircraft. That doesn't say a lot for them in terms of warmaking potential, and the low total were not their "fault." Like the other super-pistons, they achieved the pinnacle of piston performance right when jets were making huge inroads into military thinking.

Taken in this light, they were very good piston fighters, with the somewhat typical British shortcoming of poor range. The poor Seafang, on internal fuel and at cruise speed, could only manage about 360 miles range. So, it wasn't going to escort anything other than a brother. But, escort likely wasn't a mission factor in the design anyway. It was a Naval fleet defense fighter, much like the Bearact was for the U.S.A. . Likely, it would have been very good at it against other pistons.

 

[GregP]

That isnt discussion, it is just a series of contradictions.

No it isn't! That adds to the total coefficient of disagreement, doesn't it?