lesser known/experimental aircraft

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Flyboy2 said:
what does the Channelwing do?
Click to expand...

The theory...



One of the pioneers behind the concept was Roberto Bartini, an Italian communist who emigrated to the USSR in 1924 and eventually established a design office.

Robert Ludvigovich Bartini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He proposed surrounding a propeller in a close fitting ring with the lower part broadened into an aerofoil. Tests confirmed the theory which became known as the 'Bartini Effect'.
He put the concept into a flying boat with two engines in the 'channel' with the props only inches apart. At the 'eleventh' hour it was agreed that the extra lift gained by this approach was less than the weight and drag of the duct. Eventually it flew with ordinary tandem engines in 1936 as illustrated...




As late as 1990 channel wings were still being investigated, this is the Antonov An-181...



(From Gunston's 'Back to the Drawing Board' and 'Russian Aircraft')
 
If you follow the link next to The Custer Channelwing photo, there are plenty information on both Custer and his Channelwing. Including flight test movies.

It was quite a successful little aircraft, but never made it beyond experimentation. It was actually able to fly without the wing stubs, so as the channel produced all the lift.
 
The X-29 flew a successful series of tests and was retired when the project was over.

The X-plane series of test aircraft, were never pre-production aircraft, but specially designed aircraft to test aspects of aviation. Like the Bell X-1, which was designed to break the sound barrier.

Both X-29 aircraft are now on display in the USA.
 
Some X-planes are preliminary prototypes or technology demonstrators which are to directly link to a production plane. The X-35 and X-32 for example.
 
kool kitty89 said:
Some X-planes are preliminary prototypes or technology demonstrators which are to directly link to a production plane. The X-35 and X-32 for example.
Click to expand...

Yes, they have redesignated the X-name lately. Originally they were all technology demonstrators, or research planes (at least the manned vehicles).

The X-35 and the X-32 are not "true" X-planes (as I see it).

Here is a quote from "AMERICAN X-VEHICLES An Inventory—X-1 to X-50":

There has been some criticism that the use of X designations has been corrupted somewhat by including what are essentially prototypes of future operational aircraft, especially the two JSF demonstrators. But this is not new—the X-11 and X-12 from the 1950s were going to be prototypes of the Atlas intercontinental ballistic missile, and the still-born Lockheed X-27 was always intended as a prototype of a production aircraft. So although this practice does not represent the best use of "X" designations, it is not without precedent.
 
For the sake of this thread, what X-plane type are we posting- testbeds/research or pre-production aircraft? I think it would narrow down a lot of aircraft that could be posted here.
 
I think he just meant the definition of the American "X-plane" was being skewed in some instances, not what the thread is for...

The X-3 also strongly resembled the later F-104 having strong ties to it.
 
kool kitty89 said:
The X-3 also strongly resembled the later F-104 having strong ties to it.
Click to expand...
Some of the data acquired by the X-3 was obviously incorporated into the F-104 but aside from that they were two vastly different aircraft. The designe of the F-104 was presented to the USAF in November of 1952, the X-3 first flight was a month later.
 
Here are a few more experimental aircraft with swept-forward wings....

The first one is the Su-47 which is/was largely influenced by the X-29.

The Second one is the Ju-287- one of the earlier attempts at the swept forward wing concept (the first if I am not mistaken).

The third is one of the lesser known aircraft- the Tsybin LL-3. It's the Russian equivalent to the Bell X-1 used to research transonic flight. After about 100 flights with 4 different pilots it obtained a top speed of Mach .97.
 

Attachments

  • su-47-2.jpg
    33.7 KB · Views: 262
  • fig02.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 362
  • LL3.jpg
    13.3 KB · Views: 190
The He 162D was also to use a foreward swept wing.

I think the S-32/S-37/Su-47 was a contemporary, but totaly independant design from the X-29, abeit much newer.


Foreward swept wings (and the knolege of its advantages) are nothing new, it's just that modern composite materials are making them more viable.
 
The Tsybin LL-3 is pretty cool....

I have never seen it before. Thats so interesting about Soviet cold war experimental design, you never know what you are going to find.

I just found a page about it:
Tsybin Ts-1

A shame it didn't make it to mach 1.
 
Flyboy2 said:
Alright, thanks for the info, but I'm still wondering why the US dosen't invest in the forward swept design. It sure looks pretty good to me.
Click to expand...

Unfortunatly coolness is not always the deciding factor in aircraft design

I guess (stressing that its a guess) that whatever benefit was gained from forward swept wings, did not match the price of constructing these.

Advances in thrust vectoring technology has produced the same maneuverability for aircraft with conventional wing design.

Likewise air combat tactics is no longer focused on short range engagement, where agility is of great importance, but instead focuses on medium range missile engagements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
Known aerodynamicists?
3 4 5
Replies
92
Views
5K
z42
Z
M
Please help id experimental plane German? Soviet?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Wurger
Small Aircraft Carriers
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
2K
EwenS
E
Hybrid aircraft carriers
7 8 9
Replies
164
Views
4K
ssnider
S
I
Question on Luftwaffe protocols for missing aircraft??
Replies
17
Views
724
Snautzer01
Menu
Log in
Register