fbpx
Wikipedia

Wing loading

In aerodynamics, wing loading is the total mass of an aircraft or flying animal divided by the area of its wing.[1][a] The stalling speed, takeoff speed and landing speed of an aircraft are partly determined by its wing loading.[2]

The Monarch Butterfly has a very low 0.168 kg/m2 wing loading
The McDonnell Douglas MD-11 has a high 837 kg/m2 maximum wing loading

The faster an aircraft flies, the more its lift is changed by a change in angle of attack so a smaller wing is less adversely affected by vertical gusts. Consequently, faster aircraft generally have higher wing loadings than slower aircraft in order to avoid excessive response to vertical gusts.

A higher wing loading also decreases maneuverability. The same constraints apply to winged biological organisms.

Range of wing loadings edit

Wing loading examples[3]
Aircraft Type Introduction MTOW Wing area kg/m2 lb/sqft
Monarch Butterfly Animal Cenozoic 0.168 0.034
birds[b] Animal Cretaceous 1–20 0.20–4.10[4]
bird flight upper critical limit Animal 25 5.1[5]
Ozone Buzz Z3 MS Paraglider 2010 75–95 kg (165–209 lb) 25.8 m2 (278 sq ft) 2.9–3.7 0.59–0.76[6]
Wills Wing Sport 2 155 Hang glider 2004 94.8–139.8 kg (209–308 lb) 14.4 m2 (155 sq ft) 6.6–9.7 1.4–2.0[7]
upper limit Microlift glider 2008 220 kg (490 lb) max. 12.2 m2 (131 sq ft) min.[c] 18 3.7[8]
CAA (UK) regulations microlight wing loading limit 2008 [d] 450 kg (990 lb) max. [e] 18 m2 (190 sq ft) min.[f] 25 5.1[9]
Schleicher ASW 22 Glider 1981 850 kg (1,870 lb) 16.7 m2 (180 sq ft) 50.9 10.4
Piper Warrior General aviation 1960 1,055 kg (2,326 lb) 15.14 m2 (163.0 sq ft) 69.7 14.3
Beechcraft Baron General aviation twin-engine 1960 2,313 kg (5,099 lb) 18.5 m2 (199 sq ft) 125 26
Supermarine Spitfire Fighter (WWII) 1938 3,039 kg (6,700 lb) 22.48 m2 (242.0 sq ft) 135 28
Beechcraft Airliner Airliner (commuter) 1968 4,727 kg (10,421 lb) 25.99 m2 (279.8 sq ft) 182 37
Learjet 31 Business jet 1990 7,031 kg (15,501 lb) 24.57 m2 (264.5 sq ft) 286 59
Mikoyan MiG-23 Fighter (variable-geometry) 1970 17,800 kg (39,200 lb) 34.16–37.35 m2 (367.7–402.0 sq ft) 477–521 98–107
Lockheed F-104 Starfighter Fighter (multi-role) 1958 13,166 kg (29,026 lb) 18.22 m2 (196.1 sq ft) 722.6 148.0
General Dynamics F-16 Fighter (multi-role) 1978 19,200 kg (42,300 lb) 27.87 m2 (300.0 sq ft) 688.9 141.1
McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle Fighter (air superiority) 1976 30,845 kg (68,002 lb) 56.5 m2 (608 sq ft) 546 112
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 Fighter (Interceptor) 1970 36,720 kg (80,950 lb) 61.4 m2 (661 sq ft) 598 122
Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird Strategic Reconnaissance Aircraft 1966 68,946 kg (152,000 lb) 170 m2 (1,800 sq ft) 406 83
Fokker F27 Airliner (turboprop) 1958 19,773 kg (43,592 lb) 70 m2 (750 sq ft) 282 58
Fokker F28 Fellowship Airliner (regional jet) 1969 33,000 kg (73,000 lb) 78.97 m2 (850.0 sq ft) 418 86
Boeing 737-400 Airliner (Narrow-body) 1984 62,820 kg (138,490 lb) 91.04 m2 (979.9 sq ft) 690 140
Boeing 737-900 Airliner (Narrow-body) 2001 84,139 kg (185,495 lb) 124.6 m2 (1,341 sq ft) 675 138
Boeing 767-300ER[10] Airliner (Wide-body) 1982 181,437 kg (400,000 lb) 283.3 m2 (3,049 sq ft) 640 130
Concorde Airliner (supersonic) 1976 187,000 kg (412,000 lb) 358.2 m2 (3,856 sq ft) 522 107
Rockwell B-1B Lancer Bomber (variable-geometry) 1983 148,000 kg (326,000 lb) 181.2 m2 (1,950 sq ft) 818 168
McDonnell Douglas MD-11[10] Airliner (wide-body) 1990 283,720 kg (625,500 lb) 338.9 m2 (3,648 sq ft) 837 171
Boeing 777-300[10] Airliner (wide-body) 1998 299,370 kg (660,000 lb) 427.8 m2 (4,605 sq ft) 700 140
Airbus A340-500/600[10] Airliner (wide-body) 2002 365,000 kg (805,000 lb) 437.3 m2 (4,707 sq ft) 835 171
Boeing 747-400[10] Airliner (wide-body) 1988 396,830 kg (874,860 lb) 525 m2 (5,650 sq ft) 756 155
Airbus A380 Airliner (wide-body) 2007 575,000 kg (1,268,000 lb) 845 m2 (9,100 sq ft) 680 140

Effect on performance edit

Wing loading is an useful measure of the stalling speed of an aircraft. Wings generate lift owing to the motion of air around the wing. Larger wings move more air, so an aircraft with a large wing area relative to its mass (i.e., low wing loading) will have a lower stalling speed. Therefore, an aircraft with lower wing loading will be able to take off and land at a lower speed (or be able to take off with a greater load). It will also be able to turn at a greater rate.

Effect on takeoff and landing speeds edit

The lift force L on a wing of area A, traveling at true airspeed v is given by

 ,

where ρ is the density of air and CL is the lift coefficient. The lift coefficient is a dimensionless number which depends on the wing cross-sectional profile and the angle of attack.[11] At steady flight, neither climbing nor diving, the lift force and the weight are equal. With L/A = Mg/A =WSg, where M is the aircraft mass, WS = M/A the wing loading (in mass/area units, i.e. lb/ft2 or kg/m2, not force/area) and g the acceleration due to gravity, that equation gives the speed v through[12]

  .

As a consequence, aircraft with the same CL at takeoff under the same atmospheric conditions will have takeoff speeds proportional to  . So if an aircraft's wing area is increased by 10% and nothing else is changed, the takeoff speed will fall by about 5%. Likewise, if an aircraft designed to take off at 150 mph grows in weight during development by 40%, its takeoff speed increases to   = 177 mph.

Some flyers rely on their muscle power to gain speed for takeoff over land or water. Ground nesting and water birds have to be able to run or paddle at their takeoff speed before they can take off. The same is true for a hang glider pilot, though they may get assistance from a downhill run. For all these, a low WS is critical, whereas passerines and cliff dwelling birds can get airborne with higher wing loadings.

Effect on turning performance edit

To turn, an aircraft must roll in the direction of the turn, increasing the aircraft's bank angle. Turning flight lowers the wing's lift component against gravity and hence causes a descent. To compensate, the lift force must be increased by increasing the angle of attack by use of up elevator deflection which increases drag. Turning can be described as 'climbing around a circle' (wing lift is diverted to turning the aircraft) so the increase in wing angle of attack creates even more drag. The tighter the turn radius attempted, the more drag induced; this requires that power (thrust) be added to overcome the drag. The maximum rate of turn possible for a given aircraft design is limited by its wing size and available engine power: the maximum turn the aircraft can achieve and hold is its sustained turn performance. As the bank angle increases so does the g-force applied to the aircraft, this having the effect of increasing the wing loading and also the stalling speed. This effect is also experienced during level pitching maneuvers.[13]

 
Load factor varying with altitude at 50 or 100 lb/sq ft

As stalling is due to wing loading and maximum lift coefficient at a given altitude and speed, this limits the turning radius due to maximum load factor. At Mach 0.85 and 0.7 lift coefficient, a wing loading of 50 lb/sq ft (240 kg/m2) can reach a structural limit of 7.33 g up to 15,000 feet (4,600 m) and then decreases to 2.3 g at 40,000 feet (12,000 m). With a wing loading of 100 lb/sq ft (490 kg/m2) the load factor is twice smaller and barely reaches 1g at 40,000 feet.[14]

Aircraft with low wing loadings tend to have superior sustained turn performance because they can generate more lift for a given quantity of engine thrust. The immediate bank angle an aircraft can achieve before drag seriously bleeds off airspeed is known as its instantaneous turn performance. An aircraft with a small, highly loaded wing may have superior instantaneous turn performance, but poor sustained turn performance: it reacts quickly to control input, but its ability to sustain a tight turn is limited. A classic example is the F-104 Starfighter, which has a very small wing and high 723 kg/m2 (148 lb/sq ft) wing loading.

At the opposite end of the spectrum was the large Convair B-36: its large wings resulted in a low 269 kg/m2 (55 lb/sq ft) wing loading that could make it sustain tighter turns at high altitude than contemporary jet fighters, while the slightly later Hawker Hunter had a similar wing loading of 344 kg/m2 (70 lb/sq ft). The Boeing 367-80 airliner prototype could be rolled at low altitudes with a wing loading of 387 kg/m2 (79 lb/sq ft) at maximum weight.

Like any body in circular motion, an aircraft that is fast and strong enough to maintain level flight at speed v in a circle of radius R accelerates towards the center at  . That acceleration is caused by the inward horizontal component of the lift,  , where   is the banking angle. Then from Newton's second law,

 

Solving for R gives

 

The lower the wing loading, the tighter the turn.

Gliders designed to exploit thermals need a small turning circle in order to stay within the rising air column, and the same is true for soaring birds. Other birds, for example those that catch insects on the wing also need high maneuverability. All need low wing loadings.

Effect on stability edit

Wing loading also affects gust response, the degree to which the aircraft is affected by turbulence and variations in air density. A small wing has less area on which a gust can act, both of which serve to smooth the ride. For high-speed, low-level flight (such as a fast low-level bombing run in an attack aircraft), a small, thin, highly loaded wing is preferable: aircraft with a low wing loading are often subject to a rough, punishing ride in this flight regime. The F-15E Strike Eagle has a wing loading of 650 kilograms per square metre (130 lb/sq ft) (excluding fuselage contributions to the effective area), whereas most delta wing aircraft (such as the Dassault Mirage III, for which WS = 387 kg/m2) tend to have large wings and low wing loadings.[citation needed]

Quantitatively, if a gust produces an upward pressure of G (in N/m2, say) on an aircraft of mass M, the upward acceleration a will, by Newton's second law be given by

 ,

decreasing with wing loading.

Effect of development edit

A further complication with wing loading is that it is difficult to substantially alter the wing area of an existing aircraft design (although modest improvements are possible). As aircraft are developed they are prone to "weight growth"—the addition of equipment and features that substantially increase the operating mass of the aircraft. An aircraft whose wing loading is moderate in its original design may end up with very high wing loading as new equipment is added. Although engines can be replaced or upgraded for additional thrust, the effects on turning and takeoff performance resulting from higher wing loading are not so easily reconciled.

Water ballast use in gliders edit

Modern gliders often use water ballast carried in the wings to increase wing loading when soaring conditions are strong. By increasing the wing loading the average speed achieved across country can be increased to take advantage of strong thermals. With a higher wing loading, a given lift-to-drag ratio is achieved at a higher airspeed than with a lower wing loading, and this allows a faster average speed across country. The ballast can be ejected overboard when conditions weaken or prior to landing.

Design considerations edit

Fuselage lift edit

 
The F-15E Strike Eagle has a large relatively lightly loaded wing

A blended wing-fuselage design such as that found on the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon or Mikoyan MiG-29 Fulcrum helps to reduce wing loading; in such a design the fuselage generates aerodynamic lift, thus improving wing loading while maintaining high performance.

Variable-sweep wing edit

Aircraft like the Grumman F-14 Tomcat and the Panavia Tornado employ variable-sweep wings. As their wing area varies in flight so does the wing loading (although this is not the only benefit). When the wing is in the forward position takeoff and landing performance is greatly improved.[15]

Flaps edit

Like all aircraft flaps, Fowler flaps increase the camber and hence the maximum value of lift coefficient (CLmax) lowering the landing speed. They also increase wing area, decreasing the wing loading, which further lowers the landing speed.[16]

High lift devices such as certain flaps allow the option of smaller wings to be used in a design in order to achieve similar landing speeds compared to an alternate design using a larger wing without a high lift device. Such options allow for higher wing loading in a design. This may result in beneficial features, such as higher cruise speeds or a reduction in bumpiness at high speed low altitude flight (the latter feature is very important for close air support aircraft roles). For instance, Lockheed's Starfighter uses internal Blown flaps to achieve a high wing loading design (723 kg/m²) with allows it a much smoother low altitude flight at full throttle speeds compared to low wing loading delta designs such as the Mirage 2000 or Mirage III (387 kg/m²). The F-16 which has a relatively high wing loading of 689 kg/m² uses leading-edge extensions to increase wing lift at high angles of attack.

See also edit

References edit

Notes edit

  1. ^ "Wing Loading Definition". Merriam Webster.
  2. ^ a b "Chapter 11: Aircraft Performance". Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge (FAA-H-8083-25C ed.). Federal Aviation Administration. 17 July 2023. pp. 8–9.
  3. ^ Hendrik Tennekes (2009). The simple science of Flight: From Insects to Jumbo Jets. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51313-5., "Figure 2: The great flight diagram".
  4. ^ Thomas Alerstam, Mikael Rosén, Johan Bäckman, Per G. P Ericson, Olof Hellgren (17 July 2007). "Flight Speeds among Bird Species: Allometric and Phylogenetic Effects". PLOS Biology. 5 (8): e197. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050197. PMC 1914071. PMID 17645390.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  5. ^ Meunier, K. Korrelation und Umkonstruktionen in den Größenbeziehungen zwischen Vogelflügel und Vogelkörper-Biologia Generalis 1951: pp. 403-443. [Article in German]
  6. ^ Gérard Florit (23 January 2016). "Ozone Buzz Z3". P@r@2000.
  7. ^ "Sport 2 / 2C". Wills Wing.
  8. ^ "Sporting Code Section 3: Gliding". Fédération Aéronautique Internationale. 12 October 2016.
  9. ^ "Microlights". UK Civil Aviation Authority. or a stalling speed at the maximum weight authorised not exceeding 35 knots calibrated speed
  10. ^ a b c d e Lloyd R. Jenkinson; Paul Simpkin; Darren Rhodes (30 July 1999). "Aircraft Data File". Civil Jet Aircraft Design. Elsevier Limited.
  11. ^ Anderson, 1999 p. 58
  12. ^ Anderson, 1999 pp. 201–3
  13. ^ Spick, 1986. p. 24.
  14. ^ Laurence K. Loftin Jr. (1985). "Chapter 11 - Aircraft Maneuverability". Quest for Performance - The Evolution of Modern Aircraft. NASA Scientific and Technical Information Branch.
  15. ^ Spick, 1986. pp. 84–87.
  16. ^ Anderson 1999, pp. 30–1

Bibliography edit

  • Anderson, John D. Jnr. (1999). Aircraft Performance and Design. Cambridge: WCB/McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-116010-8.
  • Spick, Mike (1986). Jet Fighter Performance-Korea to Vietnam. Osceola, Wisconsin: Motorbooks International. ISBN 0-7110-1582-1.

Notes edit

  1. ^ For aircraft, this includes area of ailerons.[2]
  2. ^ 138 species from 10 g to 10 kg, from small passerines to swans and cranes
  3. ^ at max weight
  4. ^ legislation enacted
  5. ^ for a two seat landplane
  6. ^ at max weight

External links edit

  • Laurence K. Loftin Jr. (1985). "Chapter 7:Design Trends - Stalling Speed, Wing Loading, and Maximum Lift Coefficient". Quest for Performance - The Evolution of Modern Aircraft. NASA Scientific and Technical Information Branch.
  • Earl L. Poole (1938). "Weights and wing areas in North American birds" (PDF). The Auk.

wing, loading, aerodynamics, wing, loading, total, mass, aircraft, flying, animal, divided, area, wing, stalling, speed, takeoff, speed, landing, speed, aircraft, partly, determined, wing, loading, monarch, butterfly, very, wing, loadingthe, mcdonnell, douglas. In aerodynamics wing loading is the total mass of an aircraft or flying animal divided by the area of its wing 1 a The stalling speed takeoff speed and landing speed of an aircraft are partly determined by its wing loading 2 The Monarch Butterfly has a very low 0 168 kg m2 wing loadingThe McDonnell Douglas MD 11 has a high 837 kg m2 maximum wing loadingThe faster an aircraft flies the more its lift is changed by a change in angle of attack so a smaller wing is less adversely affected by vertical gusts Consequently faster aircraft generally have higher wing loadings than slower aircraft in order to avoid excessive response to vertical gusts A higher wing loading also decreases maneuverability The same constraints apply to winged biological organisms Contents 1 Range of wing loadings 2 Effect on performance 2 1 Effect on takeoff and landing speeds 2 2 Effect on turning performance 2 3 Effect on stability 2 4 Effect of development 2 5 Water ballast use in gliders 3 Design considerations 3 1 Fuselage lift 3 2 Variable sweep wing 3 3 Flaps 4 See also 5 References 5 1 Notes 5 2 Bibliography 5 3 Notes 6 External linksRange of wing loadings editWing loading examples 3 Aircraft Type Introduction MTOW Wing area kg m2 lb sqftMonarch Butterfly Animal Cenozoic 0 168 0 034birds b Animal Cretaceous 1 20 0 20 4 10 4 bird flight upper critical limit Animal 25 5 1 5 Ozone Buzz Z3 MS Paraglider 2010 75 95 kg 165 209 lb 25 8 m2 278 sq ft 2 9 3 7 0 59 0 76 6 Wills Wing Sport 2 155 Hang glider 2004 94 8 139 8 kg 209 308 lb 14 4 m2 155 sq ft 6 6 9 7 1 4 2 0 7 upper limit Microlift glider 2008 220 kg 490 lb max 12 2 m2 131 sq ft min c 18 3 7 8 CAA UK regulations microlight wing loading limit 2008 d 450 kg 990 lb max e 18 m2 190 sq ft min f 25 5 1 9 Schleicher ASW 22 Glider 1981 850 kg 1 870 lb 16 7 m2 180 sq ft 50 9 10 4Piper Warrior General aviation 1960 1 055 kg 2 326 lb 15 14 m2 163 0 sq ft 69 7 14 3Beechcraft Baron General aviation twin engine 1960 2 313 kg 5 099 lb 18 5 m2 199 sq ft 125 26Supermarine Spitfire Fighter WWII 1938 3 039 kg 6 700 lb 22 48 m2 242 0 sq ft 135 28Beechcraft Airliner Airliner commuter 1968 4 727 kg 10 421 lb 25 99 m2 279 8 sq ft 182 37Learjet 31 Business jet 1990 7 031 kg 15 501 lb 24 57 m2 264 5 sq ft 286 59Mikoyan MiG 23 Fighter variable geometry 1970 17 800 kg 39 200 lb 34 16 37 35 m2 367 7 402 0 sq ft 477 521 98 107Lockheed F 104 Starfighter Fighter multi role 1958 13 166 kg 29 026 lb 18 22 m2 196 1 sq ft 722 6 148 0General Dynamics F 16 Fighter multi role 1978 19 200 kg 42 300 lb 27 87 m2 300 0 sq ft 688 9 141 1McDonnell Douglas F 15 Eagle Fighter air superiority 1976 30 845 kg 68 002 lb 56 5 m2 608 sq ft 546 112Mikoyan Gurevich MiG 25 Fighter Interceptor 1970 36 720 kg 80 950 lb 61 4 m2 661 sq ft 598 122Lockheed SR 71 Blackbird Strategic Reconnaissance Aircraft 1966 68 946 kg 152 000 lb 170 m2 1 800 sq ft 406 83Fokker F27 Airliner turboprop 1958 19 773 kg 43 592 lb 70 m2 750 sq ft 282 58Fokker F28 Fellowship Airliner regional jet 1969 33 000 kg 73 000 lb 78 97 m2 850 0 sq ft 418 86Boeing 737 400 Airliner Narrow body 1984 62 820 kg 138 490 lb 91 04 m2 979 9 sq ft 690 140Boeing 737 900 Airliner Narrow body 2001 84 139 kg 185 495 lb 124 6 m2 1 341 sq ft 675 138Boeing 767 300ER 10 Airliner Wide body 1982 181 437 kg 400 000 lb 283 3 m2 3 049 sq ft 640 130Concorde Airliner supersonic 1976 187 000 kg 412 000 lb 358 2 m2 3 856 sq ft 522 107Rockwell B 1B Lancer Bomber variable geometry 1983 148 000 kg 326 000 lb 181 2 m2 1 950 sq ft 818 168McDonnell Douglas MD 11 10 Airliner wide body 1990 283 720 kg 625 500 lb 338 9 m2 3 648 sq ft 837 171Boeing 777 300 10 Airliner wide body 1998 299 370 kg 660 000 lb 427 8 m2 4 605 sq ft 700 140Airbus A340 500 600 10 Airliner wide body 2002 365 000 kg 805 000 lb 437 3 m2 4 707 sq ft 835 171Boeing 747 400 10 Airliner wide body 1988 396 830 kg 874 860 lb 525 m2 5 650 sq ft 756 155Airbus A380 Airliner wide body 2007 575 000 kg 1 268 000 lb 845 m2 9 100 sq ft 680 140Effect on performance editWing loading is an useful measure of the stalling speed of an aircraft Wings generate lift owing to the motion of air around the wing Larger wings move more air so an aircraft with a large wing area relative to its mass i e low wing loading will have a lower stalling speed Therefore an aircraft with lower wing loading will be able to take off and land at a lower speed or be able to take off with a greater load It will also be able to turn at a greater rate Effect on takeoff and landing speeds edit The lift force L on a wing of area A traveling at true airspeed v is given by L 1 2 r v 2 A C L displaystyle L tfrac 1 2 rho v 2 AC L nbsp where r is the density of air and CL is the lift coefficient The lift coefficient is a dimensionless number which depends on the wing cross sectional profile and the angle of attack 11 At steady flight neither climbing nor diving the lift force and the weight are equal With L A Mg A WSg where M is the aircraft mass WS M A the wing loading in mass area units i e lb ft2 or kg m2 not force area and g the acceleration due to gravity that equation gives the speed v through 12 v 2 2 g W S r C L displaystyle textstyle v 2 frac 2gW S rho C L nbsp As a consequence aircraft with the same CL at takeoff under the same atmospheric conditions will have takeoff speeds proportional to W S displaystyle scriptstyle sqrt W S nbsp So if an aircraft s wing area is increased by 10 and nothing else is changed the takeoff speed will fall by about 5 Likewise if an aircraft designed to take off at 150 mph grows in weight during development by 40 its takeoff speed increases to 150 1 4 displaystyle scriptstyle 150 sqrt 1 4 nbsp 177 mph Some flyers rely on their muscle power to gain speed for takeoff over land or water Ground nesting and water birds have to be able to run or paddle at their takeoff speed before they can take off The same is true for a hang glider pilot though they may get assistance from a downhill run For all these a low WS is critical whereas passerines and cliff dwelling birds can get airborne with higher wing loadings Effect on turning performance edit To turn an aircraft must roll in the direction of the turn increasing the aircraft s bank angle Turning flight lowers the wing s lift component against gravity and hence causes a descent To compensate the lift force must be increased by increasing the angle of attack by use of up elevator deflection which increases drag Turning can be described as climbing around a circle wing lift is diverted to turning the aircraft so the increase in wing angle of attack creates even more drag The tighter the turn radius attempted the more drag induced this requires that power thrust be added to overcome the drag The maximum rate of turn possible for a given aircraft design is limited by its wing size and available engine power the maximum turn the aircraft can achieve and hold is its sustained turn performance As the bank angle increases so does the g force applied to the aircraft this having the effect of increasing the wing loading and also the stalling speed This effect is also experienced during level pitching maneuvers 13 nbsp Load factor varying with altitude at 50 or 100 lb sq ftAs stalling is due to wing loading and maximum lift coefficient at a given altitude and speed this limits the turning radius due to maximum load factor At Mach 0 85 and 0 7 lift coefficient a wing loading of 50 lb sq ft 240 kg m2 can reach a structural limit of 7 33 g up to 15 000 feet 4 600 m and then decreases to 2 3 g at 40 000 feet 12 000 m With a wing loading of 100 lb sq ft 490 kg m2 the load factor is twice smaller and barely reaches 1g at 40 000 feet 14 Aircraft with low wing loadings tend to have superior sustained turn performance because they can generate more lift for a given quantity of engine thrust The immediate bank angle an aircraft can achieve before drag seriously bleeds off airspeed is known as its instantaneous turn performance An aircraft with a small highly loaded wing may have superior instantaneous turn performance but poor sustained turn performance it reacts quickly to control input but its ability to sustain a tight turn is limited A classic example is the F 104 Starfighter which has a very small wing and high 723 kg m2 148 lb sq ft wing loading At the opposite end of the spectrum was the large Convair B 36 its large wings resulted in a low 269 kg m2 55 lb sq ft wing loading that could make it sustain tighter turns at high altitude than contemporary jet fighters while the slightly later Hawker Hunter had a similar wing loading of 344 kg m2 70 lb sq ft The Boeing 367 80 airliner prototype could be rolled at low altitudes with a wing loading of 387 kg m2 79 lb sq ft at maximum weight Like any body in circular motion an aircraft that is fast and strong enough to maintain level flight at speed v in a circle of radius R accelerates towards the center at v 2 R displaystyle scriptstyle frac v 2 R nbsp That acceleration is caused by the inward horizontal component of the lift L s i n 8 displaystyle scriptstyle Lsin theta nbsp where 8 displaystyle theta nbsp is the banking angle Then from Newton s second law M v 2 R L sin 8 1 2 v 2 r C L A sin 8 displaystyle textstyle frac Mv 2 R L sin theta frac 1 2 v 2 rho C L A sin theta nbsp Solving for R givesR 2 W s r C L sin 8 displaystyle textstyle R frac 2Ws rho C L sin theta nbsp The lower the wing loading the tighter the turn Gliders designed to exploit thermals need a small turning circle in order to stay within the rising air column and the same is true for soaring birds Other birds for example those that catch insects on the wing also need high maneuverability All need low wing loadings Effect on stability edit Wing loading also affects gust response the degree to which the aircraft is affected by turbulence and variations in air density A small wing has less area on which a gust can act both of which serve to smooth the ride For high speed low level flight such as a fast low level bombing run in an attack aircraft a small thin highly loaded wing is preferable aircraft with a low wing loading are often subject to a rough punishing ride in this flight regime The F 15E Strike Eagle has a wing loading of 650 kilograms per square metre 130 lb sq ft excluding fuselage contributions to the effective area whereas most delta wing aircraft such as the Dassault Mirage III for which WS 387 kg m2 tend to have large wings and low wing loadings citation needed Quantitatively if a gust produces an upward pressure of G in N m2 say on an aircraft of mass M the upward acceleration a will by Newton s second law be given bya G A M G W S displaystyle textstyle a frac GA M frac G W S nbsp decreasing with wing loading Effect of development edit A further complication with wing loading is that it is difficult to substantially alter the wing area of an existing aircraft design although modest improvements are possible As aircraft are developed they are prone to weight growth the addition of equipment and features that substantially increase the operating mass of the aircraft An aircraft whose wing loading is moderate in its original design may end up with very high wing loading as new equipment is added Although engines can be replaced or upgraded for additional thrust the effects on turning and takeoff performance resulting from higher wing loading are not so easily reconciled Water ballast use in gliders edit Modern gliders often use water ballast carried in the wings to increase wing loading when soaring conditions are strong By increasing the wing loading the average speed achieved across country can be increased to take advantage of strong thermals With a higher wing loading a given lift to drag ratio is achieved at a higher airspeed than with a lower wing loading and this allows a faster average speed across country The ballast can be ejected overboard when conditions weaken or prior to landing Design considerations editFuselage lift edit nbsp The F 15E Strike Eagle has a large relatively lightly loaded wingA blended wing fuselage design such as that found on the General Dynamics F 16 Fighting Falcon or Mikoyan MiG 29 Fulcrum helps to reduce wing loading in such a design the fuselage generates aerodynamic lift thus improving wing loading while maintaining high performance Variable sweep wing edit Aircraft like the Grumman F 14 Tomcat and the Panavia Tornado employ variable sweep wings As their wing area varies in flight so does the wing loading although this is not the only benefit When the wing is in the forward position takeoff and landing performance is greatly improved 15 Flaps edit Like all aircraft flaps Fowler flaps increase the camber and hence the maximum value of lift coefficient CLmax lowering the landing speed They also increase wing area decreasing the wing loading which further lowers the landing speed 16 This section possibly contains original research Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations Statements consisting only of original research should be removed April 2023 Learn how and when to remove this template message High lift devices such as certain flaps allow the option of smaller wings to be used in a design in order to achieve similar landing speeds compared to an alternate design using a larger wing without a high lift device Such options allow for higher wing loading in a design This may result in beneficial features such as higher cruise speeds or a reduction in bumpiness at high speed low altitude flight the latter feature is very important for close air support aircraft roles For instance Lockheed s Starfighter uses internal Blown flaps to achieve a high wing loading design 723 kg m with allows it a much smoother low altitude flight at full throttle speeds compared to low wing loading delta designs such as the Mirage 2000 or Mirage III 387 kg m The F 16 which has a relatively high wing loading of 689 kg m uses leading edge extensions to increase wing lift at high angles of attack See also editDisk loading Lift coefficientReferences editNotes edit Wing Loading Definition Merriam Webster a b Chapter 11 Aircraft Performance Pilot s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge FAA H 8083 25C ed Federal Aviation Administration 17 July 2023 pp 8 9 Hendrik Tennekes 2009 The simple science of Flight From Insects to Jumbo Jets MIT Press ISBN 978 0 262 51313 5 Figure 2 The great flight diagram Thomas Alerstam Mikael Rosen Johan Backman Per G P Ericson Olof Hellgren 17 July 2007 Flight Speeds among Bird Species Allometric and Phylogenetic Effects PLOS Biology 5 8 e197 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 0050197 PMC 1914071 PMID 17645390 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a CS1 maint multiple names authors list link Meunier K Korrelation und Umkonstruktionen in den Grossenbeziehungen zwischen Vogelflugel und Vogelkorper Biologia Generalis 1951 pp 403 443 Article in German Gerard Florit 23 January 2016 Ozone Buzz Z3 P r 2000 Sport 2 2C Wills Wing Sporting Code Section 3 Gliding Federation Aeronautique Internationale 12 October 2016 Microlights UK Civil Aviation Authority or a stalling speed at the maximum weight authorised not exceeding 35 knots calibrated speed a b c d e Lloyd R Jenkinson Paul Simpkin Darren Rhodes 30 July 1999 Aircraft Data File Civil Jet Aircraft Design Elsevier Limited Anderson 1999 p 58 Anderson 1999 pp 201 3 Spick 1986 p 24 Laurence K Loftin Jr 1985 Chapter 11 Aircraft Maneuverability Quest for Performance The Evolution of Modern Aircraft NASA Scientific and Technical Information Branch Spick 1986 pp 84 87 Anderson 1999 pp 30 1 Bibliography edit Anderson John D Jnr 1999 Aircraft Performance and Design Cambridge WCB McGraw Hill ISBN 0 07 116010 8 Spick Mike 1986 Jet Fighter Performance Korea to Vietnam Osceola Wisconsin Motorbooks International ISBN 0 7110 1582 1 Notes edit For aircraft this includes area of ailerons 2 138 species from 10 g to 10 kg from small passerines to swans and cranes at max weight legislation enacted for a two seat landplane at max weightExternal links editLaurence K Loftin Jr 1985 Chapter 7 Design Trends Stalling Speed Wing Loading and Maximum Lift Coefficient Quest for Performance The Evolution of Modern Aircraft NASA Scientific and Technical Information Branch Earl L Poole 1938 Weights and wing areas in North American birds PDF The Auk Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Wing loading amp oldid 1203929736, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.