Low wing pusher configuration?

Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by BBerson, Nov 20, 2016.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Dec 9, 2016 #101

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,403
    Likes Received:
    2,091
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
  2. Dec 9, 2016 #102

    REVAN

    REVAN

    REVAN

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    58
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona USA
    I think the Jackson J-10 was a very revolutionary homebuilt airplane for its time, and yet, few have ever heard of it. It was a very early HBA having first flown in 1956. It was a design concept way ahead of its time, and could be worth revisiting and updating the concept without making it a big, fat and heavy $280K car / pseudo-LSA with airbags and all that crap. Something more along the size and weight specs of a Titan Tornado than the Transition. Keep the folding wing format of the J-10, update the aerodynamics and construction and it could be a really nice airplane.
     
  3. Dec 9, 2016 #103

    Swampyankee

    Swampyankee

    Swampyankee

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    355
    Location:
    Earth USA East Coast
    For turbojets and turbofans, the pusher/tractor distinction is somewhat moot.
     
  4. Dec 9, 2016 #104

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,403
    Likes Received:
    2,091
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    But why are almost all LearJet types low wing? The Jet Commander is the only high wing I can think of.
    I suppose they want the spar on the bottom for headroom, but might be other airflow reasons.
     
  5. Dec 9, 2016 #105

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,871
    Likes Received:
    5,728
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    I think of the Jet Commander as a mid-wing, regardless of the recent thread about wing and engine placement.

    A low wing on a business class jet has several advantages, including protecting the engine inlets from ingesting foreign matter, allowing more cabin space for people rather than structure and landing gear, and easier refuling at airports that do not have single point refueling equipment.

    Plus they look better.

    BJC
     
  6. Dec 9, 2016 #106

    Riggerrob

    Riggerrob

    Riggerrob

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    309
    Location:
    Canada
    Smaller business jets place the entire pressurized cabin forward of the wing spars. This configuration limits cabin length (number of seat rows).
    Keeping the pressure cabin away from wing spars leads to much straighter and simpler and lighter structures.
    Larger business jets and airliners build the main cabin floor directly on top of the wing Center box.

    The 1960s-vintage, mid-winged Hansa Jet solved that (short cabin) problem with forward-swept wings.

    As for the debate over mid-wing versus shoulder-wing .......
    Low-wings pass under the cabin.
    Hansa Jet and Jet Commander count as mid-wings because wing spars cross the "equator" of the fuselage.
    Shoulder wings .... cross the cabin at ... um .... er shoulder height like BA-7, Bolkow Junior and Sisler Cygnet.
    High wings go over the top of the cabin, like most military transports.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2016
  7. Dec 9, 2016 #107

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,871
    Likes Received:
    5,728
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Some examples.

    https://goo.gl/images/fMGx9T

    https://goo.gl/images/lkKoV6


    BJC
     
  8. Dec 9, 2016 #108

    bmcj

    bmcj

    bmcj

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,555
    Likes Received:
    4,579
    Location:
    Fresno, California
    Why pressurize the passenger cabin? The passengers can have a nice nap while they fly and awake bright and refreshed. :gig:
     
    Norman likes this.
  9. Dec 9, 2016 #109

    Vigilant1

    Vigilant1

    Vigilant1

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,550
    Likes Received:
    1,527
    Location:
    US
    I think there may be some confusion about identity of Lewis Jackson's designs. From this EAA Sport Aviation article, it appears that the J-10 is a tractor-engined taildragger. I'd like to know more about the specs and design of Jackson's aircraft N8072, (including the name of the design), it looks interesting. That N-number appears to have been most recently used by a Pitts.
     
  10. Dec 10, 2016 #110

    Swampyankee

    Swampyankee

    Swampyankee

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    355
    Location:
    Earth USA East Coast
    The low air pressure is sooo drying; the valet needs to stay awake to moisturize.
     
  11. Dec 11, 2016 #111

    XtremeBudgetMusician

    XtremeBudgetMusician

    XtremeBudgetMusician

    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Springfield,MO
    GoldWing. Very simple. (Not the motorcycle)
     
  12. Dec 25, 2016 #112

    VAPORTRAIL

    VAPORTRAIL

    VAPORTRAIL

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    82
    Location:
    HUDSON, FL
    Was bored after dinner. How about this BB? Think it checks most of your boxes. Didn't know if you like Red, but it is Christmas!
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Dec 25, 2016 #113

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,403
    Likes Received:
    2,091
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    Sleek!
    Looks like we have the model designation figured out.
     
  14. Dec 26, 2016 #114

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Montpellier,LFNG (Candillargues)
  15. Dec 26, 2016 #115

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Montpellier,LFNG (Candillargues)
    oh!, sorry Fritz, I just see you mention Janowski ;)
     
  16. Oct 20, 2018 #116

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,403
    Likes Received:
    2,091
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
  17. Oct 20, 2018 #117

    lr27

    lr27

    lr27

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,216
    Likes Received:
    463
    Has anyone mentioned that a high motor and low wing mean short landing gear? Less drag if fixed, lighter whether fixed or not, easier to fit retracts.
    -----------
    Strojnik's little speed machine had less than 30 hp and went 126 mph.
    http://www.reactionresearch.com/aircraft/aircraftindex.htm

    Can't remember if anyone mentioned the Stearman Hammond:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stear...rman_Hammond_Y-1_at_Langley_November_1938.jpg

    I don't know if I should mention the Prescott Pusher. I seem to recall it's an example of what not to do. Plus I guess the prop was too far back.

    The Subsonex may count.

    I'm imagining an aircraft with a more or less egg shaped fuselage mounted on a fairly thin pylon on top of the wing. The fuselage is set up so that, in cruise, it's pointed parallel to air flow as much as possible. This might be a good enough approximation of axisymmetric flow to let the prop greatly reduce the fuselage's drag. Something like what's discussed in Goldschmeid's papers:
    https://cafe.foundation/v2/tech_enablingtech_dragreduction.php
     
  18. Oct 20, 2018 #118

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,767
    Likes Received:
    1,534
    Location:
    Thunder Bay
    A few years ago after watching Mike Arnold’s videos and reading what a lot of the composite guys on HBA had to say about drag reduction, I started thinking along the same lines for a F1 air racer. Low wing, main wheels buried in the wing, V-tail on a boom, and a pilot/engine pod on a pylon above the wing. It was just conceptual though, and so far outside the realm of anything I’d ever be interested enough in to complete.
     
  19. Oct 20, 2018 #119

    plncraze

    plncraze

    plncraze

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    284
    Bruce Carmichael wrote extensively on these kinds of fuselages. He was involved in their testing although he always told the Navy it was for torpedoes. There is a picture of what I think is a Horten style wing with one of those fuselages under it at a conference this year.
     
  20. Oct 20, 2018 #120

    plncraze

    plncraze

    plncraze

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    284

Share This Page

arrow_white