Our heavyweight helicopter equal in the world does not have
In Rostov started production of the most load-lifting rotary-wing car The Russian holding «Helicopt[...]
The complete aircraft
We have so far concentrated on the factors which make supersonic wings different from their transonic and subsonic counterparts and have seen some of the reasons which underlie the selection of a particular planform for a particular aircraft. Although a few aircraft, such as the Blackbird shown in Fig. 8.18, have been designed with integrated fuselage and wing geometry, by far the largest number of supersonic aircraft retain the traditional arrangement of a discrete fuselage joined to a wing.
When we were looking at the supersonic wing we were concerned mainly with the shock waves, and resulting wave drag, produced by the lifting surface. It was mentioned, albeit very briefly, that both the thickness and angle of attack
|
Fig. 8.17 Effect of planform on drag |
|
Fig. 8.18 Configuration for Mach 3 The SR-71 used lifting fuselage chines as well as a highly swept delta wing (Photo courtesy of Lockheed California Co.) |
of the wing would contribute to the wave drag. The ‘thickness’ contribution also applies to other components of the aircraft, particularly the fuselage. Since the primary object of the aircraft is to carry things, we are normally concerned to reduce wave drag as far as possible with respect to the volume of the aircraft; so wave drag is usually considered in two parts – the wave drag due to the volume and the wave drag due to lift. The volume wave drag is primarily affected by the cross-sectional area distribution.
