Timeline for Wouldn't a triplane be much more efficient than a monoplane of same wing area and span?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16, 2019 at 14:35 | comment | added | AEhere supports Monica | @Fred another angle to consider: three sets of wings will have three sets of wingtip vortices. Consider the spanwise lift distribution, it makes no sense to have multiple inefficient wingtips and wing-body interference zones; a single wing works better. | |
| Aug 16, 2019 at 14:09 | comment | added | Chris | Yep exactly; that's why high performance gliders have one long thin wing and not several short thin wings. | |
| Aug 16, 2019 at 13:57 | comment | added | Fred | So what you're saying: If I have an airplane, 30 span, 6' chord, and now make it a high performance glider with a 90' span and 2' chord, it will be way more efficient. Now if I cut up the glider wing and make it a triplane, it will no longer be a high performance glider, it will have the same drag as the original 30 span, 6' chord? | |
| Aug 16, 2019 at 13:30 | comment | added | Chris | The span loading of each wing goes down by 66%. But you're tripling the number of wings. So the span loading of the vehicle as a whole doesn't change. | |
| Aug 16, 2019 at 13:25 | comment | added | Fred | If you keep the same overall span width, keeping the same wing area, you are reducing the chord by 1/3, and you are increasing the effective span by 300%, so your span loading goes down by 66%. Frontal area is unchanged as the the wings are 1/3 as thick, therefore form drag is unchanged, At a gap and stagger of 2 chord, I'm told there is no interference drag, just like a main wing and tail on a conventional plane, which is really a biplane of sorts anyways. | |
| Aug 16, 2019 at 13:14 | history | edited | Chris | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 44 characters in body
|
| Aug 16, 2019 at 13:04 | history | answered | Chris | CC BY-SA 4.0 |