0
$\begingroup$

The Ta-152H was well-known for having very high-aspect ratio wings: 8.94, if I'm not mistaken. Now, compare this to the P-51 which had, if I'm not mistaken, an aspect ratio of 5.86. Does this mean that in a turn the P-51 would produce more wingtip vortices than the Ta-152H?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1
$\begingroup$

Easy to follow diagramFor two wings with the same area, the higher AR wing will produce LESS wingtip vortices simply because there is not as much area close to the wing tip that can be affected by the vortices.

The Ta-152H has a wing area of 253 ft^2 while the P-51 has a wing area of 235 ft^2

With those area's being so close together (7% apart) while the AR's are very different (35% apart) it would be a safe assumption to say the Ta-152H produces LESS wingtip vortices than the P-51.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

The strength of a wingtip vortex depends on the span loading of the wing, so both weight and wingspan matter. A turn increases the apparent weight but does not change the comparison between aircraft. Aspect ratio is not a driver; it only matters as it relates to wingspan.

The P51 has a max takeoff weight of 15klb and a wingspan of 37ft, so 405lb/ft. The Ta152 has a max takeoff weight of 11.5klb and a wingspan of 47.4ft, so 242lb/ft. So at max takeoff weight the P51 would have a much stronger wingtip vortex.

Keep in mind that at high speed a wingtip vortex causes a very small amount of drag, so even if doubled it would still be overshadowed by many other factors. If you wanted to know which aircraft could out turn the other in a dogfight, wingtip vortex comparison will not provide the answer.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Vortices don't cause induced drag. Vortices are simply a byproduct of induced drag. They are how you can "tell" that induced drag is happening. The more induced drag a plane is producing, the more vortices it will have, but the vortices themselves are not the cause. $\endgroup$
    – Vinicius Quintela
    Commented May 10, 2018 at 0:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also, when calculating wingloading, you should't use "max takeoff weight" because that number includes maximum amount of ordnance (such as bombs and external fuel tanks). When comparing two aircaft's dogfighting ability, it is much more useful to use "loaded weight", which is the weight of the aircraft fully loaded with fuel but without any external ordnance. The P-51D actually has a lower wingloading than the Ta 152H - 191kg/m^2 as opposed to the Ta 152H's 201kg/m^2 . $\endgroup$
    – Vinicius Quintela
    Commented May 10, 2018 at 0:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .