0
$\begingroup$

I am in 3rd year Aerospace Engineering and trying to do a preliminary design of an airplane. My design has a front wing that also has an engine at its root on both side of the fuselage.

aircraft nose and front wing

There is another engine with thrust vectoring nozzle at the back of the aircraft. The canard is a low-wing set up and the main wing is a high-wing setup. Of course, they can all change. At VTOL takeoff and landing, the front wing would rotate 90 degrees so the engine could point downward. During cruise the engine would rotate back to be horizontal. Since the canard could fully rotate, and it also carries and thrust component, I just don't think it fits the definition of the different canard types as described in the wiki. Since the rotation of the front wing could change the direction of 2/3 of the aircraft's thrust, there is no need to have any camber in its airfoil, right? And the only requirement of this wing section's aspect ratio is that its wing need to be stubby so there won't be much drag and countertorque when the front wing is rotating?

Edit: maybe I have made a wrong assumption, I should not arbitrarily set all of the engine to be the same thrust. I should set that these two engine at the front provides a thrust that is reasonable, that could ensure the balance of the aircraft during VTOL.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's making lift and providing pitch control when it's horizontal isn't it? Why would you want an uncambered airfoil? $\endgroup$
    – John K
    Commented Mar 6, 2021 at 3:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You say that a rotating "canard" controls 2/3 of the aircraft thrust. To maintain balance that would require the fore wing to develop 2/3 of the lift, meaning that it is not a canard but the main wing. Can you clarify what you mean here? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 6, 2021 at 13:26
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure whether this canard should be a control canard, lift canard, or stabilizing canard. Also, by "2/3 of thrust" I mean since two out of three engine in the aircraft is fixed to the canard, when rotating the canard, the direction of thrust would be rotate too $\endgroup$
    – user39178
    Commented Mar 6, 2021 at 19:36
  • $\begingroup$ @user39178: the aircraft must be balanced both in vertical take-off and in hover, so if you have 2/3 of the vertical thrust there, they can't be that far forward, which means they don't have much leverage to provide control. Also either the main wing is quite close to the canards, which probably won't be very efficient, or the canards are carrying significant lift (assuming the third engine is near the tail, not on the other wing, so the canards don't need to produce 2/3 of lift). $\endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Commented Mar 7, 2021 at 22:43
  • $\begingroup$ maybe I have made a wrong assumption, I should not arbitrarily set all of the engine to be the same thrust. I should set that these two engine at the front provides a thrust that is reasonable, that could ensure the balance of the aircraft during VTOL. $\endgroup$
    – user39178
    Commented Mar 8, 2021 at 2:45

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .