New answers tagged

1

The systems used by complex aircraft are typically made specifically for an aircraft platform and all the different manufacturers of both air-frames and the control systems will have slightly different system architectures. For example, a system will have a flight control "computer" made by one manufacturer, this will send commands via a data bus to the ...


1

One very strong reason thrust vectoring is of little or no use to offset flap-induced pitch moment: you reduce thrust to idle or near idle during landing, which would make the thrust vectoring ineffective. The Harrier lands at higher throttle (it takes much more than 50% power just to hover with no stores aboard). If you were using fans at the nose, driven ...


1

I'm not sure why we're assuming that flap deployment will cause pitch instability. As far as I'm aware, flap deployment moves the CoP rearward, which should make the aircraft more stable. I may be missing something here, though, I'm still working my way through Perkins&Hage. I'm not quite following Peter's argument about gusts. For now we'll work under ...


3

No, for several reasons What you want is to compensate for the additional lift from downward deflected flaps at the back of a flying wing with vectored thrust. As @Sean points out this will not bring a noticeable net benefit if the lengthwise location of both forces is similar. But that is not all. Besides the force equilibrium around the flying wing you ...


2

No. Thrust vectoring produces a nose-up pitching moment by pointing the engine nozzle upwards, which pushes the aircraft's tail down and its nose up. Extended flaps increase total lift, and produce a nose-down pitching moment, by deflecting air downwards at the trailing edges of the wings, pushing the aircraft's tail up and its nose down. As the engine ...


Top 50 recent answers are included