PEI 3721
If 7.33g load limit was interpreted in engineering terms as ‘limit load’, then this could be 1.5 times higher than the allowed operational load depending on the chosen safety factor, e.g. the aircraft limit was approx 5g. This is less than the then state-of-the-art operational aircraft at approx 6g, and perhaps without fatigue considerations
So the operational g-load could either be 7.33g or 5g?
Harley Quinn
No idea about the g loading, guessing 9g as load limit
Well, that is higher than 7.33g.
Shown in figure 10.15(c) is the basic solution to the variable-sweep stability problem employed in the design of all operational variable-sweep aircraft in use today. The wing pivot is located outboard of the fuselage with a highly swept cuff extending from the pivot to the side of the fuselage.
When you say the cuff, you mean the glove right?
In this concept, developed at the NASA Langley Research Center, the fixed and movable components of the wing are configured so that the wing span-load distribution varies with sweep angle in a manner to minimize the rearward shift in the center of lift.
So the glove produces the more lift when the wings are swept, and less when the wings are out? I also would almost swear that the pivot was also designed so that more leading-edge came out of the glove, and more trailing edge went into it -- am I wrong?
Did this wing design tend to weigh more or less than the earlier one?
Jig Peter
On TSR2 at least, and probably other flap-blowers, roll authority was obtained from the differential movement of the tailplane, plus the effect of the all-moving vertical tail; the wing as a whole being used to provide the necessary lift and the tail assembly the control in roll and yaw.
Yeah, but did the Buccaneer have an all moving tail, and differential tail-plane movement? Regardless, I'm pretty sure it didn't have an all moving tail, and it served with the RN FAA.