Question for Harrier pilots out there
Thread Starter
Question for Harrier pilots out there
How much lift does the full flap deployment generate in hovering flight, especialy out of ground effect? Do you have to apply any aft thrust vector to compensate for wing lift?
Just curious about the aero brought about ffrom some design work and studying the Hopflyt eVTOL concept
Thanks in advance!
Just curious about the aero brought about ffrom some design work and studying the Hopflyt eVTOL concept
Thanks in advance!
Hmmm. Not really sure what you mean. In the hover the wing produces no lift therefore no compensation is required. I seem to recall the 7/9 wing would produce about 1500lbs down to about 30 kts (doubtless some worthlessness QFI will be along soon to tell me it was 1569lbs at 31kts)
I thought that too... an oddly-phrased question.
Hovering = no lift and no drag to compensate for.
Transitioning to the hover = some lift and some drag, but you want to stop so no compensation needed. Fine adjustment of deceleration uses coordinated pitch and throttle control; coarse adjustment uses coordinated nozzle and throttle control.
Transitioning out of the hover = some lift and some drag, but you want to accelerate so an aft thrust vector is used anyway.
Slow speed jet borne flight = some lift and some drag. A small aft thrust vector (about 8 degrees off the vertical IIRC) maintained a steady 50kts.
Hovering = no lift and no drag to compensate for.
Transitioning to the hover = some lift and some drag, but you want to stop so no compensation needed. Fine adjustment of deceleration uses coordinated pitch and throttle control; coarse adjustment uses coordinated nozzle and throttle control.
Transitioning out of the hover = some lift and some drag, but you want to accelerate so an aft thrust vector is used anyway.
Slow speed jet borne flight = some lift and some drag. A small aft thrust vector (about 8 degrees off the vertical IIRC) maintained a steady 50kts.
As above, the wing ( including flaps) will produce lift all the time there is a (sub-stall) angle of attack and an airflow from ahead. In a still-air hover, there is no lift BUT there is resistance to the downward movement of entrained air over the airframe. This means that flaps will increase this resistance unless they are "down", thus reducing the plan area of the wing. This vertical "drag" will off-set some of the vertical thrust, thereby reducing the weight at which a hover can be established.
Aerodynamics get a bit complex in the hover!
Mog
Aerodynamics get a bit complex in the hover!
Mog
Note that thrust vector is not completely vertical to hover
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=8UPVfRmUMio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=8UPVfRmUMio
The very definition of hover is that the lift vector is vertical.
Any non vertical component to the thrust (net thrust from all sources - if you like) will produce an acceleration in some horizontal direction until the drag equals the horizontal component of the thrust.
I guess I am missing something.
The point of the very large 62 degree flap angle was to enable the wing to deliver meaningful lift at low IAS during the transition to from the hover. Numbers above are correct so you would only start to “fall off” the wing into purely jet borne flight below about 30kts. That meant that until that point you didn’t need so much jet thrust which in turn meant saving the time limited engine ratings at higher JPTs or limited volume of water injection available until you really needed it in the hover.
Once in the hover the 7/9 had a range of lift improvement devices like the strakes, front LIDS door and rear gear door to help entrain airflow close to the ground and cushion ROD.
When considering the Harrier nozzles also remember that true 90 to the ground was not 90 to the airframe deck angle so the hover was around 82 degrees nozzle for a vertical thrust vector.
Once in the hover the 7/9 had a range of lift improvement devices like the strakes, front LIDS door and rear gear door to help entrain airflow close to the ground and cushion ROD.
When considering the Harrier nozzles also remember that true 90 to the ground was not 90 to the airframe deck angle so the hover was around 82 degrees nozzle for a vertical thrust vector.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jimjim - I agree for still air. The other 90% (or more!) of days would require a small forward (assuming straight vane!) component from the thrust vector.
To answer another facet of the question: On really strong wind days or when the landing surface (let’s call it a CVS) was moving into wind at a rate of knots - and therefore the wing was producing more lift than ‘normal’ - one still had to trim forward - so any moment requiring aft pitch (if there was one!) was overcome by the thrust vector needing to be angled forward to keep position.
And no, I’m not a trimmer.
To answer another facet of the question: On really strong wind days or when the landing surface (let’s call it a CVS) was moving into wind at a rate of knots - and therefore the wing was producing more lift than ‘normal’ - one still had to trim forward - so any moment requiring aft pitch (if there was one!) was overcome by the thrust vector needing to be angled forward to keep position.
And no, I’m not a trimmer.
Thread Starter
Hmmm.
The very definition of hover is that the lift vector is vertical.
Any non vertical component to the thrust (net thrust from all sources - if you like) will produce an acceleration in some horizontal direction until the drag equals the horizontal component of the thrust.
I guess I am missing something.
The very definition of hover is that the lift vector is vertical.
Any non vertical component to the thrust (net thrust from all sources - if you like) will produce an acceleration in some horizontal direction until the drag equals the horizontal component of the thrust.
I guess I am missing something.
WRT the Harrier, I was wondering if the jet plume induced any airflow over the wing to speak of that could generate a noticeable lift component (or more likely a noticeable horizontal thrust component that needed compensating for)
There is something very strange going on in that video - I'm struggling to see what force the forward rake of the thrust vector is opposing. I'd need to look at it in a lot of detail to understand what's going on.
PDR
It is threads like this that remind me how much John Farley used to contribute to such discussions. We would have had a definitive answer to the original question. 😔
I would hazard a guess at the lift from the 'wings' below the four props. The video states that 20% of hover lift is generated by these wings. If you look at them as a wing surface with the flow from the props providing the high speed flow over the top of the wing, you get a lift vector that's angled back and up a bit. The upwards bit is useful for hover lift, the rearwards bit needs to be offset by the canted thrust from the props.
Actually the dams/pods/lids etc did not affect the HOVER performance at all. If anything they REDUCED it because of the extra weight. What they did affect was the vertical LANDING and TAKEOFF performance. As stated above, interaction between the airframe and the vertical jet eflux and recirculation of hot air into the intake was what was managed by all the bits and bobs.
The hover was always carried out in "free air" outside the effects of recirculation, airframe impingement etc. It was possible to hover at a weight that would "spike" the engine if you attempted a VL.
Swing the Lamp!
Mog
The hover was always carried out in "free air" outside the effects of recirculation, airframe impingement etc. It was possible to hover at a weight that would "spike" the engine if you attempted a VL.
Swing the Lamp!
Mog
The harrier's nozzles would always have a net forward angle at the hover (still air) to offset the intake momentum. Essentially the engine sucks in a large massflow of air, so it effectively "sucks itself forwards".
With the intakes forward of the CofG it is this Intake Momentum Drag that makes the Harrier directionally unstable in the hover and caused all sorts of nasty problems if any appreciable yaw is allowed to develop. Hence the yaw vane on the nose and I believe vibrating rudder pedals!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most folk could mount a plausible explanation of Intake Momentum Drag and its effect if you didn’t play by the rules...everyone’s story on the effect was aligned but the explanation always seemed to be a bit woolly!
In my experience it was because the vane being straight made perfect sense, the speed band of impending disappointment seemed logical - and at some point alpha came into the conversation as a ‘it just does’ ingredient.
Hence most conversations about IMD seemed to end with someone saying ‘Look, let’s not get bogged down in this - just take one element of ‘the triangle’ out and you’ll be fine...’
Still, I suppose it allowed the QFIs to talk knowledgably about something that didn’t include a single weapon system or tactic...😉
In my experience it was because the vane being straight made perfect sense, the speed band of impending disappointment seemed logical - and at some point alpha came into the conversation as a ‘it just does’ ingredient.
Hence most conversations about IMD seemed to end with someone saying ‘Look, let’s not get bogged down in this - just take one element of ‘the triangle’ out and you’ll be fine...’
Still, I suppose it allowed the QFIs to talk knowledgably about something that didn’t include a single weapon system or tactic...😉
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm.
The very definition of hover is that the lift vector is vertical.
Any non vertical component to the thrust (net thrust from all sources - if you like) will produce an acceleration in some horizontal direction until the drag equals the horizontal component of the thrust.
I guess I am missing something.
The very definition of hover is that the lift vector is vertical.
Any non vertical component to the thrust (net thrust from all sources - if you like) will produce an acceleration in some horizontal direction until the drag equals the horizontal component of the thrust.
I guess I am missing something.
In the hover as the aircraft descends there is a "pocket" of high pressure air "retained" fore and aft by the airbrake & dam and left and right by gun pods or strakes. It may be that there if some residual that can be retained likewise by flaps?