- Posts: 1261
- Thank you received: 435
JonTappin wrote: Not sure it is going to be much, if any, slower than the BA though as per an earlier post. Is this assumption down to the straight wing vs swept or something else,eg wing section thickness?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
MikeSeale wrote:
JonTappin wrote: Not sure it is going to be much, if any, slower than the BA though as per an earlier post. Is this assumption down to the straight wing vs swept or something else,eg wing section thickness?
This is in reference to a quote from Wolfgang Matt back in 1976:
Q: You seem to prefer a straight taper configuration. Any reason for this?
A: I tried swept wings, but this design needs more speed which requires a faster flying style. I do not like a fast flying style that much
I'm not wholly convinced by this argument but this is what he thought 40-years ago.
However, the Atlas does (I think) have a thicker aerofoil. I think I read 22% somewhere, although this does seem a little too much. The BA is a more typical 18% section. This might have an effect on the speed?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
MikeSeale wrote: ...Since you have the plan, can you measure the length of the wing root section and the maximum thickness. Then do thickness divided by length x100 to find the percentage thickness.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.