No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Extract
Second in importance only to the problem of increasing the safety and reliability of aeroplanes is the question of reducing their head resistance. If aviation was to take its place as an established means of commercial transport the first essential was obviously to make it reasonably safe and certain, and the main energies of investigators and designers immediately after the War were directed to this object. Economy of operation, of which the reduction of head resistance is one of the major factors, was, by comparison, somewhat neglected. But in the last three or four years, with the safety and reliability problems essentially solved, more attention has been devoted to the reduction of drag.
In reviewing the progress that has been made, and the possibilities of further improvement, it is helpful to inquire what is the best we can hope for. We know that the generation of the lift required to carry weight in heavier-than-air aircraft is inseparably associated with a certain drag—the induced drag.
- Type
- Proceedings
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1932
References
(1)
The Streamline Aeroplane. Journ. Roy. Aero. Soc., XXXIII., 1929, p. 357. Jones, B. M.. See also The Importance of Streamlining in Relation to Performance. R. & M. 1115. B. M. Jones; and Skin Friction and the Drag of Streamline Bodies. R. & M. 1199. Jones, B. M..Google Scholar
(2) Collected Reports on British High Speed Aircraft for the Schneider Trophy Contest of 1927. R. & M. 1300. Compiled by Cowley, W. L..Google Scholar
(3) Experiments relating to the Flow in the Boundary Layer of an Airship Model. R. & M. 1268. Simmons, .Google Scholar
(4) Investigation of the Boundary Layers and the Drags of Two Streamline Bodies. R. & M. 1271. Ower, and Hutton, .Google Scholar
(5) Experiments on the Drag of Two Streamline Bodies. Lock and Johansen. In preparation for publication in the R. & M. Series.Google Scholar
(6) The Interference between the Body and Wings of Aircraft. Aeronautical Research Paper, University of Toronto, No. 22. Parkin, and Klein, . See also Journ. Roy. Aero. Soc., XXXIV., 1930, p. 1.Google Scholar
(7)
Investigation of the Effect of the Body on the Wing of a Low-wing Monoplane. Luftfahrtforschung, II., 1928, p. 34. Muttray, H..Google Scholar
(8) The Influence of a Fuselage on the Lift of a Monoplane. R. & M. 1344. Hartshorn, . See also Aircraft Engineering, III., 1931, p. 201.Google Scholar
(9) The Drag and Interference of a Nacelle in the Presence of a Wing. N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 320. Jacobs.Google Scholar
(10) The Drag and Interference of a Nacelle when installed on the upper surface of a wing. R. & M. 1414. Perring, and Callen, .Google Scholar
(11) The Interference of a Streamline Nacelle on a Monoplane Wing. R. & M. 1895. Ower, and Hutton, .Google Scholar
(13) The effect of Built-in Engine Nacelles on the Air Forces of a Wing. Wieselsberger.Google Scholar
(14)
Recent Measurements on Aeroplane Wings with Cut Away Portions. Zeitschrift für Flugtechnik und Motorluftschiffahrt, XX., 1929, p. 161.Google Scholar
(15)
The Technical Development of the Aeroplane. Journ. Roy. Aero. Soc., XXXIII., 1929, p. 1. North.Google Scholar
(16) Interference Effects and Drag of Struts on a Monoplane Wing. N.A.C.A. Technical Note No. 365. Ward.Google Scholar
(17) The Measurement of the Drag of Small Streamline Bodies. R. & M. 1409. Ower, and Hutton, .Google Scholar
(18) The Validity of Drag Tests on a Large Scale Model in a Small Closed Wind Tunnel. R. & M. 1371. Bradfield, and Perring, .Google Scholar