Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!teltone!reo From: reo@teltone (R. E. Overby) Newsgroups: net.aviation Subject: Re: Wing-loading Message-ID: <167@teltone.UUCP> Date: Tue, 12-Jul-83 12:59:07 EDT Article-I.D.: teltone.167 Posted: Tue Jul 12 12:59:07 1983 Date-Received: Wed, 13-Jul-83 17:04:59 EDT Lines: 63 AIRCRAFT SOURCE lbs/sqft Grumman AA-5B (Tiger) POH-1979 17.1 Messerschmitt ME-262 USAF Int. Rpt. 44.5 Beech F-33A POH 18.8 Folke-Wulf FW-190 Janes (War Max.) 54.8 North American F-51D TO-01 49.75 Boeing KC-135A Janes 110.97 Convair F106A Janes 52.9 Douglas A4D Janes 84.6 Lockheed F104C Janes 107.3 MIG-21 Janes 64 (est) Boeing B52-G Janes 120 (est) Cessna C-177-RG POH-1978 16.1 Cessna C-182-Q POH-1979 16.9 Piper PA28-161 (Warrior) POH-1978 13.7 Piper PA28-181 (Archer) POH-1978 15.0 NOTES: Data from Janes should be regarded as typical since mission and specific configuration will affect gross TO weight and therefore, the wing loading. I agree with Alan on the Grumman line they are relatively fast gliders yet the glide range per the POH is better than some of the Pipers. Since 15 Meters is a common international class sail-plane I would estimate wing loadings at *less* than 4.5 lb/sqft. It is always dangerous to generalize in Aero. Eng. but in its simplest form, *a given airfoil* at *a given angle of attack* has lift proportional to the *square* of the velocity of the air flow. Therefore to support a heavy load *you gots to go fast* The approach speeds on many *hot* turbine powered aircraft are above REDLINE for a C-172/ C-182. USAF Jet-Jock buddy quotes approach in F-106's at aprox 185 KTS depending on landing weight. In any given aircraft higher weight means higher stall speeds and therefore higher landing speeds. Conversely, a C-182 light and 5 KTS hot will take 4000 ft to finally quit flying. The old 'add 5KTS for wife and 2KTS per kid' is a formula to make widows on short runways! For more information on why General Aviation A/C have relatively low landing (and stall) speeds see FAR Part 23 which sets the standards for receiving a type certification. These have been considerably toughened in past 10 years, too. Example anti- siphoning filler necks, stiffer gust loadings (in effect for stronger *Higher *G*) airframes etc. P.S. My favorite XC bird is the C-182. It is one of the few General Aviation A/C whose range at 75% exceeds mine. Robert Overby !teltone reo