mattbeme

Which wing will fly better as a trainer wing with the best gentle flying characteristics.

1. BUHOR dihedral. 2mm Coro. The bottom seems to camber up and I was wondering if this would make it less efficient.

2. Spadet wing (same as RNAF wing?) with separate bottom coro piece which seems to stay nice and flat. This wing would seem to me to fly better.

Matt

Woodsy

Hmmm, the chicken or the egg????? under cambered wing give slightly more lift but are worse for inverted fligh.

for a trainer it makes no diferance.

oh i think the undercambered wing is called an epler aerofoil, often udes on glidrs i think.... but then i could be wrong

Jack Hyde

My Feedback: (1)

If you draw the proile of an airfoil and mark the midpoint between the top surface and the bottom surface the line resulting is the camber line. Then draw a straight line from the tip of the nose to the trailng edge. The distance between the 2 lines at the point where they are farthest apart divided by the chord is the % camber.
So a wing with a flat bottom is a cambered wing. A wing with more camber than a flat bottom is undercambered.One with less camber is sometimes called semisymmetric (a horrible term - a bumpy road is semismooth?). A wing with no camber is symmetric. Wing lift and drag vary smoothly with varying camber. A flat wing is just another camber. High camber gives high max lift coefficient but higher drag than one with less camber.
It turns out flat bottom wings give a pretty good lift and drag for putting around. So is a symmetric wing - needs to fly a little faster to generate enough lift to stay up.

Mike in DC

They probably all fly about the same, and for sure a new pilot couldn't tell the difference. My first reaction would be whichever is lightest, since wing loading is probably more important for flying characteristics than any other factor. I would guess the design of the plane, plus amount of control throw would also affect "gentleness" more than the wing design.

voyager_663rd

Just what I was thinking.

Not having flown the deb, I would say that they all fly about the same (at slow speed, like bricks I might add). Pays your nickle, takes your chances. Heavier they are, harder they fall.

Woodsy

i've made, RNAF and standard, Undercambered, polyhedral, dihedral, symetrical, yada, yada and they all fly pretty much the same as a balsa or foam equivalent. one of my fav planes is a polyhedral under cambered wing type old timer.

"flying like a brick" at low speed is almost nothing to do with aerofoil (on trainers) and a lot to do with wing loading, (as voyager points out) but it's also nothing to do with construction materials, a SPAD trainer with the same loading as a basla one will fly pretty much the same.