BEST WINGLOADING FOR 3-D
#2
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Rochester,
NY
As light as you can posible go for indoor flying but more power for outdoor. Im not sure of an actual number on my shcok flyer Yak but it weighed 5.4 oz with a 2 cell pack and 5.8 with 3 cells
#3

My Feedback: (4)
It is entirely dependant on airplane size. Without trying to get too far into it, it has something to do with Reynold's numbers, which has to do with airspeed and size and such, which basically takes into accout the size of things and the way they react to gravity, air pressure, etc. If you want to delve into the theory, you can go to http://home.earthlink.net/~x-plane/F...-Reynolds.html or type "reynolds number" in a search engine...
To give you an idea, the ideal wing loading for a 30" 3D foamy is somewhere around 5 ounces/sq.ft, while a very light wing loading for a 40%er is around 30-32 ounces/sq.ft. In the mid range would be a 120ish size plane, where optimal wing loadings are floating around 20 ounces/sq.ft. I have a 50cc plane that weighs 15.2 pounds with 1450 squares for a 24 ounce wingloading and flies like a kite...
BTW, did you know that a high performance full scale aircraft, such as the Yak 54, has over a 15 POUND/sq.ft wing loading?
To give you an idea, the ideal wing loading for a 30" 3D foamy is somewhere around 5 ounces/sq.ft, while a very light wing loading for a 40%er is around 30-32 ounces/sq.ft. In the mid range would be a 120ish size plane, where optimal wing loadings are floating around 20 ounces/sq.ft. I have a 50cc plane that weighs 15.2 pounds with 1450 squares for a 24 ounce wingloading and flies like a kite...
BTW, did you know that a high performance full scale aircraft, such as the Yak 54, has over a 15 POUND/sq.ft wing loading?
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Austin, TX
My favorite 3-d plane is a 35% Von Extra 260 with a wing loading of 28.3 oz/sq foot.
Wing loading doesn't scale with size. Cubic loading does a much better job of indicating how performance scales with size.
With the cubic loading measurement, below 10 is acceptable and below 8 is really great for a monoplane. For a biplane below 7.5 is good and below 6 is really great.
If you fly something with a floater-type wing on it (e.g. a U can Do), the formula is not as representative.
The expression to calculate cubic loading in excel is =B4*16/power(sqrt(B3/144),3) where b4 is weight in pounds and b3 is wing area in sq. in.
Here are the cubic loadings for some of the planes I've owned or flown :
Wing loading doesn't scale with size. Cubic loading does a much better job of indicating how performance scales with size.
With the cubic loading measurement, below 10 is acceptable and below 8 is really great for a monoplane. For a biplane below 7.5 is good and below 6 is really great.
If you fly something with a floater-type wing on it (e.g. a U can Do), the formula is not as representative.
The expression to calculate cubic loading in excel is =B4*16/power(sqrt(B3/144),3) where b4 is weight in pounds and b3 is wing area in sq. in.
Here are the cubic loadings for some of the planes I've owned or flown :
Code:
Von Extra 260 35% AW 33% Edge 540T FC 35% Extra 330 Hyde Dumbo Vision
weight 22.9 27.8 25 15.8
wing area 1870 1870 1861 1600
cubic loading 7.82 8.31 8.68 6.82



