×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Custer Channelwing

Custer Channelwing

Custer Channelwing

(OP)
Layperson here re: Custer Channelwing
He built at least three working examples and asked the entire world for a "peer review" and everyone laughed? WTH? Google says no one talks about this (apart from the "official" site). So, I'm asking you learned folks--is this ostensibly proven technology useful today?

RE: Custer Channelwing



I believe mounting the engines above the wings so that the plane gets extra lift from the wash over the wings has been a standard practice in the past.

The Channelwing just seems to be the same technology taken to the extreme. So personally I don't have any problem believing it. If I ever make a model aeroplane I'll consider it. smile

RE: Custer Channelwing

One of the proposals for the project that culminated in the V22 Osprey was a craft with 4 channel wings similar to the bell X-22 with the ducted fans, but the top half of the ducted fan missing and the whole duct/wing being larger. Obviously it never passed the design stage.

Custer got the idea for the channelwing from seeing the roof fly off a barn, and he had NO engineering schooling whatsoever, he went by the seat of his pants rather than base his designs on "good science" yet it worked for him and the technology does indeed work.

The concept has problems though, firstly, it's relatively inefficient for going thru the air so it's slower than a conventional airplane, and it can't hover so it doesn't have the practicality of either a helicopter or a V-22 Osprey. So secondly, I'm sure it'd have great use as a niche aircraft, but I don't personally think that there is sufficient of a market for a company to tool up for producing it, unless the military buys into it as well.

RE: Custer Channelwing

i can't comment on the aerodynamic efficiency, but structurally it's looks a mess.

and you've lost the trailing edge for flaps.

and isn't most of pressure on the inner face of the channel not acting in a direction to support the weight of the plane (ie radially in the channel, as opposed the vertically for a conventional wing).

RE: Custer Channelwing

Well, yes, aerodynamically it is a mess. Quite whether it is a worse aerodynamic mess than an egg beater or a VF22 is another question!

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Custer Channelwing

why fighter ? ... OP doesn't mention it, and i think the pic of the spit was only to show the conventional installation has slipestream effects already included.

RE: Custer Channelwing

Sorry, I obviously scrambled V22 and F22, that really would be a mess!

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources