High Wing vs Low wing

[Ferris]

I've flown quite a few hours in both high and low wing aircraft. The handling characteristics come down to aircraft design in my opinion, and I have no particular preference for either, as each has it's merits and draw backs. I've heard a few of the old timers discussing this point around the aero club. The consensus seems to be that for general pottering around and sight-seeing, high wing is the way to go. If you want to go somewhere in a hurry then low wing is the answer. Low wings are better for people who suffer from motion sickness. The pendulum effect is apparently less pronounced with low wing aircraft.

 

 

[facthunter]

Pendulum effect.

 

Dihedral and sweep-back have a lot to do with lateral stability. The effect that you often feel in your "butt" probably has more to do with fuselage "keel" surface, as much as other factors.. Most low wing aircraft have more dihedral than high wing, for ground clearance and stability.. aerobatic aircraft tend to have neutral rather than positive lateral stability characteristics, to be more manoeuverable. Horses for courses. Nev

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Dihedral and sweep-back have a lot to do with lateral stability. The effect that you often feel in your "butt" probably has more to do with fuselage "keel" surface, as much as other factors.. Most low wing aircraft have more dihedral than high wing, for ground clearance and stability.. aerobatic aircraft tend to have neutral rather than positive lateral stability characteristics, to be more manoeuverable. Horses for courses. Nev

Not sure about the dihedral Nev, my tecnam has quite a lot of dihedral while my Yak had none and was razor flat. Both feel similar to each other but way different to a high wing. Of course I don't fly my Tecnam inverted either.

 

I have attached two photos of rollercoaster's. The first one is the high wing rollercoaster (the high wing feeling while hanging from your head). The second one is the low wing rollercoaster (pinned by your bum). Neither actually has a wing so the feeling has nothing to do with keel surface, sweep-back or dihedral etc. The feeling is all about which part of your body is attached to the pivot or axis; head or bum. Both feel the same G straight down your spine.

 

You are right though, 'horses for courses' and low wing is definitely my horse.

 

I think that for most pilots who spend their lives flying around S & L and between 15 and 30 degrees of bank, might not feel the difference. But if you bank it up and pitch it up, there is a difference. You can feel it in your bum.

 

 

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Tecnam and Yak are designed for two different purposes. Tecnam needs a bit of inherent stability for it's recreational/training. The Yak is to train for upcoming fighter jocks who need a bit of instability and fast response to control imput.

 

 

[facthunter]

Roller coaster.

 

Cloudsuck, I am genuinely sorry that I do not get the connection with the rollercoaster situation. Sideloads on your butt are felt any time the ball is not centred. We all know that don't we. The sort of sensation I am referring to is what you might encounter in light "chop" particularly in a "VEE" tail Bonanza or a twin commanche with full tanks. at approach speeds.. In the case of the twin it is exaggerated by the amount of mass out on the wings giving rotational inertia in the yaw axis. the sideload is generated when the rudder effect does not balance , The nose is not heading towards the relative airflow and that airflow causes uneven forces on the sides of the fuselage.. The extreme illustration of this is when the aircraft is in a vertical bank but can be flown on the lift generated by the fuselage on its own with top rudder and stick neutral.. You need to keep your speed up when doing this, but I am just trying to illustrate my point.

 

Getting back to the comparison, visibility has to be taken into account. The high wing blots out a lot of sky, but the low wing blots out a lot of countryside when you are looking down. Nev.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Cloudsuck, I am genuinely sorry that I do not get the connection with the rollercoaster situation. Sideloads on your butt are felt any time the ball is not centred. We all know that don't we. The sort of sensation I am referring to is what you might encounter in light "chop" particularly in a "VEE" tail Bonanza or a twin commanche with full tanks. at approach speeds.. In the case of the twin it is exaggerated by the amount of mass out on the wings giving rotational inertia in the yaw axis. the sideload is generated when the rudder effect does not balance , The nose is not heading towards the relative airflow and that airflow causes uneven forces on the sides of the fuselage.. The extreme illustration of this is when the aircraft is in a vertical bank but can be flown on the lift generated by the fuselage on its own with top rudder and stick neutral.. You need to keep your speed up when doing this, but I am just trying to illustrate my point.Getting back to the comparison, visibility has to be taken into account. The high wing blots out a lot of sky, but the low wing blots out a lot of countryside when you are looking down. Nev.

Thanks Nev, no I can see that you don't get the connection. It has nothing to do with side loads or out of balance or knife edge flight. Just how far you bum moves in a balanced turn. I thought the rollacoaster would do it but I can't put it any simpler.

 

If the guy with his head bolted to the rail of the coaster banks from 45 degrees left to 45 right, his backside swings through a big arc, probabily two - three metres wide. The guy with his bum bolted to the coaster rail has his backside following the rail (he is on rails) but his head is what moves two - three metres from side to side. If you straddle a kids swing and get somone to push you through a 90 degree arc, see how much ground you backside covers.

 

Here is a guy flying a paraglider (just a wing). There is no keel, no tail, no side loads, he feels G in the turn the same as we do. See how much his body (bum) is off the centre line. Now imagine he is sitting on top of the wing in the same turn.

 

 

 

 

[Tomo]

I get ya now anyway!

 

Thanks for explaining it all Cloudsuck...

 

 

[facthunter]

Yes.

 

Then he will describe a tighter radius. the pivot point is still above him/her??? sorry. Nev..

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

I get ya now anyway!Thanks for explaining it all Cloudsuck...

I knew I could count on you Tomo! Now.... what about that whole Tailwheel -v- Nosewheel thing

 

 

[Tomo]

what about that whole Tailwheel -v- Nosewheel thing

Why, that's easy! Tailwheel is for real pilots, nosewheel is for lazy pilots!

 

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Why, that's easy! Tailwheel is for real pilots, nosewheel is for lazy pilots!

I tend to agree....

 

 

[skydog]

the abundant ocean of knowledge does it again

 

I am always impressed by this website and this thread is one of the reasons why.

 

The great ocean of knowledge out there has I think fully provided just about every aspect of high vs low wing benefits, negatives and more.

 

("thinks... I must ask some questions myself")

 

 

[BigPete]

Real Pilots

 

Real Pilots

 

1. Start their engines by hand, :black_eye:

 

2. Dont have any brakes, :ah_oh:

 

3. Don't have flaps,

 

4. Don't need a compass or any other new fangled means of navigation, i_dunno

 

5. Don't have cabin heating,

 

6. Have at least two sidcot suits, :thumb_up:

 

7. Don't use sealed runways,

 

8. Have no radio, phone, ipod, gps, etc, thumb_down

 

regards

 

:big_grin::big_grin:

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Haha..tomo, mate, the drifter is barely a taildragger.. ..

 

 

[Tomo]

Haha..tomo, mate, the drifter is barely a taildragger.. ..

Yeah I know! just rubbing it in!!!

 

Hey Bigpete: That just about covers the Drifter... though it does have a compass! and handheld radio.............. an we have had to hand start it by hand when the battery is down on grunt!

 

Oh yeah, and it does have brakes! though not real good...!

 

 

[Yenn]

And I was thinking real pilots didn't have a cabin.

 

 

[skydog]

Real flyers

 

Actual real flyers, dont have an airplane at all!!!

 

They have an arresting device strapped to their backs to land safely but otherwise their aerobatics, flying etc is done in freefall using just their bodies.

 

 

[Guest drizzt1978]

I have one for you. Being able to see parachutes (meat bombs) over head. The other day during a nav, we were on the south side of an aerodrome, when we herd chutes over head at 3,500, well we knew we were on the south side and the dangerside was north side, but a hole in the roof would have been nice to see above us!!!

 

So we quickly turned for our next destination, So a high wing with a sunroof is a good option on these occasions!!

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

skydivers= meat missiles

 

parachutists= toggle turkeys

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

Actual real flyers, dont have an airplane at all!!!They have an arresting device strapped to their backs to land safely but otherwise their aerobatics, flying etc is done in freefall using just their bodies.

Yeah right ... makes me laugh when I hear meat bombers talk about flying. I say mate, you don't fly, you fall like a rock. When you can gain altitude i'll be impressed.

 

 

[Guest Cloudsuck]

So a high wing with a sunroof is a good option on these occasions!!

A low wing is a better option :big_grin:

 

 

[Yenn]

OK so real flyers are under a canopy. Surely that is a high wing, although they can get above the chute.

 

 

[mAgNeToDrOp]

Got some flight time for a present so took the sportscruiser in Bunbury for a fly with instructor, first time in a low wing, what a lovely looking aircraft! Biggest difference for me was the visibility compared to high wing, huge difference, handling was totally different too but haven't had enough time to comment with authority on that, landing was ok seemed to float forever but settled nicely, not a bad landing considering it was 6 months since my last flight... controls alot more sensitive and responsive than the jab...hope to get some more time up there soon, flying bug sunk its teeth in me again :) Might stick to j230 for Nav endorsement so I can concentrate on the navigation side of things instead of getting used to a different aircraft,left hand stick, toe breaks etc, but definitely on my list after navs...oh and so much more room in the sportscruiser, being 6'4" and 120kg (humorous sight climbing out of a j160) was still room to spare..:)

 

 

[dazza 38]

:big_grin:hello i have around 50/50 split between high wing and low wing aircraft. They do have minor handling differences but, an around an hour check with an instructor. Is all you will need. I personally like flying the technam Golf with the bubble canopy because it has a lot better visibility in turns than in a high wing echo.

 

 

[Ultralights]

feel like a bit of stir, if your turns are balanced, regardless of high or low wing, then gravity should be acting through th base of the seat. and in non cantilevered high wing aircraft, the lift forces act through the aircraft floor just as they do in a low wing. remember, the lift strut transfers the lifting loads to the fuselage, and its attached to the lower section of the fuse!! so high wings also lift from the bottom .