Re: Power Loading

Douglas R. Jones (
Tue, 16 Jan 1996 23:22:51 -0600

>So it is better to be light than heavy for the same wing area. Counter to that
>argument is the one where a higher wing loading is less affected by gusting
>conditions but wing profile camber is also important in this case.
>Light pattern ships with zero camber are much less affected than trainers or
>WW1 models with significant camber.
>I would expect an SE5 or SPAD to be less affected by gusts than an Albatros
>because the wing profiles of the first two have much less camber. In fact
>the wing section used by many British types were little more than modified
>flat plates. Sections with little camber generally have a smaller Cd than
those with more. That is a significant reason why the boxy SE5 had a slightly
>better performance than the streamlined Albatros D.Va. Less profile drag from
>the wings and therefore better performance with similar amounts of power.

Does this then say that if I wish to design a model of a WWI aircraft, if I
replace the undercambered scale airfoil with one of say a Clark-Y
configuration I will get a better flying aircraft with less need for power.
That will also be more tolerant of gusty wind conditions?