Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sonic Cruiser  
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2237 times:

What characteristics gave the Sonic Cruiser such good performance even when right up to the sound-barrier? Also, how extreme was the shift in the center of lift? (Was it controlled aerodynamically, or by fuel-ballast?)

Could any of these characteristics be used to develop a supersonic plane that would experience virtually no drag jump from Mach 0.9 to 1.2 with supersonic performance at least comparable to a modern high tech airfoil?

Andrea Kent

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2543 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2228 times:

I'm not sure the Sonic Cruiser had that much better performance, nor would it have cruised right up to Mach 1. Quoted cruise was 0.95. The big change in centre of pressure happens above Mach 1, so any small trim changes would probably have been accomplished with fuel shift (just a guess you understand) and a Mach trimmer.

Again pure speculation, but being a canard configuration with FBW computer control the CG could have been positioned well forward to give neutral longitudinal stability allowing zero or positive canard lift for trim and so minimum trim drag. The main wing was a delta for good transonic performance. The canard would have allowed trailing edge flaps to improve takeoff and landing performance.

Cruise fuel flow was 15-20% higher, but transit times were 20% less, so overall fuel cost was about the same. The alternative offered by Boeing (the 7E7) had 20% less fuel burn at normal cruise speeds. Basically the airlines didn't buy the idea of paying the same to cruise faster. They preferred the idea of paying less to cruise at the same speed (now the 787).

As for the transonic drag rise, the best you can do is get through this region as fast as possible. Even the Sonic Cruiser couldn't change that. Transonic cruising is not a good idea.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2201 times:

Are you sure about that statement about the center of pressure cange occuring after supersonic speed? I remember reading that the center of pressure shifts aft when you lose the upwash at the front of the wing.... that would occur as you near and reach the speed of sound.

As I understand it the bulk of the shift in the C/L occurs in the transonic range (high subsonic, low supersonic) range, even though some shifting occurs at higher mach numbers.

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineSCAT15F From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2175 times:

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 1):
Quoted cruise was 0.95.

Actually, Boeing's website at the end of the program changed from the initial .95 - .98 to just .98 mach.

It was rumored that Boeing even investigated the possibility of Mach 1.2-1.3 supercruise on transoceanic route segments as range was planned to be between 9,000 and 10,000 nm (meaning every conceivable route would have substantial transoceanic sectors).  spin 


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2543 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2133 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 2):
Are you sure about that statement about the center of pressure cange occuring after supersonic speed? I remember reading that the center of pressure shifts aft when you lose the upwash at the front of the wing.... that would occur as you near and reach the speed of sound.

There is a shift of the C/P as you say, which is why many subsonic aircraft have a Mach trimmer, but the big change occurs when the flow over the wing is supersonic, i.e. above M=1.0. By definition this is still in the transonic range. Sorry I didn't make that clearer in my first reply.

Put very approximately the C/P will move from around the 25% chord point (subsonic) to about the 50% point (supersonic). At least that's what my hazy memories of aerodynamics lectures tell me.  Smile



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

Jetlagged,

So, the flow over the wing is supersonic, but the leading edge is still in the subsonic flow, and you got a shockwave moving from front to back over the wing when the C/P shifts aft a lot?

Additionally the shift from 25% chord to 50% chord is to my knowledge only truly accurate on straight wings. On swept wings, delta wings, or arrow wings, the shift is less.

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineStarglider From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 678 posts, RR: 44
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2064 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 5):
So, the flow over the wing is supersonic, but the leading edge is still in the subsonic flow

Analysis results show that the flow around large portions of the aircraft will be supersonic, even if very thin airfoil sections are used.

Big version: Width: 605 Height: 381 File size: 43kb


The figure above presents a typical Mach number distribution on the surface as well as a section cut through the outboard wing. It is clearly visible, that the flow around the canard and the outboard wing is completely supersonic at Mach 0.98, even with thin airfoils. The Mach number on the fuselage and the inboard wings does not exceed M = 1.1 over most of their surface.

Source: DLR Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technologies, Germany.


Starglider


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2046 times:

And during these moments when the plane is subsonic, right up against the sound barrier, and most of the wing (damn near all of it) is supersonic with the exception of a tiny area of the front of the wing, and a tiny amount of the back, the center of pressure has shifted rearwards most of the way?

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineStarglider From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 678 posts, RR: 44
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2013 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 7):
And during these moments when the plane is subsonic, right up against the sound barrier, and most of the wing (damn near all of it) is supersonic with the exception of a tiny area of the front of the wing, and a tiny amount of the back, the center of pressure has shifted rearwards most of the way?

My guess is, yes. And there the canard served its purpose as a trimming device, to compensate for the shift.
Now where have we seen this before . . . . . i think we know the answer to that question. Boeing bought Rockwell International which used to be named North American Aviation. At least some of the basic design of the Sonic Cruiser had that heritage.


Starglider


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2543 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2011 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 5):
So, the flow over the wing is supersonic, but the leading edge is still in the subsonic flow, and you got a shockwave moving from front to back over the wing when the C/P shifts aft a lot?

I meant when the whole flow is supersonic.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

According to that diagram, the flow is still slightly subsonic at the front of the wing.

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1768 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 10):
According to that diagram, the flow is still slightly subsonic at the front of the wing.

A blunt, or round, leading edge will always have flow moving somewhat subsonic until it accelerates as it goes around.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 1665 times:

So, which is it. C/L shifts aft when wing is totally supersonic? Or C/L shifts when wing is almost supersonic?

Because what I read on an aviation site, the shift occurs just before going supersonic. Is the page wrong?

Andrea Kent


User currently offlineStarglider From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 678 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 1651 times:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 12):
So, which is it. C/L shifts aft when wing is totally supersonic? Or C/L shifts when wing is almost supersonic?

Because what I read on an aviation site, the shift occurs just before going supersonic. Is the page wrong?

First thing that matters is a wing's critical mach number. Critical Mach number of an airfoil is when the speed of the airflow over some of the area of the airfoil reaches Mach 1. If the air flowing over an airfoil reaches Mach 1 at some point when the airfoil/aircraft is actually moving at Mach 0.8, the airfoil's critical Mach number is 0.8.

At speeds below critical Mach number, the center of lift is at approx. 25 percent of the wing chord. When speed increases above the critical Mach number and reaches the transonic range with supersonic flow over the wing, generating shock-waves, the center of lift starts to move aft. This will require trimming to counter the nose down effect and is the main reason the all flying tail with irreversible control system was introduced to counter increasing forces as the center of lift continues to move aft with increasing supersonic speed. This phenomena is also known as the "Mach Tuck". If no corrective action would be taken by trimming the aircraft, it would continue to nose over more and more with increasing supersonic speed. Aircraft such as the XB-70 took advantage of its folding wing tips which changed the delta wing geometry in such a way that the center of lift moved relatively forward again when the tips were folded fully down, reducing the amount of trim required to keep the aircraft longitudinally stable.

Starglider


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1559 times:

Quoting Starglider (Reply 13):
the center of lift continues to move aft with increasing supersonic speed.

Are you sure about that? I was taught that supersonic air pressure becomess equally distributed along a surface past Mach 1, so the center of lift locks to 50% chord and stays there.

But this should only apply as long as the wingroot shock wave doesn't cover the wing, i.e. airflow normal to the cross section is still subsonic, mathematically.

With the latter I'm refering somewhat to Robert T. Jones' Oblique Wing theory, that a wing sweept of 45* will render no shockwaves across the wing, negating MCR. If BSC had 45-degree wings maybe it could have had less of a wave drag impact, apart fromt he dutch-roll problem?

Unless I paraphrased wrong, do correct, its been a while.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineStarglider From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 678 posts, RR: 44
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1498 times:

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 14):
Are you sure about that? I was taught that supersonic air pressure becomess equally distributed along a surface past Mach 1, so the center of lift locks to 50% chord and stays there.

By moving aft of the aerodynamic center of lift at increasing supersonic speed, i mean gradually moving aft between 25% to approx. 50% chord. You are correct, at supersonic speeds the whole of the surface behind the crest of an airfoil causes expansion of the relative airflow. The accompanying suction over the upper surface contributes far more to the total lift than at lower speeds, and thus the resultant lift acts much further aft, e.g. limited to around the 50% chord.


Starglider


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Sonic Cruiser
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Sears-Haack X-section Ditribution & Sonic Cruiser? posted Tue Nov 13 2001 16:17:14 by Ikarus
Sonic Cruiser Construction posted Wed May 16 2001 21:33:41 by Sinlock
Sonic Cruiser Designation posted Sun May 6 2001 18:59:25 by UA767-223
Sonic Boom Reduction Techniques posted Thu Dec 21 2006 20:17:58 by Blackbird
Question For Those That Have Heard Sonic Booms posted Mon Oct 23 2006 04:09:55 by FLY2HMO
Sonic Boom - Really An Issue? posted Thu Apr 6 2006 00:52:41 by Keta
Sonic Venturi? Will It Work? Has It Already? posted Sat May 14 2005 21:25:52 by Lehpron
How Many Big Sonic Airplanes Were Built In US? posted Fri Feb 11 2005 22:03:38 by Lehpron
I Can Solve The Sonic Boom Issue, To An Extent posted Mon Apr 26 2004 20:11:43 by Lehpron
Traditional Sonic Designs Are Just That posted Tue Feb 24 2004 22:25:07 by Lehpron

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format