Are the aerodynamics more favorable when the inlet is not flush with the fuselage, or is there another reason for this gap? Other fighter aircraft seem to have it as well, such as the Eurofighter and the Mirage 2000..
IFixPlanes From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 239 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2805 times:
There is also a diverter in front of the A320 APU inlet.
The AMM (49-16-00) is telling why:
... Its primary purpose is to improve the ram air recovery during in-flight APU operation. This is accomplished by positioning the inlet some 50mm into the airstream, thus the lowest energy portion of the aerodynamic boundary layer is prevented from entering the air
SNAFlyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 2704 times:
Thanks for your replies everyone, I hadn't considered compressor stalls and such, though it makes perfect sense now...
Did the Concorde exhibit the same kind of gaps between the engine inlets and the wing surface? In the picture below, there appears to be space between the inlet and wing, albeit a very small one...maybe my eyes are just playing tricks on me. Was stagnant/turbulent air ever much of a consideration at that location during any stages of flight?
Airflow considerations on the Concorde are performed inside the nacelle, not outside...and as the nacelles are located under the wing a psitive airflow is a constant...( I read that somewhere, can't quote at this point, but I do remember that)...j