Sign in to follow this  
LAdamson

Cardinal dihedral? hmmmm sure looks like it to me!

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

:-lolGeez, Hornit.. you done stole that idea from me. I was just perusing those sites and you beat me to it. Dang!!!But, before everyone jumps on this.. keep in mind that these are illusions generated by the photography. Yeah, right.. parallax and all that stuff. No wait!!!! They are under lift and that is "bendage", certainly not dihedral. That's the correct answer! :)Can you tell I am really really tired of this subject???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goes to prove it's tough making a firm decision from a photo, doesn't it? L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's remove all the extranious stuff, draw some parallel lines and expand the picture somewhat. Geez, that be dihedral. :)Now, can we put this subject to rest? The airplane has dihedral. There is no such thing as an aircraft that has zero dihedral (in the modern era that is). Now, can we move on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Now, can we put this subject to rest? The airplane has >dihedral. There is no such thing as an aircraft that has >zero dihedral (in the modern era that is). Now, can we move >on? Yes there is.....I'd have to check to make sure, but check aircraft such as the aerobatic Extra300, Sukhoi, etc. The idea is to prevent rudder from causing the aircraft to bank due to dihedral of the wings.An simple R/C plane with only rudder control and no ailerons will have an extreme amount of dihedral to begin the turn. We don't want these newer aerobatic aircraft to start rolling when using high amounts of rudder for knife edges, etc.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, okay, mea culpa.. I should have said "except for aerobatic aircraft where roll stabilization/stability is critical". Which, OBTW, does not describe a Cardinal. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>There is no such thing as an aircraft that has >zero dihedral (in the modern era that is). Tom,There may be aircraft however that has "negative" dihedral. Take for example C-5A Galaxy military transport. It is my understanding the dihedral is to add lateral stability but with a heavy fuselage suspended underneath the wings there may already be "too much" of this stability therefore wings are bent downwards in effect creating negative dihedral.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, BUT, THERE IS dihedral - negative or otherwise. And that's my point (with the exception of my caveat above). Heck, even a helicopter has dihedral. Now, you figure that one out. :-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can continue this converstaion over the Saturday banquet .. :-lolMichael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Heck, even a helicopter has dihedral. Now, you figure that >one out. I'd say that has to do with flexing of the individual blades in lift. For instance, each blade may constantly change angle as it travels around the "swash plate". To move the helicopter forward, the trailing blades will have more pitch than the forward ones. This will look like a "dinner" plate tipped slightly forward, and now what looked like dihedral on the front blades will be level or even negative. Any other questions, and arn't you glad I won't be at Tahoe? ......... I'll just be a bit jealous! :)L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, no one jump on me...I don;t mean to help beat a dead horse, but negative dihedral is (correct me if I'm worng, please) called 'anhedral,' which CAN be referred to as negative dihedral, however it is not completely correct to do so. I just had to throw this up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No no no.. You got it all wrong. Of course. :-lol Otherwise I wouldn't be responding to this techno-weenie-geek-a-zoid stuff. A rotor in stasis does have dihedral. Put it in motion and all bets are off - but it does provide a starting point from which to gauge the physics. Pitch has nothing to do with it. If you have or could view a rotor blade in slow motion, photographed from the center of the rotor head, you would crap yourself. Never the less, forward or aft travel has everything to do with it. Its related to blade stall and is called articulation; but that has nothing to do with dihedral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay... anhedral. I have to admit that I didn't know that. But what the hey! I am not one of those techno-geek-a-zoid types. Heck, up until today, I called it "bent wing effect" or "bendage". Now I stand corrected. :-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think It's called rotor disc coning,Heres a good one, does anyone know what the angle of decalage (sp?) is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David is right about anhedral.To complete our techno-geek session there is also polyhedral - A form of dihedral in which there are one or more changes of dihedral in each wing panel.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really pathetic quite frankly. If you're all such experts about flying aircraft, then why the heck are you fixed on the visual model rather than focusing on the panel? :-rollRyan-Flightpro08 :-coolVATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Controller 1 (C-1)SAN TRACON Lead [link:www.taxiwaysigns.com]Taxiwaysigns.com Scenery Designer-----------------------------My "Home Made" System Specs:Intel Pentium 4 2.2GHz ProcessorTurbo Gamer ATX Mid-Tower with 420W Power SupplyEPoX 4G4A Motherboard with Intel 845G ChipsetVisiontek XTASY GeForce4 128MB Ti4600 (Det 40.41 Drivers)512MB PC2100 DDR RAM40GB Matrox 7200RPM Hard DriveWindows XP Home Edition*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 11298

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d791f796089601e.jpg >>Just another view, not trying to prove a point either way. >>Clyde The only thing wrong with this view is that your seeing the wing from below and the wing is tapered at the rear edge. I tried to get photos that actually showed there is dihedral of at least a few degrees from above the chord line. When you view it from the angle in this shot the rear taper makes it appear there is little or no dihedral. I have a few hours in these aircraft and can recall the marked dihedral not evident in ..ahem....some models I have seen. :) Sorry I beat you to the punch Tom! Not making any judgements one way or the other, just putting stuff out there to see :)Hornit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a re-print from the Dreamfleet forum at Flightsim com. It's from the Cardinal Flyers organization regarding the dihedral. "With the reduced tail arm length in combination with the wide-chord ailerons and the rather high 3.0 of wing dihedral, an excessive amount of adverse yaw occurred in sharp turns. This required 10 degrees of rudder deflection (at low speed) for a coordinated turn. Thus it was necessary to reduce the wing dihedral to only l.5 degrees to minimize heavy rolling moments due to yaw. A more important change was an increase in vertical tail area of 20% with a slight increase in aspect ratio."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this