flap or aileron?

Could you teach me what effect this extend board is?
This LE rooting wing as pointed in photo looks like fliped from underneath of wing fixed section.
Although I have almost thousands photos of Panavia Tornado, but rarely saw this extend section flip from underneath except these image I snapped from video.


So what professional name this rooting extend section should be?
How does it work?

Hi emile,
It is an "Air Brake" and it performs the duty it imply's, breaking in mid air. The action is used for slowing the aircraft down for maneuvers, landing, bombing and or shooting the gun like say, in a dogfight.
Yours,
Vance

I assume you are speaking of the portion on the "leading edge" of the wing. That is a wing slat. It changes the shape of the airfoil to produce high lift. It allows for low speed maneuvers and produces high drag as well which will slow the aircraft.

Arh yes, slat, you remind me of what this name is. Would you please tell me is this slat controlled by avionics or reacted by air flow? What's kind of slat is this? I convinced that only Tornado was fitted this sort of slat but others since jet presented from end of WW2. If Iam wrong please point what others.

Here I pray more photo especially sharp photo in which this slat showed.
thanks in advance.

Originally posted by emile
What's kind of slat is this? I convinced that only Tornado was fitted this sort of slat but others since jet presented from end of WW2. If Iam wrong please point what others.

Pretty much all jet (good) fighters have had leading edge slats.


Even the Me-262 had a form of leading edge slat - I'll see if I can find a pic of it.


Meanwhile, here is a LE slate from the Thunderchief

Hi kilcoo:
your slat is not my slat
notice the slat on Tornado is flipped from underneath, but the slat on F-105 is skied forward.
There must be professional name of the slat on Tornado, I saw it somewhere but I forgot.

reply to post by emile


The leading edge slats on fighters in Korea such as the later versions of the F-86 and early Vietnam aircraft such as the F-100 had slats that would deploy when the airspeed over the wing was slow enough to let them fall forward Due to their weight and springs I assume. For modern Fighters I would pretty much think that all fighters leading edge slats are controlled by the flight avionics.

The slat or what not you are specifying doesn't seem to be active on GR4's or F3's in most landing config shots on airliners I don't see it deployed. It does awfully look like a slat but it may just be an airbrake?

[edit]
Looks like it may be just Italy or the ECR version of the tornado that still has or did have this slat version. I looks like a attempt to have a slat or what I call the shoulder or pivot point of the wing. Here is a much better resolution image of the "slat" deployed.




[edit on 30-9-2008 by Canada_EH]

reply to post by emile



Believe it is called a "Krueger" flap. Not fitted to all Tornado's, Fitted to some airliners.

Originally posted by Canada_EH

Looks like it may be just Italy or the ECR version of the tornado that still has or did have this slat version. I looks like a attempt to have a slat or what I call the shoulder or pivot point of the wing. Here is a much better resolution image of the "slat" deployed.

Oh my god please don't don't cut the complete photo, I need the original one.

Originally posted by ajsr71
reply to post by emile

 

Believe it is called a "Krueger" flap. Not fitted to all Tornado's, Fitted to some airliners.

Arh yes, you expressed it accurately! That IS Krueger flap

No other combat jet since WW2 fitted with Kruegger flap?

The "slats" on the 105 and earlier birds were to simply increase the mean camber of the wing. From the F-4E LES and certainly this particular variant of the Tornado, the LES are more of a boundary layer control measure.

F-4 LES

In other words, it keeps the air conformed to the top of the wing. The Tornado in the OP's pic has a different slat closer to the fuselage simply because this is where the air will first separate from the wing as it nears a stall. It probably "packs" the air more aggressively. LES deployment is regulated by the flight control systems (imagine having to do that yourself?? whoa!). This pertains to high and low speed stalls (did you know you can stall at Mach 1?).

Interestingly, the MiG-15 (and above) has "stall gates" (terminology?) along the wing chord to stop the air from separating any further down the wing.

[edit on 30-9-2008 by HatTrick]

reply to post by HatTrick


You can stall at any airspeed and any attitude.



(Not a one liner)

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by HatTrick
Interestingly, the MiG-15 (and above) has "stall gates" (terminology?) along the wing chord to stop the air from separating any further down the wing.

[edit on 30-9-2008 by HatTrick]

I believe what you are referring to are called wing fences? Much like you see on STOL aircraft now a days.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by HatTrick
Interestingly, the MiG-15 (and above) has "stall gates" (terminology?) along the wing chord to stop the air from separating any further down the wing.

Wing fences are more for span-wise boundary layer control (which can lead to big problems towards the wingtips) than for preventing stall due to leading edge camber.

reply to post by kilcoo316


Also part of the reason that the F-4 also has the notches in the wing. Same with the F-105 just a different way of controlling the boundary layer.

Originally posted by Canada_EH
Also part of the reason that the F-4 also has the notches in the wing.

Yeap.

The original F-4 wing was a complete f**king disaster (pardon my french)... the first wing having no crank, or notch, and suffering badly from wingtip stall (inducing the control problems your wiki link explains) as well as lateral stability and a few other problems.


I think McAir took 3 goes to get it right.


Original:



Iteration 1 (crank included, but no LE treatment):




Iteration 2 (crank and LE):





McAir later had problems with the F/A-18 wings, but I suppose they were developments of the Northrop YF-17 so its not really their fault.

Hi,

Concerning the boundary layer control, I am looking forward you guys here answer what principle the F-105's inlet used? Why the swept angle of inlet's lip toward fuselage like F-35's inlet but not a DSI?


The F-4 developed from F3H Demon. The Demon's inlet also is very rare and strange indeed, which section is so thin that almost like a crevice. why?

The original F3H-1 had the flush inlets that were a NACA invention of the time (hence 'NACA duct'). In theory it limits disturbances to the airflow in the intake and creates less drag than a conventional inlet. Turns out they didn't work quite as advertised -- it's very hard to get the volume and pressure of air flow desired -- so the F3H was redesigned with standard "cheek" intakes (F3H-2) as well as given a more powerful (yet still not powerful enough) engine. There was a P-80 derivative that underwent this same process. F-93A traded it's flush inlets for cheek inlets. There were a few others, but those are the ones that stick out off the top of my head. Basically it was hard to get sufficient air-flow with the flush inlet.

The -105 uses the "Ferri-scoop". It was in vogue for awhile. That was Antonio Ferri's baby, and you see it in the F-105, F-103 (which also had variable geometry ahead of its time), F8U-3 and several missiles of the era. It gave a few advantages in supersonic flight. Most recently seen on the X-32. Now most advantages are offset by variable geometry inlets.

Thank you so much for your reply., since talented man here, I want to ask further the Ferri-Scoop inlet was also used on F8U-3 you said it wasn't so good as people anticipated, but the top speed the F8U-3 has almost reach 2.7Mach!
Fast enough isn't it? The F-105 was a M2 class strike aircraft too! How do you explain?

No, the Ferri scoop works fine. It provides some advantages at supersonic speed (which is why you saw them on the Crusader III and the Thunderchief, etc).



It's the NACA ducts, the flush inlets on the original Demon and others, that didn't quite live up to expectations. Every design I can recall (including the Demon) that used them was modified later to standard "cheek" inlets.