They are both symmetrical and must be. Supersonic airfoils operate much differently at these speeds and generate immense forces, lift is generated by supersonic compression that is generated by shockwaves.
Because if the supersonic airfoil had a smooth top for example the compression zone, would have less shock than the bottom and the airfoil would not maintain level flight and climb.
Still not Proofed,…
Excuse me, I am sorry. what was that?? You say you say symmetrical profiles cannot produce lift?
You go even further to outright declare that shockwaves do not create lift??? Really?
Look up what Compression Lift is.
In aerodynamics, compression lift refers to the increased pressure under an aircraft that uses shock waves generated by its own supersonic flight to generate lift.
At least you know how lift works at subsonic & transonic. @MiG_23M does not know how lift works at all.
Facepalm
Yes if AoA=0
Look this
Yeah, you just talk a good one about missiles design and all, but did not know that lift can be generated using shock waves.
Actually, outright declared they don’t, so of course you would have no clue they require no angle of attack to maintain lift and level flight.
So why would I expect you know that lift can be obtained without any angle of attack in both subsonic & supersonic designs.
Will you retract your statement as false?
What did I show you the pressure chart for?
We cannot effectively discuss technical design without intellectual honesty.
It’s a simple question.
Is this statement incorrect?
I understand that it’s all about pressure at the end of the day, I don’t see why shockwaves wouldn’t cause a pressure change… That just seems strange, however we’re talking about 0 AoA on a symmetrical diamond/round wing, I would assume the shockwaves would be the same on either side, and hence cancel out each-other’s lift. Leading to no lifting force on the body? Maybe I got the terms mixed up…
No that’s right. Ziggi don,t understand
Look graph
Well, a shockwave is a pressure change by definition. A powerful pressure change of temperature and density.
Yep, I meant a pressure change on the body itself.
I’m just trying to learn, not saying anyone is right or wrong, I’ve just read some questionable stuff on this thread.
I understand the fundamentals for subsonic flight, but I have not learnt exactly how supersonic/hypersonic flight changes aerodynamics on a wing/body, I just know that they do in a big way, hence why I’m asking some ‘basic’ sounding questions. I did not learn this when I took my pilots license lol
As you know, lift is the force that keeps aircraft upright in the air generated by its motion. Compression lift is the shockwaves on each side of the airfoil, top and bottom preventing it from dropping altitude and preventing it from gaining altitude. It is maintained by forward motion just like how lift is applied classically, supersonic forward motion in this case.
So, it makes sense that supersonic airfoils are symmetrical, you want level flight out of the airfoil and let the control fins operate less restricted.
But do not get it twisted, with round symmetrical airfoils. They have no place in supersonic profiles.
Because a rounded edge would behave as a blunt body in supersonic flight and thus would form a bow shock, which greatly increases wave drag.
They are an obsolete older design originating & used in subsonic regimes & earliest designs of flight and must always be defected at angle of attack for lift. Today, fighters and all fixed wings predominantly utilize cambered wings of sorts because it massively reduces drag.
Last message youdidn’t answered that bringed me to:
And you can facepalm, you still not did what i asked you to,…
I told you the SU-27SK flight manual, section 5, page 171
I asked you to screenshot the information, as i’m not havi.g the manual you refers to
It is searched literally within 1 minute
You said earlier the rudders on the R-27 series do not produce lift and are changing your mind now that you’ve read up on the situation. When BBCRF and I are talking about lift, we are talking about positive lift in a certain direction. If there is no side of the fin with lower pressure, the resulting force is not positive lift.
They aren’t maintaining lift or level flight without angle of attack.
… You’re right. Now look in the mirror.
You guys let him derail based on semantics again… let me remind us why he’s pandering semantics right now;
If lift is equal above and below the airfoil what additive force is keeping it from being pulled down by gravity? That would require net positive lift above the airfoil. What you’re saying makes no sense.
The truth is, the missile requires some angle of attack to maintain or gain altitude or it won’t maintain itself. It simply does not produce positive lift without angle of attack which is something you seem to not understand and yet you want to lecture and claim others are not learned in the subject.
Thanks, but I think you and I are wasting our time arguing. Ziggy knows he’s wrong and only wishes to derail the thread in an attempt to avoid answering the question. He doesn’t want people to see him being foolish and honestly it would be more beneficial if he just deleted his absurd comments altogether. He’s been warned multiple times already for these antics and is still at it.
He says it is overperforming, he has provided no documentation or evidence to support the claim.
I did not read the hundreds (!) of posts before this, I don’t know what’s been said. I’m just trying to ask the right questions since I find the topic interesting
