Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/08/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Doug, I don't think so. That close to the wing, the "propwash" is still spiral and would "impact" differently on the surfaces. But I am not an aerodynamicist, I am an aerostructures engineer. Jerry Douglas Sharp wrote: > Jerry, > could it also have something to do with the aerodynamics of those > combined ailerons/flaps (Junkers Flaperons) that the Ju52 has for STOL > capability? > > Cheers > Douglas > > Jerry Lehrer wrote: >> H-Ball >> >> Yes I can . I am not aeronautically inclined, but have fallen all the >> way. I am a graduate aerospace engineer with 55 years of >> experience. Reasons why engines are non-parallel may be; >> >> Structurally easier to design engine mounts >> >> Less apt to go into a spin if one of the wing engines dies. the >> outboard pointing thrust vector partially compensates the >> natural tendency to turn/spin into the dead engine. >> >> Jerry Lehrer >> >> >> H. Ball Arche wrote: >>> I'd seen one of these in the air often in the '70's around >>> Gainesville, it was owned by Martin Caiden, but I'd never noticed >>> that the wing engines are mounted perpendicular to the leading edge, >>> and clearly skewed off parallel from the axis of flight. Can one of >>> the aeronautically inclined explain why?