# how do cruise missiles cruise? (wing size) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 21, 2015, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172 "2015-11-21T08:16:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![SHARKBITEATTACK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@SHARKBITEATTACK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SHARKBITEATTACK)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/21 "2015-11-22T15:52:46Z")
I’m sure all the modern cruise missiles have some form of advanced gyroscopic stability on them. Don’t they automatically adjust pitch if the wings aren’t generating enough lift? ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2015, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/22 "2015-11-22T18:09:16Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > So, when you decrease the dimensions by a factor of 2, you will need half as much wing area proportional to the rest of the aircraft because your total surface area has shrunk by X4 but your weight has shrunk by X8. And in case people are thinking “if this is true, why do small airplanes have big wings?”, it’s because they fly slower. The above statement is true only if the speed remains the same. So it doesn’t hold for comparing a 747 to a Piper Cub, but it does hold for comparing a 747 to a cruise missile. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/23 "2015-11-23T16:22:18Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The F-104 was a slashing interceptor, not a dogfighter. The MiG-21 was a pure dogfighter… This [site purports to discuss](http://area51specialprojects.com/migs_area51.html) what the U.S. found when they mock dogfighted (dogfought?) captured MiG-21s vs a variety of U.S. aircraft. Interesting stuff, I thought. FWIW, I think (and the cited article goes into, below the -21 discussion) some of the prior MiGs like the -17, were much better at ACM than the -21. (Plus, didn’t some of the -21s have a fault where a high-G turn broke the gunsight or radar, to where it would have to be fixed back at the base? The Soviets and others made a gazillion of the things, so I doubt the fault, if it existed at all, affected most of them, but I remember reading something about that.) Anyway, I always thought it interesting that the North Vietnamese Air Force would choose to have their apocryphal “[Colonel Tomb](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Tomb)” flying a MiG-17, rather than the much newer MiG-21. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/24 "2015-11-23T17:20:39Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The F-104 was a slashing interceptor, not a dogfighter. The MiG-21 was a pure dogfighter. > > With modern weapons there would be some ways for the F-104 to be effective against a MiG-21 also magically equipped with modern weapons. > > But with actual period weapons from the '60s it’s sorta like a lancer with no horse fighting on foot against an infantryman with a short sword. Unless the infantryman is asleep or inept he’ll duck inside the first (and only) lance thrust and then close for an easy kill. PAF starfighters were equipped with Gatling guns and were employed in the Air to Ground role. [http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/may/f-104.htm](http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/may/f-104.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/25 "2015-11-23T17:43:16Z")
> [@SHARKBITEATTACK](#): > > I’m sure all the modern cruise missiles have some form of advanced gyroscopic stability on them. Don’t they automatically adjust pitch if the wings aren’t generating enough lift? Cruise missiles have some combination of GPS, radar altimeters, inertial navigation, and other systems that tell it what altitude it needs to be at. Ultimately though the situation is the same as for the autopilot systems on commercial aircraft: if the vehicle is not holding at its prescribed altitude or climb rate (as dictated by the preprogrammed flight path), you adjust pitch until it is. ---
**Author:** ![Kevbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47774/32.png) [@Kevbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kevbo)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2015, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172/26 "2015-11-23T22:15:49Z")
In addition to not needing to slow down, the missile doesn’t need to make tight turns. It is the wings that generate the turning force when an airplane changes direction, the control surfaces just steer the wing. (simplified, but essentially true) The '104 likely suffered from an inability to turn with the migs. As for the '104’s safety record: Petty much all aircraft that have high landing speeds for their class have poor safety records. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-cruise-missiles-cruise-wing-size/738172.md?page=1)