If You Thought Rutan's Planes Looked Odd

[Tuckerfan]

Then let me introduce you to the vacuplane.

The “Vacuplane”, a strange new type of airplane, has made its appearance at the University of Miami, Florida. Its abbreviated wing, open at the top, is lined with hollow chambers or “suction cells”. These are said to make its lifting power equal to a conventional plane of greater wingspan. Several planes of this type have been constructed under the direction of Prof. Fred H. Givens, head of the university’s aviation department, following in general the original design of E. H. Lanier, Cincinnati inventor. More than 15 successful flights have been made. In the latest model, illustrated here, round “tip-loss boards” at the ends of the wing increase the lifting force by preventing the formation of air vortexes. Ailerons that control the plane’s banking are mounted on the fuselage behind the propeller.

According to this site the developer was the son of the guy who invented the ice cream cone.

[Tuckerfan]

Hmm, I thought Broomstick would find this interesting at the very least.

[DocCathode]

I’m interested. I’m interested in pretty much any unusual flying machine you can name.

[tomndebb]

I opened this thread thinking there was a new plane in the works.

I note that Rutan is pretty rare in the aviation field, in that his odd designs seem to work (although he does not have many more production models than such folks as Custer and his Channel Wing design).

[Tuckerfan]

@tomndebb

I opened this thread thinking there was a new plane in the works.

I note that Rutan is pretty rare in the aviation field, in that his odd designs seem to work (although he does not have many more production models than such folks as Custer and his Channel Wing design).

Well, here’s some pics of the designs he’s working on for Virgin Galactic.

[Broomstick]

@Tuckerfan

Hmm, I thought Broomstick would find this interesting at the very least.

Yes, she is, but she also has this thing called a “job” that interferes with the important parts of her life like the Straight Dope.

Will read up on this and comment, as I have time.

[Tuckerfan]

@Broomstick

Yes, she is, but she also has this thing called a “job” that interferes with the important parts of her life like the Straight Dope.

Well, obviously there’s only one thing to do: Get a new job!

[Broomstick]

I actually am looking would you believe it?

Anyhow, about the goofy airplane… Not sure if you could call something form 1935 “new”. Certainly is strange, though.

Further, it is an object to provide a machine that will not nose dive, side slip or tail spin under ordinary circumstances, but should this happen, the machine will right itself without the pilot’s aid.

I can’t recall ever being in an airplane that will “nose dive, side slip, or tailspin” under ordinary (presumably straight and level) circumstances, and most of what I fly tends to want to “right” itself. So that concept is hardly limited to this aircraft.

Further, it is an object to provide an aeroplane of great inherent stability which will be particularly useful for aerial school student passenger flights around aerial fields, and will be especially useful to develop confidence in those afraid of the present high speed planes.

The new model weighs 360 pounds, is only 16 feet long, and is reported to have a speed of 96 mph.

Huh. Well, is that the cruise speed or the landing speed or some other speed? Anyhoo… at that weight it may be stable but it’s also going to be tossed around in the least bit of turbulence or chop.

Given this was the era of Piper Cubs and Taylorcrafts, 96 mph was a fairly average speed.

It will be seen that the mid-section of the plane, composed of the fuselage proper and the adjacent cellules, constitutes the center section of the airfoil and is so designed as practically to eliminate the possibility of a crash due to forced landing by materially reducing the landing speed.

Well, that is a noble goal, but since he doesn’t give a landing speed it’s not possible for me to judge whether or not it’s slow enough to really make a difference

This result has been accomplished by increasing the lift through the effective removal of what is known as boundary layer — a mass of air lying on the top surface of a conventional wing, resulting in serious down pressure and loss of lift. See Figure 8. Air deflected by the leading edge is thrown back over the wing in a stream. The movement of the stream over the upper surface creates an area of low pressure, into which the wing is drawn giving lift to the entire pane, but all of the air is not deflected. It is this air which creates the boundary layer and prevents the pressure over the upper surface from being nearly so low, as it should be and, therefore, decreases the tendency to lift.

I am not an expert in aerodynamics (maybe one will be along soon) but it’s my poor understanding of the forces involved that a boundary layer is actually required and it is the loss or separation of a boundary layer from the wing that leads to loss of lift and a stall.

A plane constructed in accordance with my invention to carry a single passenger can be made with a span of 14 feet, a length of 14 feet 9 inches, a height of 4 feet 6 inches and weigh when empty from 260 to 275 pounds. It may be driven by a 27 to 30 horsepower motor

It’s an early ultralight!

Well, I have a couple questions/comments here. I’m wondering if the “baffles” act somewhat like the STOL kits installed on small airplanes, which interfere somewhat with the boundary layer on a wing to keep it “stuck on” at high angles of attack, allowing slower airspeeds without inducing a stall. The angle of incidence in the drawings also make me wonder along those lines, but I’m going more by intuition here than a deep understanding of aerodynamics. It would certainly slow the plane down in the air.

As for stability - you want stability in an airplane, but not too much or manuvering starts to become difficult. This may be a case of valuing straight-and-level over all other modes. I think perhaps all the stabilzing fins and what not have more to do with its stability than the novel wing design.

One item that is used these days are the “plates” on the ends of the wings which do reduce the induced drag of wingtip vortices. You see variations on them on everything from bush planes in the artic to large passenger jets.

I think, perhaps, this flies at all because of the amount of conventional wingspace (that is, with an unbroken upper surface) around the “baffles” along with a high-lift construction and not so much from the “vacuum cells”

[Broomstick]

Um… is there an aerodynamicist in the house…? Would like a more qualified opinion than just mine to comment on this.