Rosenfelder's Flying Wing
 |
| X-1 |
This brief
article, which is basically an illustrated footnote, was originally posted in the № 114 issue of the Italian aviation magazine Ali Antiche as a postil of a
larger scope article that covered the history of the Turin based S.T.A.L.
Italian aeronautical company. The article takes for granted that the readers know, at least, some history of the S.T.A.L. company (I agree, not a good name for an aircraft manufacturer), and it could be a little obscure; nevertheless, it gives a chance to publish several nice drawings (which were probably never seen before outside of Italy); and it is interesting because it clearly proves that the concept of ultra-low-aspect ratio wings, capable to fly at very high angle of attacks and therefore at very low airspeed, had also intrigued aircraft designers of the Old World, like Willy Rosenfelder.
Your comments, as usual, will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
L. Pavese
Your comments, as usual, will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
L. Pavese
 |
| Probably the most famous of all discoid wing aircraft: Charles H. Zimmerman's Vought V-173. |
The curious history of S.T.A.L. (A postil)
By Giovanni Masino (Traduzione di L. Pavese).
So goes the world: after one has spent years and a lot of energy
dissecting the events of the past, consulting dusty archives and entire
libraries, searching for the few survivors who still remember in order to interview
them, as soon as one thinks one’s done, further elements pop up (luckily) which
help one define better the unfolding of the story.
And that is what happened with
a folder that emerged from the historical archive of the DIMEAS (Aerospace and
Mechanical Engineering Department) of the Politecnico of Turin, Italy, with
“S.T.A.L.” written with a red pencil on the cover. Inside the folder there were
the wind tunnel results of the tests of several aircraft models, all attributed
to Dr. Willy Rosenfelder of S.T.A.L., the company of which he was one of the founders
and the vice-president. What really jumps to one’s eye is that the date of the
early drawings of the aircraft that was shown on the n.114 issue of this
magazine, and designated X-1, precedes the date of the establishment of S.T.A.L. by fourteen days!
As shown by the tryptic (in the title drawing),
the aircraft is an ultra-low aspect ratio flying wing tail-less airplane: a formula that at the
time had many advocates in Europe. It must be pointed out that, in the same
period, Dr. Flaminio Piana Canova was investigating analogous wing designs at
the Politecnico of Turin; although Dr. Canova’s wings were trapezoidal in shape
rather than elliptical like Rosenfelder’s.
 |
| The planform of the wing of the X-1 with its relative airfoils. |
The December 13, 1934 wind tunnel tests at the Politecnico probably revealed stability problems, because the design was modified immediately with new airfoils and the addition of a horizontal stabilizer on December 16, 1934 (and a similar thing did Dr. Piana Canova, transitioning from the P.C. 100 to the P.C.500).[1]
 |
| 13 December 1934. Drawings of Rosenfelder's aircraft, modified with the addition of the empennage. |
There is
no trace of a designation of this derivative, but it was probably S.T.A.L. 2,
since the following model was designated S.T.A.L. 3. The latter differs from all the others in having a different wing planform (a sort of gothic delta
wing), without a horizontal stabilizer, but with a sizeable slot near the
middle of the wing. This is the same solution at which Dr. Piana Canova had arrived
in his design of a general aviation aircraft of the same period [2]. Could
it be that the two men knew and frequented each other, exchanging the results
of their research?
 |
| The trapezoidal wing's planform of the S.T.A.L. 3, with the slot, and the two holes. |
 |
| Wing section of the S.T.A.L. 3 that shows the wing slot. |
The wind tunnel tests of a model of the S.T.A.L. 3 bear the
date May 6, 1935 and, probably, the tests ended then with the transition to a
more conventional design: in fact, the wind tunnel tests of the wing of the
S.T.A.L. 11 are dated June 25, 1936.
In any case, unlike Dr. Piana Canova, Dr. Willy
Rosenfelder, who now has been confirmed as the actual designer of all the
S.T.A.L.’s aircraft, regrettably never had the satisfaction of seeing anything
elaborated by his fertile and remarkable mind actually fly.
A german wikipedia led a google translator to a discussion of the very low aspect-ratio type. Is specified that finned but lacking a separate tailplane, is called "brush-less" variety of "Nearly tail-less" planes that have produced successful fly-able planes not tricky, extremely limited or trecherous. The Arups & Nemeth flew amazingly well.
ReplyDeleteSee also the Arup S-2 and S-4. A pair of remarkably successful little planes. The basis for the Vought/Zimmerman V-173, which digressed the very low aspect ratio type into his VTOL experimenter. Not intended as a useful example of the type. It's funny that the Navy persisted with the XF5U when tests on powered models before the V-173 flew, showed no appreciable efficiency advantage with normal props for the engine type, spinning outward or inward.
Boeing "flapjack" Naval fighter would be very like these planes, very like the Hoffman and the Little Bird.
The Eschelman "Spirit of National Defense" or "flounder" was another of the type, during the war. Also apparently ignored.
The Fauvel AV-10 was a tiny brush-less all-wing fairly short aspect ratio, but he never really explored it. Cheranovsky made an interesting development of the type, as of course did Lipisch with the longer-wing DFS-39-4 or -d.
These designers of the time all tried tail-less, most tried wing-tip fins. All the useful planes, had tractor prop and a big fin & rudder & the tailplanes right in the prop-blast.
See also the remarkably successful Nemeth Parachute plane, circular wing parasol over an Alliance Argo fuselage. Faster then the biplane, silly slow landing speed at high-A. Stall & Spin-proof, crazy steep climb-out and drop-in approach, slow short roll.
It would be interesting to see what different airfoils at different span works best. Prandtl BSLD is worth exploring.
Johnson, Snyder/Arup/Hoffman, these by Rosenfelder all show a lot of interest in these types in the early mid-30s. It's hard to say where it first came from.
Thank you for your comment.
DeleteWe should also notice the similar Farman 1020 of the period. High wing instead of parasol circular-wing as the Nemeth. Like it built on the fuselage of a known successful plane.
ReplyDeleteThe Farman with nearly straight LE, huge long chord round semi-circular TE like the Snyder Arup plus winglets. Tailed like the Nemeth, and like it faster than the original, stall-spin-proof. And like it, not developed further.
Thank you, I will certainly research those. Best, L.
DeleteI would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well. In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to start my own Blog Engine blog now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your write up is a fine example of it. private jet charter
ReplyDeleteIt's really very useful to me. Thanks for sharing with us.
ReplyDeleteBest Aviation Academy in Chennai
Thank you.
ReplyDelete