Jonathan Baron
New member
I've pursued this with others wise in the ways of aerodynamics and here's the essential problem with what is essentially an urban legend that you can get more speed by faring the gear.
The gear protrude within the high pressure surface (lower wing). Anything the obstructs the low pressure surface prevents laminar flow. Smoothing this can produce modest results, but modest results only because they exist in an area where there'd best be nothing at all. This is why the notions of farings on Bellancas is totally different from the notion of wheel pants on fixed gear aircraft: on the latter, the gear are far away from the wing. I believe this difference bred a misconception that has endured for more than half a century.
One strategy employed by the post Bellanca, Bellanca company in Minnesota was to try to reduce the wetted area in front of the wheel. This was a good idea but, as I noted up-topic, proper rigging without constant vigilence was nearly impossible and, even when rigged properly, the speed gain was modest. Plus, this was done on Vikings - an aircraft where little improvements mean more than they would in an aircraft with fewer horsepower.
The only way to gain SUBSTANTIAL improvement would be to have a bump on top of the wing that would allow the gear to completly retract into the wing. Undoubtedly Giuseppe knew this but found it impractical, as he did the behind the gear farings on the Junior.
Keep in mind that Beech had already introduced fully retractable gear when the 14-19 made its debut, as had North American with the Navion. Thus, you can be reasonably certain that Giuseppe would have made a fully retractable gear if he could of. Problem is, as you all know, his company was not prosperous, and such a major redesign was probably beyond their means.
Cruisairs and Cruisemasters are what they are - the best combination of handling, control harmony, and yet magnificent stability in even rough air, all delivered with defiant excellence of style unmatched in the general aviation fleet.
I'll skip the Henry the 5th St. Crispin's Day speech of "we few, we proud few...."
Jonathan
The gear protrude within the high pressure surface (lower wing). Anything the obstructs the low pressure surface prevents laminar flow. Smoothing this can produce modest results, but modest results only because they exist in an area where there'd best be nothing at all. This is why the notions of farings on Bellancas is totally different from the notion of wheel pants on fixed gear aircraft: on the latter, the gear are far away from the wing. I believe this difference bred a misconception that has endured for more than half a century.
One strategy employed by the post Bellanca, Bellanca company in Minnesota was to try to reduce the wetted area in front of the wheel. This was a good idea but, as I noted up-topic, proper rigging without constant vigilence was nearly impossible and, even when rigged properly, the speed gain was modest. Plus, this was done on Vikings - an aircraft where little improvements mean more than they would in an aircraft with fewer horsepower.
The only way to gain SUBSTANTIAL improvement would be to have a bump on top of the wing that would allow the gear to completly retract into the wing. Undoubtedly Giuseppe knew this but found it impractical, as he did the behind the gear farings on the Junior.
Keep in mind that Beech had already introduced fully retractable gear when the 14-19 made its debut, as had North American with the Navion. Thus, you can be reasonably certain that Giuseppe would have made a fully retractable gear if he could of. Problem is, as you all know, his company was not prosperous, and such a major redesign was probably beyond their means.
Cruisairs and Cruisemasters are what they are - the best combination of handling, control harmony, and yet magnificent stability in even rough air, all delivered with defiant excellence of style unmatched in the general aviation fleet.
I'll skip the Henry the 5th St. Crispin's Day speech of "we few, we proud few...."
Jonathan
