Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Not sure about that (but then I am no expert). The Sikorsky S-43 mentioned in the L7P1 text has similar engines and is only slightly slower. It has less range and a lower ceiling than the L7P1, but the S-43 is 50% heavier. Also considering that the BH-3 would be (by the looks of it) a 'now' design rather than a 1935 or 1938 design, those engines would probably be a bit more efficient than those on the historical designs.
Quoted
Flight tests were made by Navy Commander Sukemitsu Itoh who pointed out the difficulties with water take offs. This was partially due to the increased weight caused by the wooden wing which in turn increased the stalling speed of the aircraft. In general, all other performance figures were close to those calculated.
If increased weight increasing the stalling speed is an issue, would a plane that has 80 more horsepower and 3000 kg more weight not have even bigger issues then?
Quoted
Stalls depend only on angle of attack, not airspeed. However, the slower an airplane goes, the more angle of attack it needs to produce lift equal to the aircraft's weight.[14] As the speed decreases further, at some point this angle will be equal to the critical (stall) angle of attack. This speed is called the "stall speed". An aircraft flying at its stall speed cannot climb, and an aircraft flying below its stall speed cannot stop descending. Any attempt to do so by increasing angle of attack, without first increasing airspeed, will result in a stall.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH