Talk:Wing loading

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Aircraft WikiProject

I'm no engineer, but if "wing loading is the loaded weight of the aircraft divided by the area of the wing" then in metric shouldn't it be measured in N/m² instead of kg/m²? Blaise 21:08, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Er... You're right, but strictly, N(Newton) is not just metric but SI. The "kg" in the article probably means "kgf" in fact...I'm sorry I was completely wrong. I didn't see the article well... See the discussions on talk:A/C project and its subpage for much more datails, if you're interested. - Marsian / talk 00:02, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

That loaded weight is a measurement of mass in kilograms or pounds, not of force in newtons or pounds-force or kilograms-force. That's the measurements we have. I'm less certain of what should be measured for the "wing loading" quantity, and whether that should have dimensions of force divided by area (the same dimensions as pressure or stress), or of mass divided by area. Gene Nygaard 00:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

At least one Japanese aeronautical engineer(Akira Azuma) uses N/m² for wing loading. Though in "Aircraft Design" by D.P.Raymer, lb/ft² and kg/m² are uesd (I'm not sure these are mass or force). - Marsian / talk 15:46, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Using mass/area would define wing loading so that it is the same for a particular aircraft independent of its location, whereas using force/area would make the wing loading of a particular aircraft dependent on whether the aircraft is sitting on earth, the moon, or flying through Jupiter. I would think that mass/area would be preferable because of its constancy, but I'm not an expert so I won't commit the article to one or the other. Just a point. -Guest User 02:09, 16 February 2006

[edit] Animal flight

I would really like to see some discussion of wing loading in flying animals. All the discussion ignores animals altogether, and perhaps the article should be reworded to reflect the fact that wing loading applies to more things than man-made aircraft. John.Conway 19:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] References

This page really needs some references, and sections would help it's readability. John.Conway 19:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Y Done I have had a go at tidying this article, it is not quite right but I believe that it is much better than it was. Cheers. Nimbus227 (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)