Advantages/disadvantages of biplanes over monoplanes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sid_galt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion highlights the advantages and disadvantages of biplanes compared to monoplanes, particularly during the early 20th century. Biplanes, such as the Spad, offered increased surface area and structural stiffness, making them superior in certain flight conditions. However, they also faced significant drag due to their dual wings and supporting structures. The conversation also touches on aerodynamic principles, such as the effects of wing placement and angle of attack, and mentions modern biplanes like the Pitts Special and SAAB 37 Viggen.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic aerodynamics and lift generation
  • Familiarity with aircraft design principles, including wing structure
  • Knowledge of drag types: induced and parasitic drag
  • Awareness of historical aircraft models and their specifications
NEXT STEPS
  • Research aerodynamic equations used for wing placement optimization
  • Explore the design and performance characteristics of the Pitts Special biplane
  • Study the impact of angle of attack on lift and drag in biplanes
  • Investigate modern applications of biplane designs in aviation
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, aviation enthusiasts, and students of aerodynamics will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the historical context and technical aspects of aircraft design.

sid_galt
Messages
502
Reaction score
1
So, does anyone know what are the advantages/disadvantages of biplanes over monoplanes?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The advantages way back when (1900-1930's) was the having twice the surface area and a stiff structure. Remember they had wooden frames, and the first models were held together with wire. The structural alloys introduced during the early years of WW II were not available in years prior. Although Louis Bleriot introduced the first monoplane in 1906, there was limited production, and the Spad (biplane) was considered far superior.

The early monoplanes were fine in straight flight, but severe stresses (high speed turns and banking) during dogfighting would be too much for the wing.

The major disadvantage is the greater drag associated with two wings, and any wires and struts.

See - http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Bleriot/Aero47.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the string bags had more character.
 
Astronuc said:
The advantages way back when (1900-1930's) was the having twice the surface area and a stiff structure. Remember they had wooden frames, and the first models were held together with wire. The structural alloys introduced during the early years of WW II were not available in years prior. Although Louis Bleriot introduced the first monoplane in 1906, there was limited production, and the Spad (biplane) was considered far superior.

The early monoplanes were fine in straight flight, but severe stresses (high speed turns and banking) during dogfighting would be too much for the wing.

The major disadvantage is the greater drag associated with two wings, and any wires and struts.

See - http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Bleriot/Aero47.htm


Thank you for the reply.

Wouldn't the two wings interfere with each other and reduce lift? What are equations aerodynamicists use to determine optimum placement for the two wings?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sid_galt said:
Wouldn't the two wings interfere with each other and reduce lift? What are equations aerodynamicists use to determine optimum placement for the two wings?
If you look at early models, the wings were about 6 feet apart or so. A man could stand up between them. I believe that separation was reduced. The airflow is only affected within a few inches of the wing surface. I imagine it was trial and error back then, more experiment than theory. I haven't delved into the detail of aircraft design back then.

Try this - http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1929/naca-tn-310/

Specifications on a Curtiss "Jenny" - http://www.airminded.net/jenny/jn4_spec.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like Astronuc, I have not spent any real time studying biplanes. However there are a few things I have learned. With two wings:

- You get more induced drag.
- You have more parasitic drag due to struts and wires.
- You do not have good visibility in either the upward or downward directions.

A slight improvement in the idea was to stagger the wings (when looking from the side) so as to try to induce more flow over the bottom wing. I really don't know if that works or not.

Danger could add more to this as well.
 
Thank you for the replies.

I was wondering, if the top wing was made at a slightly higher angle of attack than the bottom one and the bottom wing had its leading edge someplace after the top wing's leading edge, wouldn't the airflow have been faster over the bottom wing due to the venturi effect?
Would this have increased performance?
 
sid_galt said:
I was wondering, if the top wing was made at a slightly higher angle of attack than the bottom one and the bottom wing had its leading edge someplace after the top wing's leading edge, wouldn't the airflow have been faster over the bottom wing due to the venturi effect?
Would this have increased performance?
The wings aren't close enough to establish a venturi effect. A higher angle of attack would increase the drag. The lift on the wings is by the same principle as a single wing.
 
BTW, there are some modern 'biplanes' like the SAAB 37 Viggen, but that's probably not what you had in mind.
 
  • #10
There are plenty of new biplanes today. Probably one of the most popular is the Pitts Special. You see them at airshows quite a bit.

Many aircraft had a slight dihedral in the top wing to increase stability, but I have not heard of varying the AoA between the two.
 
  • #11
Thank you for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
10K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
21K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
805
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K