Is a hollowed out fuselage ideal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yrjosmiel73
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
A hollowed-out fuselage could potentially manipulate airflow to enhance lift, but it presents significant challenges in integrating essential components like avionics and fuel systems. Increased skin friction drag is a concern due to the larger wetted area, which can negatively impact performance. While some designs utilize airflow through the fuselage for specific aerodynamic benefits, such as delaying wing separation, the overall advantages of a hollow fuselage remain unclear. The discussion raises questions about the rationale behind such designs and whether they can effectively offset their drawbacks. Innovative concepts, like a "biplane" lifting body, are being explored, but their practical benefits are still uncertain.
yrjosmiel73
The air passes through the fuselage. Will it have bad effects on the aerocraft?
illustration.png

Yes, I have horrible drawing skills.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Why is this a good thing in your opinion?

I mean, lots of craft are essentially hollow tubes, but I suspect you weren't thinking in terms of a propulsion cavity.

North_American_F86-01.JPG
 
It becomes a pain to integrate avionics, fuel, and other essentials into the aircraft when a good portion of that internal volume exists so that air can flow through it. Not only that but skin friction drag would increase because there's more wetted area for boundary layers to form on.
 
  • Like
Likes billy_joule
DaveC426913 said:
Why is this a good thing in your opinion?

I mean, lots of craft are essentially hollow tubes, but I suspect you weren't thinking in terms of a propulsion cavity.

North_American_F86-01.JPG

What if it's a plain 'ol tube? Without engines and that?
 
yrjosmiel73 said:
What if it's a plain 'ol tube? Without engines and that?
What is your rationale? What problem are you hoping it solves?

I'm not suggesting there is anything wrong with the idea, but if I posed a question such as 'what if I made a television shaped like a donut?', wouldn't you need to ask about my logic before answering?
 
DaveC426913 said:
What is your rationale? What problem are you hoping it solves?
I think of like manipulating the flow of air with the shape of the tube, like adding extra lift.
 
yrjosmiel73 said:
I think of like manipulating the flow of air with the shape of the tube, like adding extra lift.
Would it provide an advantage over the typical wing surfaces usually used? Enough to offset the disadvantages?
 
There are a cases where some air flow is diverted through the fuselage for beneficial effects. It can be used to delay separation from the wing or to avoid having too much air going through the engine. But it is done for specific reasons like those.

There were early biplanes. In this era of lift bodies, maybe there could be a "biplane" version of a lifting body. I don't know what the advantage would be, but there are all types of strange things being investigated these days.
 
Back
Top