Why must VTOL engines be larger than normal engines?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter E'lir Kramer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Engines Normal
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

VTOL (Vertical Takeoff and Landing) engines must be larger and produce more thrust than traditional engines due to the unique demands of vertical flight. Unlike conventional aircraft that rely on wings for lift during takeoff, VTOL aircraft depend entirely on engine thrust to counteract gravity until sufficient altitude is achieved. This thrust must exceed the weight of the aircraft, which is approximately 9.8x N for a laden plane. Additionally, the design of VTOL engines, such as those in Harrier jets, requires larger fans to generate the necessary thrust at low speeds, complicating the efficiency at higher velocities.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thrust-to-weight ratio (T/W) in aviation
  • Knowledge of aerodynamics, specifically lift and drag forces
  • Familiarity with VTOL aircraft mechanics and operation
  • Basic physics principles related to force and motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mechanics of VTOL engines, focusing on thrust generation and airflow dynamics
  • Study the aerodynamics of lift and drag, particularly in relation to different aircraft designs
  • Explore the differences between conventional and VTOL takeoff procedures
  • Investigate the engineering challenges faced in designing efficient VTOL aircraft
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, aviation students, pilots in training, and anyone interested in the mechanics of VTOL aircraft and their operational principles.

  • #61
It's simple physics. F = ma. In a steady climb, acceleration = 0 so F_net = 0.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #62
cjl said:
It's simple physics. F = ma. In a steady climb, acceleration = 0 so F_net = 0.

if you were climbing in zero gravity ?

you are going to have to do a better job of explaining
 
  • #63
davenn said:
if you were climbing in zero gravity ?
No, gravity is part of the F in F=ma.

davenn said:
you are going to have to do a better job of explaining
How about you explain what is wrong about it?
 
  • #64
Davenn, I understand your skepticism. According to everyday experience, it may appear that a force needs to be applied to an object in order to make it move -- and that's partly correct. In reality, however, a force only needs to be applied temporarily in order to get it moving. After that, you take away the force and it keeps on moving by itself -- indefinitely. The reason this might be counter-intuitive is that friction and air resistance tend to obscure the underlying law.
 

Similar threads

Engineering Paradox: Weight & Thrust/Weight
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
Undergrad Question about Newton third law and NASA article
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Normal Force Discrepancy for Wedge Vs. Ramp
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Airplane lift, take off and loading capacity
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Flight Mechanics - Maximum Cruise Altitude
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Newton's Laws Conceptual Problem
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Calculating Normal and Lift Forces: Elevator and Jet Physics Homework Help
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Graduate Validity of rocket pressure thrust term
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Help With Understanding Thrust Calculations (rifle muzzle brake)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
The 1904 plane of the Wright Brothers a bit strange
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K