Talk:Swept wing

message: I found this discussion inside the body text and moved it here.
!-- this next stuff is so garbled that I have no idea what it means, should it be removed???
 
-	
Probably, Arnero
 
-	
..........
 
-	
The real question is now, why would the air see a shorter chord at lower speeds? Especially considering that span wise flow is outwards (for swept back)?
 
-		 
-	
Looking at the design evolution of the B-52 one can see that chord length and sweep increase, but chord length increases
 
-	
more than a rotation of the wing would suggest. Also some experimental aircraft in WWII had swing wings to be operated on the ground, but modern aircraft are designed in the computer and there is no reason for rotation. Sweep and airfoil can be altered independently. And nowhere is said that the chord is not to be measured along the streamlines. Even look at the ribs and engines of the B-52, they are stream-aligned. This whole "fool" stuff is just for "fools", who want an easy misleading explanation. The explanation for the successful experiments and the widespread use is found in the article about the Supercritical airfoil.--
:Not only was that the wrong place, but the content is simply incorrect. The reason the B-52 gained chord and sweep over its evolution was the captured German data, as explained (and refed) further into the article. I'm not sure what the difference between "head on" and "stream-aligned" is supposed to mean -- when I look at a B-52 head-on, the engines are pointed right at you. That's what I mean by "head on" and I think what you're trying to say with "stream aligned". Finally, I don't understand what the connection is to supercritical airfoil, research from over a decade later. Please, try to explain what you mean in depth. Maury (talk) 18:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Discussion" inside body text moved here 

message: painful physical explanations, muddled with aviation trivia.  swept wings mitigate effects of compressibility, not just wave drag. an accurate and concise  explanation of swept wing aerodynamics (this wikipedia article is neither): http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedaero/potential3d/sweeptheory.html.  the fool explanation implies a swept wing should be equivalent to a straight wing shaped on an airfoil with a stretched chord, definitely false.  ✈ James C. (talk) 07:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ugh

message: In the Introduction section there is a sentence: "The British Supermarine Spitfire used as thin a wing as possible for lower high-speed drag, but later paid a high price for it in a number of aerodynamic problems such as control reversal." It is difficult to see why it is in this article and more importantly, it is rubish. See Supermarine Spitfire Wiki article Talk archive3 section Elliptical Wing to see Kurfürst's failed attempt to spread this misinformation. So the claim is untrue and isn't even appropriate to this article. I suggest that it should be removed.VaidaXX (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: As airflow accelerates around curved surfaces, near the speed of sound this can cause the airflow to reach supersonic speeds. When this occurs, an oblique shock wave is generated at the point where the flow slows back to subsonic speed. 
Since this occurs on curved areas, these shock waves are normally associated with the upper surfaces of the wing, the cockpit canopy, and the nose cone of the aircraft, areas with the highest local curvature.
The above is I am fairly sure in error. The air does not 'accelerate' around curved objects in the common language use of accelerate as in to speed up.
'''
In the case of a wing the air does not 'speed up over the upper surface' with reference to the static air, this is a myth. It actually slows down slightly due to form drag. This is easily seen in wind tunnel smoke stream videos.<ref>http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/how-wings-really-work<ref>
The reason shock waves form as they do and where they do; (such as when the maximum T/C passes or on the reducing taper of a cockpit canopy)  is due to a drop in air density as the air turns the corner and rapidly expands to fill the space formerly occupied by the solid object.  This rapid lowering of density changes the local speed of sound. If is occurs in the transonic range it can cause part of the aircraft to  go supersonic.
This is why supercritical wings are flatter on top and more curved underneath. The very gentle angular change of the local air flow due to the flatter upper wing surface reduces the density drop and weakens the shock wave thereby reducing drag.
The formation of shockwaves varies due to density - in static air caused by temperature. Density (often due to temperature) 5.112.18.148 (talk) 13:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subsonic and transonic behavior[edit] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Swept wing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327095031/http://www.bwl.tu-darmstadt.de/bwl2/akl/downloads/kolloquien/%5bakl09%5d%20-%20heinzerling%20BILDER.pdf to http://www.bwl.tu-darmstadt.de/bwl2/akl/downloads/kolloquien/%5bakl09%5d%20-%20heinzerling%20BILDER.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920235140/http://www.b2streamlines.com/EffectiveDihedral.pdf to http://www.b2streamlines.com/EffectiveDihedral.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312201329/http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p63_11.html to http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p63_11.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: was obviously remarkable. I'm no native speaker and working on many other wikipedia 'road works'.  
May some fellow wikipedian contribute ? --Neun-x (talk) 19:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. Wing sweep was introduced on the Me 262 as much to position the wing root for optimum pilot visibility as anything else. It was too small to have any real aerodynamic significance. The aircraft already has a mention and that is probably enough — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  the swept wing of the [[Messerschmitt Me 262]] 

message: Wing configuration classifies swept wing and delta separately and there are separate articles Swept wing  and Delta wing. However, Swept wing includes delta aircraft and bridges-the-gap/justifies-the-inclusion with the vague "delta is a form of swept wing". Is this ok or shall I take out the delta examples? Thanks.Pieter1963 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Pigeonholeing