1.

Report

No.

2.

NASA
4.

Title

and

TN

Government

Accession

No.

Subtitle

REVIEW
OF DRAG
CLEANUP
TESTS
IN LANGLEY
SCALE
TUNNEL
(FROM
1935 TO 1945) APPLICABLE
CURRENT
GENERAL
AVIATION
AIRPLANES
7.

3.

Recipient's

5.

Report

Catalog

No.

: :,--

,:,.:

':

D-8206
Date

June

FULLTO

1976

6.

Performing

Organization

Code

8.

Performing

Orgamzation

Report

Author(s)

No.

L-10735
Paul

L. Coe,

Performing

Organization

Jr.
10.

9.

NASA

Langley

Hampton,

12.

Name

Sponsoring

National

Center

Name

and

'11.

Contract

13.

Type

No.

or

Grant

No.

and

D.C.

of

Report

and

Technical

Address

Aeronautics

Supplementary

Unit

505-10-11-07

23665

Washington,
15

Work

Address

Research

Va.

Agency

and

Space

Administration

14.

Period

Covered

Note

Sponsoring

Agency

!i!i!i

Code

20546

Notes
.: - . 2: : : ,
;....%.
___
:
_"" i .iI_ _': _

16.

Abstract

Results
period

from

of drag
1935

propeller-driven
that

the

drag

drag

are

dynamic

air

is

and

by

in the

summarized

by

in drag

adherence

the

basis

can

obtained

to the

be

by

are
of the

proper

indicate
-

gaps,

summed,

such
and

the

i_i_i:
i_:_
.::_II
i::(:i:i

as,

antenna

resulting

investigation,

in the

the

to current

features

attention

discussed

during

23 airplanes

control-surface

of results

guidelines

on

configuration

increments

On the

tunnel

application

tests

canopies,

when

full-scale

potential
from

individual

cockpit

however,

significant.

Data

many

Langley

for

airplanes.

leakage,

large;

reduction

design

been

produced

not

increase

considerable

conducted

aviation

installation,
-

tests

have

increments

installations

that

1945

general

power-plant

total

to

cleanup

it appears

to details
present

in aero-

? _!.::(_::.}

paper.

:i.': .:= :2:.!i;

,,
:.?:-:.:::. :

i17.

Key

Words

(Suggested

Drag

by

18.

Author(s))

Statement

Unclassified

cleanup

General

Distribution

Unlimited

aviation

Subject
19.

Security

Classif.

(of

this

report}

20.

Security

Unclassified

Classif.

(of

this

Category

02

page)

Unclassified

*For

sale

by

the

National

Technical

Information

Service,

Springfield,

Virginia

22161

_ii_ :::. ::)':i

_!_ii_
__,

__iI _ I_
ii_?i__ _,_

-'?'

REVIEW

OF DRAG

CLEANUP

TESTS

(FROM

1935 TO

IN LANGLEY

FULL-SCALE

1945) APPLICABLE

GENERAL

AVIATION
Paul

period

of drag

from

1935

propeller-driven
that

the

drag

CURRENT

i?:C:<::!ji_

Center

iii:?}

that

drag

are

reduction

design

leakage,

and

for

when

On the

in drag

by adherence

from

the

control

increments

can be obtained

are

gaps,

summed,

_.<!:<:!<i!,i_:

such

as,

and antenna

the resulting

investigation,

attention

discussed

indicate

features

of the

the

to current

surface

by proper

to the guidelines

during

on 23 airplanes

configuration

of results

tunnel

application

tests

canopies,

basis

full-scale

potential

individual

cockpit

however,

Langley

Data

by many

is significant.

considerable

dynamic

air

not large;

increase

summarized

produced

installation,

in the

airplanes.

it appears

to details

in the present

in aero-

paper.

INTRODUCTION

The

Langley

is currently
the

design

has

been

tions

engaged
of safe,

formance,

drag

1935

cleanup

due both

cleanup
coefficient
maximum
the

thereby
light

to 1945,

design

speed

Army

of the

general

and

to provide

airplanes.

the

Space

required

considerable

airplanes.

improvements

competitive

Administration

technology

Recently,

aviation

significant

a strong

number

Langley
and

studied

P-39

were

tunnel.

to manufacturing
for

fighter

by about
airplane

of full-scale

full-scale

modifications

of the airplane

configurations

a large

to poor

the

for

to offer
insure

in the

for

program

Aeronautics

(See
in fuel

position

interest

ref.

1.)

economy

in the

for

Reducand

domestic

and

were

subjected

per-

airplanes.

of suitable

tests

National

aviation

reduction

tests

determination

research

be expected

for

of the

general

in drag

and would

From
to drag

efficient

would

market

Center

in a broad

expressed

in drag

foreign

Research

of over

these

Such

airplanes
tests

poor

and

design

indicated
The

in reports

results

identified

sources

in addition,

features.

in modifications
and

44 knots.

summarized

military

processes,

resulted

35 percent

...

Jr.

Research

conducted

been

aviation

increments

installations

tests

to 1945 have
general

power-plant

total

cleanup

[( -

'2.

TUNNEL

SUMMARY

Results

AIRPLANES

L. Coe,

Langley

TO

:..i.2

allowed

For

which

a potential

reduced

by C. H. Dearborn,

the

example,

increase

of cleanup

of

tests
Abe

the

drag

in the
for

23 of

Silverstein,

and Roy H. Lange (refs. 2 and3). Unfortunately, these summary reports were originally
issued as NACA Wartime Reports with restricted distribution, and they are now generally
unavailable.
It is believed that many of the results and design guidelines derived from the foregoing tests are directly applicable to:current propeller-driven general aviation airplanes.
The present paper was therefore prepared to collate information from the two previous
reports in a readily available publication. The results of references 2 and3 have been
technically edited, and items having no application to general aviation airplanes (such as
drag of armament installations) havebeen omitted.
SYMBOLS
In order to facilitate international usageof data presented, dimensional quantities
are given in both the International Systemof Units (SI) and in U.S. Customary Units.
Measurements were made in U.S. Customary Units.
Ae

duct exit area, m2 (ft2)

Ai

duct inlet area, m2 (ft2)

Ar

radiator frontal area, m2 (ft2)

wing span,m

CD

drag coefficient,

ACD

drag-coefficient increment

CD,w,o

wing

ACD,w,o

difference

between

local

chord,

profile

wing

reference

(ft)

drag

wing

FD
qS

coefficient

measured

chord,

Cd,o

two-dimensional

wing

CL

lift

FL
q-_-

coefficient,

at zero

and

lift

calculated

wing

profile

drag

(ft)

(ft)

section

drag

coefficient

at zero

lift

coefficients

:4.

:_

"': "_, _i

..

/-

FD

drag force, N (Ib)

FL

lift force, N (lb)

power,

Pt

total

AP t

change

(hp)

pressure,

N/m 2

in total

free-stream

P_

flow

required

QREQ'D

free-stream

wing

distance

rate

m2

along

m3/sec

flow rate

wing

wing

spanwise

distance

of attack,

(lb/ft

(ft3/min)

of air,

pressure,

2)

m3/sec

N/m 2

(ft3/min)

(lb/ft

2)

(ft 2)

maximum

angle

(lb/ft 2)

N/m 2

of air,

dynamic

area,

N/m 2

pressure,

volumetric

(lb/ft 2)

pressure,

static

volumetric

.::j...

surface

section

measured

thickness

along

wing

for

from

stagnation

a given

spanwise

measured

from

airplane

point,

location,

center

(ft)

line,

(ft)

(ft)

deg

Abbreviations:

L.E.

leading

edge

rpm

revolutions

per

minute
AIRPLANES

Three-view
graphs

showing

ure

The

2.

sketches
the

of the

airplanes

photographs

show

23 airplanes

mounted
most

AND EQUIPMENT

for

tests

tested

are

in the

of the airplanes

wind

presented

in the

tunnel
condition

in figure
are

1, and photo-

presented

in fig-

as received

at the

:.

Langley full-scale

tunnel

(designated

configurations

shown

in various

titles.

are

The

basic

geometric

original,
stages

or service,

condition);

of modification

characteristics

and

however,

as described

power-plant

a few

in the

..

figure

characteristics

are

presented

early

models,
The

section

in tables

I and I2, respectively.

or prototypes,

tests

of the

were

of fighter

conducted

Langley

9.1-m

tunnel.

by 18.3-m

The

METHODS

The
from
was

results

presented

27 m/sec
first

was

sealed

and

at lift
The

suspected.
faired

change

removed

condition,

fairings

was

drag

to the airplane

surface

Except

open-throat

in detail

progressively
the

measured,

test

in reference

seal

which

the

4.

the

the

and an attempt

as an aid

as noted,

all

the

associated

to the
were

in the

points

drag

of the airplane
condition.

increment

seals

and fairings
made

due

were

tufts

to

attached

and analysis

with the

to

in all tests

of wool

determination

air

to as the

flight

was

tests

where

drag

the motion

made

ranging

is referred

in which

cases

all

high-speed
and

order

speeds

procedure

to determine
for

In most

tests

usual
and

removed

cases

at tunnel

condition,

made

observed

to determine

conducted

with

inlets

and

outlets

ducts

and

cowlings

ahead

of and
The

pressure

cowling

of the

drag

were

obtained

When

was

outlet

wake

techniques.
geometric
to the
evaluated

from

of poor

propellers

removed

at a tunnel

speed

in reference

features
airplanes
in subsequent

for

force

sealed,

airflow
of the

airplanes

tests

were

and with

these

quantities

through

the

static

total

and

contributing

in the

from

in detail

to excessive

determined,
tests.

and

analysis

total-pressure

described

the

total-

locations.

(125 ft/sec).

As an aid

are

1 to 11 from

spanwise

of 38 m/sec

determined

force

completely

tests,

at various

5.

methods

were

airflow,

pressures

units.

wing,

These

these

determined

was

cooling

measurements

of the

point

with

and outlets

with

cooling

was

in detail
transition

inlets

determined

in the

by hot-wire

modifications

were

surveys

boundary-layer

duct

In conjunction

profile

is described

drag

and/or

open.

at the

wing

surements

tions

were

the airplanes.
In order

used

The

required

as possible.

was

tests

airplane

in this
were

In some

by 60-ft)

is described

from

on the

tests

of drag

(30-ft

(147 ft/sec).

to those
then

items

conditions.

from

were

the amount

as many

airflow

force

tunnel

obtained

the airplane

determined.

affected

isolate

With

configurations

AND TESTS

all protrusions

corresponding

and

were

to 45 m/sec

or remove

coefficients

seals

each

(88 ft/sec)

to fair

leakage

herein

of the

airplanes.

in the

full-scale

Most

drag

and

These
The

staticmea-

technique

of wing

drag,

the

measurements
in reference

were

effectiveness

identified,

."

!:,:2; _-

of the air:-::

planes

-.

and

6.
practical

of the modifica-

_.

RESULTS

The

results

features
plant

which

of the
produce

installations,

ments

due to these

produced

by the

the

features

that

reduced

the drag

the

most

provided

landing-gear
gaps,

and

antenna

items

a significant

valuable

was

contribution
to excessive

increments

drag

of these

airplanes

were,

drag

cleanup

and

the
total

drag

tests

verified

wing

cases

of the

drag

of each

was

the

drag
incre-

configuration.

identification

tests.

of

which

in performance
by flight

surface

the

of modifications

increases

instances,

with power-

canopies,

sum

the development
The

configuration

In most

however,
of the

features.

in many

cockpit

part

into

associated

installations.

small;

of the

insight

on drag

installations,

items

was

valuable

with emphasis

individual

contributed

modified

tests

drag,

leakage,

control-surface

Perhaps

for

cleanup

excessive

air

irregularities,
increment

drag

AND DISCUSSION

predicted
In some
r

cases
they

it was
were
The

not practical

used

successfully

drag

coefficients

increments
rized

produced

in table

considered,
ures

to incorporate

III.

in the

in the design
of the

Because

appendixes

in the

or removing

of the diverse

discussion

features

into the

of subsequent

airplanes

by modifying

a brief

these

of specific

airplane

service

various

nature
test

existing

results

however,

configurations.

condition
airplane

of the

design;

and the

drag-coefficient

components

individual

items

is presented

are

and

with

summa-

modifications

appropriate

fig-

as follows:
)i .:;, "-

Appendix

Air

installation

leakage

Wing

....................

installations

....................

canopies

Control-surface
Antenna

..........................
gaps

A general

........................

discussion

a subsequent

of the

Presented

in table

indicate

features.

design

features

which

contribute

5-

D1 to D8
E1 to E4
e

F1

G1 to G3

to excessive

drag

is given

in

section.
Identification

results

C1 to C3

.......................

installations

B1 to B2

irregularities

Landing-gear

A1 to A31

.............................

surface

Cockpit

......................

Power-plant

Figure

the

airplane

the

power-plant

lowing items
in the sealed

IV are

impressive

As previously

the

of Drag

in a sealed
installation

results
level

mentioned,
and

Sources

faired
were

for

of tests
of drag
the

removed

for

which

initial

condition.

a Representative
airplane

8 (Seversky

is produced

tests

consisted

As the
individually,

were identified
(the values
are given
and faired
condition
and the condition

Airplane

seals
the

XP-41).

by a number
of measuring

and
drag

fairings

of airplane
the

associated

increments

These

for

drag

of

with
the fol-

in percent
of the drag of the airplane
number
is indicated
in parentheses):

.,

":2.

[!(.:.:,....

-.

"
.-%',

_7-.'.

_.','"

".

,_.

.:-

.
.-

Original

cowling

Unfaired

carburetor

Cooling

and

airflow

exhaust

Intercooler

(11)

cooler

The

foregoing

45.6

percent

air

(5)

airflow

scoop

through

Projecting

Oil

cooling

(3 and

(7)

...............

(13)

............

........................

for

percent

6.6 percent
10.2

associated
that

3.6 percent

.................................
items

3.0 percent

.................................

above

3.6 percent

compartment

(10)

18.6

......................

accessory

stacks

12)

...,

with

the power-plant

the

sealed

and

The drag increments

service
condition
were

for

the additional

Removing

in cowling

installation

faired

increased

the

percent

drag

condition.
:.

seals

Ejector

chute

Removing

Blast

19.2

(18)

total

drag

than
most
add

for

drag

and
for

the

total

be reduced

19.2

percent

and

the

drag

of the

improvements

lack

following

of attention
Power-plant

and
6

its

accessories

to detail

(i.e.,

and

the protrusion,

faired

by features

service

leakage

items

airplane
of the

airplane

roughness,

was

cockpit

was

and

ventilator

about

important

results

the

the

sealed

and

leakage

items

could

are

typical

of the

cleanup

for

can be made

Contributing
illustrate
excessive

The
units,

'

<.-.:

and

66 percent
to note

that

drag

roughness

can cause

i'"'"

by an impressive

of only a few percent,

showed

of the

:L-7 %':'

higher

that

these

although

increments

__

,.(

:. 2), ,>

analysis

examples

cooling

and

increments

in drag

installation.-

and

It is particularly

Features

selected

roughness,

summed.

These

Design
The

drag
when

percent

to 2.5 percent.

that considerable
namic
design.

produced
of the

careful

45.6

;' 7

condition.

items

sealed

airplane.

tot,/1

from

and faired

of the

was

produced

and

of protrusion,

power-plant

drag

sealed

tests

group

sealed

drag

drag

the

generally

Additional

percent,

1.2 percent
4.2 percent

this

the

the

Additional

value

26.6

(4) ................

1.8 percent

of the

increased

up to an impressive

could

doors

4.8 percent

with

drag

,.'.

to

5.4 percent

..............................

combined

venturi,

items

...............

................................

of the

percent.

the

(14)

the airplane

1.8 percent

landing-gear

associated

items

cowling

(8)

(17)

percent

leakage

flaps

to bring

..................................

tubes

The

64.8

around

walkway

Antenna

gaps

required

(9) ................................

seals

Sanded

The

from

features

drag

power-plant

and faired

by attention

to Excessive
some

of the

items

condition

to

be reduced
tests

to details

from

and

indicate

in aerody-

Drag

of the design

features

for

which

includes

the

engine

drag.

power-plant
carburetor

installation,
air

scoop,

which

supercharger,

exhaust

stacks,

etc.)

tigated.

was

typically

Specific

installations
terms

examples

are

of drag
The

produced

drag

is attributed

to the

tion

the

includes

in appendix
by internal

increment
loss

turning.

to produce

the

largest

of drag-coefficient

presented

total-pressure

to flow

found

associated

in ducts.
cooling

unit

associated

If heat

transfer

drag

external

example,

itself;

losses

The

associated

increments

however,

airflow

the

inves-

with power-plant

may

be discussed

is primarily
duct

actual

entire

is ignored,

items

in
....

in a cooling

with the

of the

airflows.

with internal

For

increment

increments

A.

and

drag

duct

some

pressure

system,

the power

a function

loss

loss

of the

including

absorbed

of the

total-pressure

in a duct

installa-

features

related

is given

by

P = Q Ap t
Therefore,

an efficient

volumetric

flow rate

previously

noted,

in reference

duct
does

7, some

thrust

are

dimensional

duct

transfer;

duct

is minimized

satisfactory

of heat

efficient

should

and

cooling.
however,

to the

design

be located

to recover

guide

have

the

cooling

may

As

as

shown

air.

be obtained

by

full

on a stagnation
total

point.

pressure

Inlets

corresponding

pressure

internal

ahead

angle

with
area

to an included

higher.

and

surface

of 7 .

Also,

should

be avoided.

cooling

cross

duct

is located

sections.

be avoided.

Two-

of 10 o, and three-dimensional

area,

of the
block

cylindrical

An exception

as explained

curvature

if the

duct,

should

angle

of a high-resistance

streamwise

gradients

of the

in cross-sectional

to an included

be considerably

section

be installed.

be limited

just

if the

should

changes

be limited

be higher

high-speed

a smooth

should

expansion

may

vanes

sudden

should

angles

in the

should

is a low-velocity

adverse

heat

by the transfer

inlets

be designed

expansions

can

for

by ignoring

in general,

duct

particularly

(4) In general,

angles

that,

required

loss

guidelines:

should

required,

(3) The

expansions

obtained

total-pressure

speed.

(2) Bends,
If bends

the amount

is provided

possible,

locations

to the flight

sion

(1) was

2 indicates

(1) Whenever

is one for which

not exceed

to the following

at other

design

equation

Reference
adhering

(1)

to this

in which

case

in reference
walls

general

is used

8, the

the

rule
expan-

expansion

downstream

to reduce

the

to straighten

the flow.
(5) The
amount

required

condition,

for

volumetric

the area

flow

cooling.

provisions

(6) The
varying

volumetric

of the

should
flow
duct

rate

of air

Since

outlet.

through

the volumetric

be made
rate

passing

flow

for controlling

of air

through

Internal

the
rate

airflow
a duct

shutters

duct

should

depends

upon

the

the flight

rate.

can be efficiently

should

not exceed

be avoided.

controlled

by

(7) The
the

duct

airflow

outlet,

The

drag

implemented
drag

to meet

the

by ejecting

gases

the

that

rearward

installed

exhaust

provide

Failure

of engine

shape,

drag

to the

has
which

thrust

force

through

gaps

power-plant
a drag

that

is equal

installais

as well

directing

may

by

increment

to about

properly

are

produced

airstream,

shown

at

power-plant

increments

stacks,

relative

body

which

considered

to the

exhaust

component
this

streamline

be charged

experience

a thrust

undercut.

are

The

at an angle

to utilize

ideal

of the aerodynamic

be slightly

requirements,

therefore

case

gases

the

airflow.

Furthermore,

may

thrust.

in the

contour

should

from

external
may

the

outlet

installation

with

protuberance.

duct

to departures

power-plant

be noted

along

at the

protuberances

It should

actual

due

associated

engine-associated

caused

be discharged

the afterbody

penalties

increments

tion.

should

and

the

as by

exhaust

10 percent

of the

be considered

a drag

penalty.
Air

leakage.-

associated

with

leakage

from

The

drag

air

leakage

ducts

to total-pressure

the airstream,

it produces
the

to leakage
contribution

penalties,

emphasizes

other

to the

external

Because

of the

significance

airflow

normal

to this

which

due

the drag

problem

in terms

across

to

and thereby
increments

results,

surfaces

is, therefore,

of isolating

related

of these

example,

is generally

difficulty

results

of sealing

and

of drag-coefficient

additional

importance

irregularities.-

and

ment

in drag

other

items

surface

was

ing incremental
in table

V.

roughness

on wing

showed

for

both

that

and

measured

profile

drag

drag

attributable

rivets,
the

from

the

measured

examples

of the

were

coefficients
to wing

are

shown

are

of drag

a pressure

wings

and

the

of the

production

therefore

coefficients
of the
surface

the

for
smooth

profile

dif-

the

were

service-condition
indicates
even

that

The
points

are

and-

transition

of airplanes
located

flow.

significant
these

result-

C.

wings

when

on two-

boundary-layer

generally

of turbulent

incre-

irregularities

wings

of

and

(based

transition

of surface

of the

The

coefficient.

in appendix

location

wings

wings

irregularities,

coefficients
drag

effects

deviations,

boundary-layer
effects

the

1 to 11.

construction

service-condition

in a region

includes

airplanes

drag

and discussed

to determine

which

for

calculated

Additional
drag

drag,

joints,

measured

irregularities
points,

measured

and the

smooth

transition

was

coefficients

conducted

the

profile

to roughness,

data)

profile

Investigations

wing

by subtracting

airfoil

drag

presented

points

due

estimated

smooth

The

irregularities,

coefficient

dimensional

are

B.

The

leakage

be properly

For

in momentum

since

examples

by leakage,

headings.
the

surface

friction

profile

Specific

may

airflows.

exists.
Wing

skin

solely

a reduction

disturbance

surfaces

external

Furthermore,

in appendix

produced
under

ferential

drag.

in airplane

and/or

represents

a significant

presented

discussed

to internal

loss.

aerodynamic

are

due

essentially

a contributor

increases

of air

increments

1 to 11

behind

Comparison
with the
drag

irregularities

the
of the

calculated
increments
are

located

in the turbulent boundary layer. From the results presented in table V it is readily apparent that extreme care shouldbe exercised in wing construction to avoid the excessive high
drag penalties associated with surface irregularities. Furthermore, it should be noted
that wing protuberances (for example, nonflush rivets) may fix the point of transition from
laminar to turbulent flow on the wing if the protuberance is located aheadof the natural
transition point of the corresponding smoothwing. For example, ff transition for the
smooth wing occurs at 0.30_, then the addition of a row of nonflush rivets at 0.20_may
fix the boundary-layer transition at the 0.20_location. However, ff transition for the
smooth wing normally occurs at 0.15_,then the addition of a row of rivets at 0.20_ should
not affect the location of the transition point. Whenthe transition point is movedforward
by the presence of the protuberances, a significant drag increment is causedby the
increased region of turbulent flow and a smaller drag increment is producedby the form
drag of the protuberance itself. Therefore, for configurations with surface irregularities aheadof the boundary-layer transition point, the incremental values of drag would be
even larger than those shownin table V. A detailed study of the effects of surface irregularities on wing profile drag is presented in reference 9.
Landing-gear
determined

from

gears

and

cover

plates

that

installation.-

that

differences

of the

exposed

condition,

results

obtained

drag

found

increased

for

by cockpit-canopy

gaps

from

exhaust
or

the

gaps.-

When

rectly

can also

by inducing
Reference

ing the

thickness

the

maximum

stream
cause

airflow

through

airfoil

thickness

seals

metal

and

that

act as a jet
drag,

Air

to the
spoiler.

both directly

such

drag

control

base

are

completely

in turn

drag

were

The
D.
have

leads

to

increments

removed

were
can

produced

blunt

through

unsealed

rear

where

it can

of the fixed

as profile

surface,

the gaps
Such

side

lightening

from

measured.

leak

can be reduced

of the fixed

surface.

by

canopies

low-pressure
The

if there

caused

E.

increments

the airframe
profile

the

fairings

sources.

surface

at the blunt
of the

drag

several

considerable

10 indicates
of the

and

which

and

indicated

in appendix

on airplane

to reduce

doors

to leakage.

discussed

separation,

in appendix

all

in the

due

were

retracted

consistently

even

drag
are

discussed

of the

that

gear

the original

disturbances

afterbodies

of flow

landing

retracted,

results

be noted

short

with

by airflow

conducted

from
side

The

considerable

significant

can result

to the

spar.
than

surfaces,

high-pressure

normal

stabilizer

of tests
are

drag

and

with

airplanes

installations

regions

installations

control

control-surface

edges

results

Control-surface
with

landing-gear

significant

The

It should
produced

associated

with gears

faired.

produced

leakage.

Sharp

to produce

were

of the

condition

portions

sealing

specific

canopies.-

drag.

associated

air

increments

in a smooth

increments
and

drag

the drag

protruding

inadequate

Cockpit
been

and

components

faired

between

airplanes

sealed,

considerable

The

drag
holes

markedly
so that

fin

and indiin the

rear

by reducit is thinner

,;

..:;,t:;'{(_.

_'. ](1:.:

":!--.,::I:A--_

;.:'_:,,.1

" "7_". ". >! . '.;. _;:';:..:;

]:7 b(

_{+7L-'].I.::::'.._

,,'L:j-.;:,.L_.'i,I_;IS:

hE,i

._c];j::

:.-'

2-;:,

O'W:.)

"' 'i

'.:;:".:i'_(.2.;1;

L_;;I(_.]7;:_.::

,;;:_-'f..--i

"

,:

'.:; i :7;=-:7:
i,,7,.; ".h

77:h.'i
Specific

examples

of drag-coefficient

presentedAntenna
in appendix
F.
installations.comprised

of an increment

nal antennas
flow

The

are

and

(2) the

increments

due

required,
mast

have

to antenna

increments

drag

due to the

increment
wires

it is suggested

due to control-surface

associated

with

and an increment
that

a thin airfoil

section.

installations

are

due

(1) the wires

Specific

presented

CONCLUDING

antenna
to the

are

installations
mast.

be positioned
examples

gaps

is

If exter-

parallel

to the

of drag-coefficient

in appendix

iii?iiiii!!):).
;i.!:
!
_f, /

:::::"
::: : -:
_iii.!ii:.

G.

REMARKS

_k:,':'; : ....
::::

Results
period

from

of drag
1935

to 1945

propeller-driven
that

the

total

drag

dynamic

general

drag

power-plant
installations

increments

increase
design

aviation

23665

summarized
by many

leakage,
cockpit
however,
when

Data
individual

can

full-scale

potential
from

tunnel

application

tests

during

the

to current

on 23 airplanes

configuration

of results

be obtained

Administration

Langley

features

indicate
-

of the

discussed
by proper

investigation,

in the

present

attention

'S-'j

::, "

_L?_t_L:::
:i';::i:;: :':!:

such

?:C::(:!
as,

canopies,
control-surface
gaps, and antenna
the increments
are summed,
the resulting

to the guidelines

in drag
Space

for

On the basis

and by adherence

and

in the

airplanes.

produced

reduction
Center

conducted

been

is significant.

Aeronautics

April
Hampton,1, 1976
Va.

tests

have

installation,
air
- are not large;

that considerable
Langley
Research
National

cleanup

:=

:h;:; ::i:'

it appears

iliJ:!ii:!
;::`....... ii

ii{7{i;;;7,5.1:
i:_/::!:.i:=:i:
!;:i,!:

;if:::i.!i_i;ii:_

paper.

to details

in aeroi:]i::i!/'i:iil-i
!j:

_ii

7 }1
:L"

:;!

:: (): L,,;:
'.,
-.

( ;.:-.
;.-.-_(.

Iu
i

;.

;7",

APPENDIX

DRAG

Specific

examples

installations

are

DUE

TO

POWER-PLANT

of drag-coefficient

discussed

according

increments
to the

following

INSTALLATIONS

associated

with

power-plant

outline:
Figure

Wing

cooling

Fuselage

cooling

Cowlings
Spinner

ducts

.............................

A1

to A3

A4

to A7

A8 to A10
All

s .....................................

A12

s ...................................

Carburetor

air

coolers

Exhaust

................................

....................................

Intercooler

Oil

duct

scoops

.............................

...................................
stacks

Superchargers

.................................
.................................

A13

to A16

A17

to A25

A26

to A29

A30

to A31

APPENDIX

NACA 18429

NACA

(a) Inlet.

ing

(b) Outlet.

structure

members

---- Wheel

(c)
Figure

Cooling
outlet

control.

6 percent
uted

the

tion

further

12

drag

interior

original

increment

provided

duct

air

the
and

quantity
to

in drag
duct.

duct

cooling
may

on airplane

9 (Bell

XP-39).

a radiator

located

in the

by

of the

outlet

a drag-coefficient
the

for

outlet

cooling

airflow
have

well

section.

height

By reducing

due

reductions

Longitudinal

Wing

chord,

airflow.

sufficient

to the

AI.-

9 was

reference

cooling

chord,

and

airplane
In the

of the

to the

erence

bers

for

18430

been

was

increment
opening

in the
was

opening

reduced

obtained

removal

without

approximately
was

3 percent
condition

to 0.0008.
by

duct

of 0.0023

to about

high-speed

wing

For
of the

attrib-

of the
was
this

structural

ref-

obtained,
installamem-

:- :

_ :.

.;:.

::.

APPENDIX

;ii!!!ii:

!iii!i;

Wing

Inlet

chord

line

Inlet

/jl-

General
Inlet

Inlet

CL

0.12

Pt

ACD

I 0.0006

0.12

for

.87q

0.12

wing

airplane

Various

inlets

relatively

sharp

This

showed

inlet

internal

flow

at the face
high

lift

was

less

problem

were

lip and
the

an inlet

lowest

separated

of the

0.95q

0.0011

.68q

radiator.

than

that

also

caused

for

inlet
inlet

between

range

conditions.

considered

for

the

plane

coefficients.

2 was

designed

of flow

separation

the highest

drag

of high

for

the

pressure

wing

chord

in a loss

lift

on

the

of those

1 had a

and

diffuser

axis.

coefficients

the

tested.
and

presented

the

recovery
recoveries

recovery

inside

recovery

Inlet

pressure

pressure

just

18.

in pressure

higher

increments

high-speed

drag

of airplane

At high

to obtain

coefficients

drag-coefficient

ducts
to the

resulted

cooling

Model).

cooling

lip and

considerations

satisfactory

wing

at low lift

associated

Research

lower

2 to have

and

perpendicular

1 because

The

ducts

at low lift

Inlet

However,

a compromise

quantities

the

cooling

18 (General

drag

from

coefficients.

of flight

tested

p_

0.86q

0.0022

.89

Inlets

.22q

.89

A2.-

view

0.95q

.89

Figure

cross-section

for

upper
Inlet

inlet

This

3 represents

low drag
are

lip.

at

for

for

a wide

airflow

condition.
13

APPENDIX

: ..:_:
..:

:.,,:

;:..
)

ii21;:
i;?G:;::

Original

installation

Modified

installation

1111_
1

11

29 _\

(a) Right

inlet.

Figure

Propeller
rotation

operating,

caused

in serious

losses

installed

tilted

15 farther

about

and

increased

improved

14

A further
was

high-speed
for

the

conducted

both

than

with airplane

pressure

the high-speed

the

of the

and

inlet

that

faces

of the

climb

this

on the

side

radiators

conditions

slipstream
This

condition,

velocity

decreased

the

the airstream.

the

inlet

drag

coefficient

by 15 percent.
with

the

modified

inlets

blade

of the downgoing

to free-stream

the

resulted

modified

propeller

of increasing

of inlet

inlets

the

22 showed

of the upgoing

consisted

ratio

modified

P-63).

and

side

inlet.

22 (Bell

To remedy

which

at the

inlet

on the

the plane

to lower
the

duct

recovery.

modification,
made

on airplane

wing

of the inlet

condition
total

inlets

of the

the plane

downward

33 percent,
the

tests

duct

in total-pressure
with

blade.

For

Wing

a misalinement

were

peller

A3.-

(b) Left

area

proby

velocity.
by 0.0005
Cooling
inlets.

was

_.

= 0"067 m2

.:

.,

APPENDIX

0"72 ft2) ....

I-[/

"ft."

; ,;-

?iij,

A-A

-:,?..

(a)

Original

..,

7 ii:!?i

installation.

= 0.095 m 2 (1.03 ft2) .....

----_-

: ;:

B-B

_-

,.:..-.-

A i = 0.069k_.__
m2 (0.74 ft 2)
A-A
(b) Modified

Figure

In
and

the

fuselage
raising

its
air

original
was

line.
the

taken
This

installation

Cooling

condition

the

in by

means

installation

installation

drag-coefficient
original

A4.-

increment
was

installations on airplane

radiator
of the
increased

so that
was

installation.

it did

not

reduced

on airplane
large
the

scoop

7 was
which

airplane

protrude
to 0.0017

coefficient

the
the

located
protruded

drag

beyond
and

7 (Curtiss

normal

same

airflow

XP-40).

under
below
by

the
the

normal

0.0034.

fuselage
as

engine,

lines,
that

for

By
the
the

obtained.
:U::-/. :!".

15

APPENDIX

0.17

m 2

(1"86ft2)

(14,000

NACA

18907

ft3/min)

/_

.......

_--__

_A

6_'_

_c

B-B
C-C

(a) Photograph
Figure

A5.-

and

sketch

Radiator

of forward
installations

airplane
16

underslung
and

11 (Curtiss

associated
XP-46).

radiator
cooling

installation.
drag

on

:C!ii:: :::.-

_-ff

(u-[._/[%$

v-v

ooo'

{T)

E_'o = _V/TV

_/_,= _o._,: a,_%

(g%,_ 6_'g)

aUTT

_a%uaa

a_TaSrk.E

:.j.<<%.._:!f.

6_ I - 9_-_I

%alUl

q-_Tq-ao

:. --.
.<

,).
-- :!
y-

V XI(ll_clcIV

.,i.

7]i::.7:'
L_

.,
.

..

,;,,

ii::::!:i:
<::ii
,.
:::>_:

:, ,

T_'O

APPENDIX

i.5

.....
, ' ' '

1.3

]'

"-w-i

_4[

-,-L-t
.. ,

J,

._z!

:'-'

"'f

": '.! 4,-F_'P.i'. t-T-"L!/"

,,

_'
+-__-r
._.__-:!-:::

........

-+4,_-_.4

_q-L
J- :.._'Zi.
Q

:_,

;Z/:

_!_

....

QREQ'D

i.i

-i4 <r" _"_:d

1! 4 iq- J ......
4-4-,: _,-.... '-:--_-

,T ._.-

0.9

.tj

4.

0025
t,vt-r_

H--F_--t-_=
-'.-:-q
-,-'-

r-

I t i- !

o0020
-; q/-_-Iq,44--

.......

,_-_

o015
Radiator

_N :

Installation

,,

AC D

Forward
Rear
.0010

___:_
,

0005

__,

_: J_]l

.UU:

r_ 2

::
1.0

.8

.6

Ae/A r

(c) Volumetric

flow rate and drag-coefficient

of exit area for forward

and rear radiator

Figure

A study
according

was

to their

drag-coefficient
tions

(figs

A5(a)
in drag

is

by

(fig. A5(c)).

18

location

for
on

increments

increase
shown

conducted

the

and
which
steep

A5(b))
would
slope

the

two

A5.-

fuselage
and

when

were

have
of the

occurred
curve

installations

installations.

designated

of airplane

of 0.0011

as a function

Concluded.

radiator

both

increment

0.0010

for

adjusted
if outlet

of drag

11.
the

The

results

forward

and

to the

correct

control

were

increment

forward

as

and

show
the

respective

rear

installa-

airflow.
not

a function

The

used

rear

large

on these

of exit

area

ducts

APPENDIX

A
,G

!.

"

' i

.._
.(:

!.s-.7:i,i)i
,

- ...: .:<

: !.i .-_-..,.
32 ..i-"-

(a) Original
Figure

Airplane
cowling
had

expansion
of the
was

12 had

shape

leading

with the

of the

that

greater

cowlings

a relatively

were

high-velocity

cylinders

scoop

Nose

of high fineness

edges

engine
0.0040

A6.-

ratio.

removed.

the

The

too sharp.
cooling

original

inlet

The
air

cowling.

on airplane

long propeller

of only 0.40q.
for

long nose

12 (Curtiss

XP-42).

extension

in order

shaft
of the

sudden

resulted

original

change

in direction

in a total-pressure

In the high-speed
installation

cowling

than

for

condition
the

sealed

to permit

was

too small

and the
recovery

the
and

drag

extreme
in front

coefficient

smooth

and

cowling

_? .-

APPENDIX

.H

i- .

/
i/

/.

.f

./

-=_

//
\

.Q_-:

....

.,,eg+"

'i>: '

. :i

\
_.

-.._

i__i:!.>::
w/
x.

:. : .:)-:..: .:,

(b) Modified

cowling

with annular

Figure

A modified
losses

of the

on airplane
reduced

The

total

conditions.

2O

cooling
12.

was

cowling
air

The

to 0.0025

pressure

data

with
and

showed

when

at the rear

that

adjusted

and

spinner.

A6. = Continued.

an annular
to avoid

inlet

the

inlet,

designed

large

drag

to reduce

of the

the drag=coefficient

the

original

cowling,

increment

for the

same

airflow

as the

of the diffuser

was

slightly

less

kinetic=energy

of this

original

than

was

0.90q

tested

installation

installation.
for

these

i:!/L:i::'i

APPENDIX

i'

Collector

Cowllng-flap

gear

ring

Section

at

original

cowling

outlet
.

!:
Section

at

smooth

cowllng

:..

:-.:,-.!:'

(c) Outlet

of annular-inlet

Figure

The

outlet

an exhaust
of these
bottom
allow

of the

collector
items

exit
greater

annular-inlet

ring,

provided

was

and

provided

cooling

flow

by removing
with the

contained

lip just

reduction
the
cowling

iZ

cowling.

Continued.

cowling

a sharp

a further

A6.-

outlet

inside

in drag
oil cooler
flaps

a cowling-flap
the

cowling-flap

coefficient

actuating
outlet.

of 0.0007.

and enlarging

linkage,
Removal

In addition,

the oil-cooler

exit

a
to

closed.
::,-.:

.-..:.

.2< - -_ -',_

21

APPENDIX

</
/

::..,.;} .
,-

.'_!:::-<-:

(d) Modified

cowling

with

annular

Figure

A further
of an

enlarged

increment
with
cient

the
for

modification
spinner

of only
scoop
the

engine,

which

0.0012

removed.

of the

when
This

carburetor,

A6.-

cowling

reduced

the

compared

and

oil

and

enlarged

../,.

spinner.

Concluded.

inlet
inlet
with

increment

inlet

:.

was

arrangement
area,

the

on

produced
sealed

obtained

a total

and
for

airplane

smooth
an

airflow

12,

consisting

drag-coefficient
original
which

cowling
was

,,;,.

suffi-

cooler.

,.,_.

22

?::i!:
/,,

,,.

,:

?: L'.:._,,_

APPENDIX

:,::(.,::'(:.

\,

Carburetor

Figure

cool

AT.-

satisfactorily

losses
ings.

Cooling

in any flight

in the cooling
The inlet was

installations

attitude

addition,

the average

drag

coefficient

This

reduction

greater

efficiency

was

pressure

propeller
attributed

of the

internal

pressure
on each

in front

removed
mainly
flow.

was
to the

inlet

:.L

13 (Curtiss

condition.

XS03C-1).

Tests

of restricted
increased

engine

decreased
improved

cylinders
0.0004

shape

!i::!:::ii_(i:.ii!:

revealed

that

. _,_;_.:;::.:::?

inlet and outlet openby about 28 percent.

side
by about
of the25cowling.
percent

of the

':

on airplane

system
were excessive
because
accordingly
lowered'
and its area

total

with

air

in the original

Additional
tions
increased
outlet the
openings
power-on were inletinstalled
total

(_.

was

by the

of the

inThese
the climb
modfficaattitude,

increased.

cowling

cowling

!iiii:!:i:ii!ii!,il

!ii__!

The

modification.

lip and the

i_L _.::_.::_
i,'.{ :'-

::.

:;,,:'.-

i:

" ,-

i ;-::2

:).'

!!2

_ }.;.:_

.....

(a) Airplane

(b) Airplane
Figure

A8.-

Cowlings

Air-cooled
nonideal
The

drag

0.0020
added.

shape

engine
often

coefficient

greater

Lengthening
on the

drag

drag

coefficient

and

resulted

drag

the
of the

in flow

and

airplane
for the

extension

separation

caused

for

by means
the

airplane

original

fuselage

by an adverse

cowling

of a conical

with

extension.
L-76-160
8 (Seversky
XP-41).

in a blunt

the airplane

streamline

afterbody

on airplane

resulted

8 with the

with

fairing

generally

coefficient

fuselage

of 0.0005

nose

afterbody

airplane

the

cowling.

streamlined

installations

for

than

ence

8 with

8 with original

and

extension

nose,

the original

pressure

no cooling

with a solid
had

but resulted
cowling.

shape.

This
gradient.

airflow

streamline

was
nose

no significant
in a reduction

influin

APPENDIX

(b) Airplane
Figure

The

drag

coefficient

airflow),

was

line

fairing.

nose

A9.-

0.0013

greater

10 with streamlined

Cowlings

of airplane
than

the

on airplane

nose

10 (Grumman

10, with the

drag

fairing.

coefficient

original

L-76-161
XF4F-3).

cowling

of the airplane

sealed

(no cooling

with a solid

stream-

25

APPENDIX

Figure

Airplane
to remedy
cylinder
that
drag

26

the

this
baffles.
flow

coefficient

A10.-

Engine

cowling

on airplane

14 had unsatisfactory

engine

situation,

cut in the

holes

Subsequent

disturbance
of 0.0041.

were
tests

caused

showed

cooling

that

by the airflow

14 (Douglas

in the

periphery

climb

the

cooling

from

the

of the

A-20A).

condition.
cowling

problem
holes

resulted

was

In an attempt
just

behind

the

not solved

and

in an increase

in

APPENDIX

L-76-162
Figure

All.-

Spinners
line

shape.

upper

same

of various
Powered

photographs,

efficiency

Spinner

and

increase

sizes

tests
provided

provided

arrangements

showed

evaluated

that

approximately

sufficient

in propulsive

were

cooling

efficiency

on airplane

the

on airplane

61.5-cm

The

XF4F-3).

10 to obtain

(24.2-in.)

a 3-percent
air.

10 (Grumman

spinner,

increase

a better

stream-

shown

in overall

larger

spinners

produced

but did not provide

adequate

cooling

in the

propulsive
about
air

the

to the

engine.

27

i::-2,._ y :-

outline
Section

Figure

AI2.-

Airflow

from

wells

without

any

energy

lation

was

0.0012.

The

28

the

Intercooler

intercooler
recovery.
drag

wasdue

duct

duct

A-A

on airplane

of airplane

The
both

total

I0 (Grumman

10 was

discharged

drag-coefficient

to internal

duct

XF4F-3).

into the

increment
losses

and

for

wheel
this

to leakage.

instal-

_ii_::::
!_
i:?i
ii!_
_i:>
_:,i_i::_i::
!!?i_i_?ii:i:ii:
ii::_
:::_::
:,_::
i::_i:?iiii::i!:?
ili_i::?:
i?i:::i:_
_:_i_:
__;ii_!_i!!:
:_!_:_i::
!i:,:i:!!
_:
,ii_i!i_i:_:!_i_i::_i?!i
,i:i_:7
:/!_:,_
_!::_,:_i:
:i_i_i_
i:_i
::,
i:_
_i:_,:::
_:i,_:,:,
I:IIL
!:_ii:i:ililli:_!i
i/: _

APPENDIX

"_,! :_-

_:i

(,ii::
_i:
ii/

_:_:?:.).

i:
:i:,,
.:2.?_

L-76-163
(a) Tuft

photograph
showing

of original
region

carburetor

of separated

air

scoop

flow.

:_:':?_:)
"::)5

!!::i!::-_':i

(b) Section

Figure
Refairing

AI3.-Carburetor
the

carburetor

view

air
air

of modified

scoop

scoop

and

pressuredrag
coefficientup
to highbY
0.0010.angles
ofThiSattack.mdificatin

installation.

on airplane
cowling
further

2 (Grumman

of airplane
helped

XF4F-2).

2 reduced

to maintain

i,ii:iiiil::!;;i!i

the
the

airplane

carburetor

::._::_.::,:

i!!ii_iiii!!/i_'
:::_!!

!,!i)i;_:
_:'i_

APPENDIX

_9!
k_ . -.:...': .

-.:-

- ?q

ii!S:i

f
L-76-164
Figure

AI4o-

Flow

visualization
airplane

of flow over carburetor

air scoop

on

9 (Bell XP-39).
r"

Small
These

air

increment
visualization

sharp-edge
scoops
was

air

increased
attributed

using

surface

scoops
the

to the

were

airplane
sizable

used

in the

drag

coefficient

region

wing-fuselage

of disturbed

by

fillets

0.0019.
flow,

This
as

of airplane
large

determined

j.

,:._:

9.

drag
by

flow

tufts.

3O

!._ ./:%

APPENDIX

NACA
Figure

Flow
satisfactory
operating,
slipstream
faired

A15.-

Carburetor

visualization

studies

flow

existed

a flow

separation

rotation.

out more

over

air

for airplane
the

was
and

carburetor
observed

To eliminate

gradually,

scoops

the flow

a reduction

on airplane

10 (Grumman

10 showed
air
on one

that

scoop.
side

in the

However,
of the

separation,
of the airplane

the

scoop
sides

drag

18559.1
XF4F-3).

power-off
with

the

because
of the

coefficient

condition
propeller
of propeller

scoops

were

by 0.0006

resulted.

31

APPENDIX

i. 21

Original

Revised

inlet

forward

Flush

inlet

inlet

L-76-165
(a) Photographs of original and modified inlets.

Original

inlet

__

Revised
_/

77

(b) Section
Figure

A16.-

Inlets

Two modifications
revised

forward

correct

airflow.

pressure

was

ward

inlet.

improved
the

32

inlet

resulted

shape

advantages
of the
of the

nose,
lower

"

_-_Flush

inlet

of original

carburetor

air

carburetor

air

below

inlet

also

the value

of the revised
which

was

and

scoops

in an increment

the flush

"

"//////////,

view

to the

significantly
The

elimination

for

Although

forward

inlet

modified

in drag

0.95q

forward

inlet

lip on the original

inlet.

11 were

coefficient

had very

nearly

11 (Curtiss

of airplane

of about

more

inlets.

on airplane

scoop

obtained

parallel

thought
to the

tested.

of only

low associated

are

X-P-46).

with

0.0001

drag,

the

the

revised

The
for

the

ram
for-

to be due to the
streamlines,

and

to

=:iii:::i!:iiii_:il;:_;_;i:::i:_
-:_;.i;_ :;,:_::_!ii_;-:;> ::; --::

,. :

..

-.:-

APPENDIX

:::::
<<<:+:::<::

(a) Inlet.

(b) Outlet.
Figure

The

air

undersurface
oil cooler
chord)

the

of the
was

through

interference
was

for

measured

A17.-

Oil cooler

oil cooler
wing.

The

of airplane
air

located,

and was

louvers

on the upper

due to the
for

this

inefficient

on airplane

passed

discharged
surface
discharge.

2 was
through

2 (Grumman

taken

of the

in by means

a cross-flow

at an angle
wing.

L-76-166
XF4F-2).

of about
Surface

A drag-coefficient

of a scoop

wing

duct,

45 (relative
tufts

show

increment

on the

in which
to the
the

the
wing

flow

of 0.0020

installation.

33

k, _

_i ii_(:
,:

APPENDIX

.....

i%

:7:.-

"

L.':"

::_!:-;ili_
_
> :"

;5

:: ..-,

)1%'

."')

L-76-167
Figure

The
rear

of the

installation.

34

oil-cooler
cowling.

A18.-

scoop

Oil-cooler

of airplane

A drag-coefficient

scoop

3 was

on airplane

located

increment

3 (Grumman

at the
of 0.0007

bottom
was

F3F-2).

of the fuselage
measured

for

on the
this

i:' ':2. '

APPEND_

..._,

,.-

:./.}2
...

2,

) -..,.

L-76-168
Figure

The

A19.-

oil-cooler

scoop

incremental

drag

was

to 0.0003

reduced

coefficient

Oil-cooler

scoop

on airplane
produced

by refairing

4 was

on airplane

placed

on the

by the installation
the

scoop

as

4 (Vought

SB2U-1).

top of the

was

0.0007.

cowling.
This

The
increment

shown.

";: : ::?

APPENDIX

A
_

.r

k: ./L
.

. k

2. (,

..

..

L-76-169
(a) Original
Figure

The
on the
ducts
tive
for

A20.-

oil-cooler

bottom
located

installations

installation
fuselage

which

in the

fuselage.

This

and

axis.
increased

on airplane

on airplane

of the

to the fuselage
oil cooling

Oil-cooler

installation.

This
the

8 consisted

diverted

air

at a rather

air

then

discharged

oil-cooler
airplane

was

installation
drag

8 (Seversky

XP-41).

of a sharp-edge

scoop

failed

coefficient

sharp

angle

at an angle
to supply

located

up into oil-cooler
of about
sufficient

60 relaairflow

by 0.0017.

5--!-_:!_,

.:

..

iiii
36

APPENDIX

NACA
Figure

The
faces

coefficient
blisters

oil coolers

of the wings

airplane

A22.-

drag

coefficient

cooler

airplane

outboard

increment
located

for

Oil

on airplane

10 were

located

of the fuselage.
by 0.0008.

of 0.0001

at noncritical

was

This

When

the

measured.

positions

may

18524

10 (Grumman

XF4F-3).

in streamline

ducts

oil-cooler

cooler

units

These
not produce

on the

installation
were

results
large

lower

increased

streamlined,
indicate
drag

that

surthe

a dragstreamlined

increments.

39

(a) Original

installation.

'x

,/

:,

*?

"\,

(b) Modified

Figure

The

A23.-

Oil-cooler

original oil-cooler

installations

The

oil-cooler

ing and

a gradually

modified
cooler

modifications
expanding

installation was

face was

increased

consisted
diffuser.

reduced

installation.

on airplane

installation on airplane

coefficient of 0.0018, and the total-pressure

recovery

14 resulted

face was

in drag
only 0.40q.

flush with the face of the cowl-

drag-coefficient

to 0.0008, and the total-pressure

to 0.95q.

A-20A).

in an increment

at the oil-cooler

of an inlet that was

The resulting

14 (Douglas

increment

recovery

of this

at the oil-

APPENDIX A

'. 'i.:!
: ,"L

i_..:-,i z

i/ii!_!!j

,-I /

;/-il}(/i_:!

/-):(il_i:_
/

, i!ii!
'1

Figure

The
increment
only
the

oil-cooler

installation

of 0.0008.

0.33q.
local

A24.-

This
flow.

result

However,
was

Oil

cooler

on airplane

of airplane
the
attributed

(Lockheed

15 produced

total-pressure
to the

15

recovery
high

oblique

YP-38).

a moderate
at
angle

the

drag-coefficient
oil-cooler

of the

inlet

face
relative

was
to

APPENDIX

Figure

Dividing
pressure
at the

In addition,
at

vanes

losses
inlet.

A25.-

the

were

at the

The

from

installed

radiator

airplane

pressure

_ = 0.2 o, and

Oil cooler

drag
recovery

_-h-

on airplane

in the

resulting
coefficient
at the

0. 84q to 0.92qat

18 (General

underslung
from

flow

was
radiator
_=

duct

Research

of airplane

separation

reduced
face

18 to reduce

of a thick

by 0.0004
was

Model).

increased

by this
from

the

boundary

layer

modification.
0.69q

to 0.83q

10.4 .

<:,,.:_.:i_!:::

42
iJ) "

: ; :!:

APPENDIX

(a) Airplane

AC D = 0.0010.

5;

(b) Airplane

8;

ACD = 0.0005.

ii:: ii :/:/i:/

(c) Airplane

11;

Figure

AC D = 0.0003.

A26.-

Exhaust-stack

8 (Seversky

Large-bore
drag;
for
may

however,
airplane

8.

be obtained

ever,

the

sive

drag

used.

exhaust
some

(d) Airplane

drag

XP-41),

stacks

drag
9 (Bell

such

reduction

may

has

by using

an exhaust-stack

increment

exhaust-stack
which

was

that

and

used

be provided
significant

on airplane

to the

used

reduction
as shown

on airplane

relatively

XBT-2),
XP-46).

5 produced

by introducing
drag

AC D = 0.0014.
L-76-171

5 (Douglas
11 (Curtiss

installation

arrangement
attributed

airplanes

X:P-39),

as those

Analysis

individual

shown

for

9;

excessive

fairings
and

thrust

for airplane
9 contributed

large-diameter

as shown
increases
11; howan excesexhaust

pipes

!:::::_::!!:_
I

APPENDIX A

Figure

A27.-

Exhaust

and

large

19 and

0.0021,

original

jet

exhaust

plane

the air

leakage

respectively.

the

reduced

protrusion

stacks.
drag

19 with

obtained
about

(b) Airplane

19.

on airplanes

19 (Curtiss

of the large-bore
around

Engine

exhaust-stack

17.

stacks
and

The

(a) Airplane

them

Analysis
through
a 5-percent

tests
and

of the results
use

of the

increase

stovepipe

increased

operating

installation

17 (Grumman

XTBF-1)

SB2C-1).

the

were

drag

installation

indicated

that
jet

stacks

coefficient

conducted

a modified

individual

exhaust

the

exhaust

for

on airplanes
by 0.0008

airplane
which

increased
stacks

17
and

19 with
used
thrust

would

both

individual
and
provide

air-

in speed.

iiii!;!i!i

APPENDIX

(
\

Figure

Removing
coefficient
however,
accounted

A28.-

the

seal

by 0.0010.
the
for

large
the

Exhaust

from
The

stack

the

form

on airplane

exhaust
drag

opening

of the

20 (Vought-Sikorsky

of airplane

installations

amount

of air

leakage

through

excessive

drag

of the

installation.

the

has
opening

F4U-1).

20 increased

the drag

been

in this

around

avoided
the

exhaust

design;
stacks

_i
,i_!_i:
_i;!
A

APPENDIX

:-).:- ;i

i!i',5

!i;iiiii!

(a)

Airplane

_.2.

(b) Airplane
Figure

A29.-

Exhaust
and

Removing
and

46

23

increased

the
the

sealed
drag

metal

23

stacks
(North

fairings

coefficients

on

airplanes

American

that
by

23.

0.0005

enclosed
and

22 (Bell

P,63)

exhaust

stacks

P-51B).

the
0.0007,

respectively.

of airplanes

22

The
ment

in drag

charger,
system

external

coefficient

0.0010
used

turbosupercharger

was

to cool

installation

of 0.0033.
attributed

the

exhaust

Of this

to the

bypass

lines

from

used

increment,
stacks,
the

engine

on airplane
0.0020

and

was

0.0003

to the

was

9 produced
attributed
attributed

supercharger.

an increto the

super-

to the

 /
.,., .

APPENDIX

k -.-

.:.:

: -

(a) Original

..!-,,. -

installation.

,..: .-...

i!i:i
_._\_:_:_ .... .

"
:- .:,:"
._
"%"

i,

: . .;
:2.:=...

(b) Submerged
Figure

A31.-

Because
plane

16 was

engine
the

original

tested.

at the

The

installation

would

aft end

would

results

the

from

isolated

these

tests

an increment

installation.

Submerging

nacelles
of the

modification

have

only

on airplane

experience

of the

by redirection
of this

installations

constraints,

supercharger

obtained

effectiveness

48

of size

configuration

openings
ery

Supercharger

installation.

required

reduced

exhaust
under
some

engine-nacelle
indicated
in drag
the

this

gases

was

cooling.

expected
conditions;

B-24

D).

installation

that

the

of air-

complete

coefficient

supercharger

increment

operational
shroud

16 (Consolidated

four-

of 0.0040
and

sealing

to 0.0027.

Thrust

to further

enhance

however,

the

due
the
recovthe

submerged

to

APPENDIX

DRAG

Specific

examples

DUE

of incremental

TO AIR LEAKAGE

drag

coefficients

due

to air

leakage

are

discussed

herein.

(a) Airplane

5 (Douglas

(b) Airplane

XBT-2);

AC D = 0.0008.

10 (Grumman

XF4F-3);

AC D = 0.0003.

:'

_:..

(c) Airplane

8 (Seversky
AC D = 0.0009.

Figure

B1.-

Air

leakage

through

_ ::.

!(/i;

XP-41);
L-76-173
cowling
gaps.

49

....

..

APPENDIX

"_

Upper

cowling

(d) Airplane

(e) Airplane

19 (Curtiss

flap

"

Lower

17 (Grumman

XTBF-1);

SB2C-1);

cowling

.-,

flaps

AC D = 0.0004.

(f) Airplane

AC D = 0.0005.

21 (Grumman

F6F-3);

AC D = 0.0005.
Figure BI.- Concluded.

Incremental
seals
age

were
that

drag

removed

produc.ed

in an increase

coefficients

from
a loss

in drag.

cowling

due to air
gaps

in momentum,

and

leakage

hinges.

disturbed

were
The

the

obtained

arrows

external

when

indicate
airflow,

the

doped-tape

sources
and

in turn

of leakresulted

APPENDIX

Figure

B2.-

Tail

wheel

airplane

Removing
of airplane
to leakage
internal

seals

21 increased
through
sealing

these
of the

and

fairings
the

drag

openings.
bulkhead

and

21

from

arresting

(Grumman

the

The

drag
of the

by

at

0.0005.

could

openings

on

F6F-3).

openings

coefficient

in front

hook

have

tail-wheel

the

tail

wheel

This

increment

been

reduced

well.

and

arresting
was

or

largely

eliminated

hook
due
by

APPENDIX

DRAG

Examples
drag

are

of the

discussed

DUE

efiects

TO WING SURFACE

of surface

irregularities

IRREGULARITIES

and

roughness

on wing

profile

herein.

: :

NACA
Figure

The
in a drag

use

C1.-

Perforated

of perforated

increment

of 0.0016.

trailing-edge

flaps

on airplane

flaps

(split

6 (Brewster

dive

brake)

17173

XSBA-1).

on airplane

6 resulted

--: :2

APPENDIX

Wing

_L
' b/2

015

010
C

c
.oo5

Figure

The

results

protuberances,
and

had

butt

C2,-

obtained
gaps,

joints

and
on

the

Wing

for

profile

the

roughness
lateral

wing
on
seams

station

drag

for

airplane

of airplane
wing
and

9 are

typical

drag.

The

profile
lap

9 (Bell

joints

on

the

XP-39).

of the
wing

longitudinal

effects

was

flush
seams.

of small
riveted

APPENDIX

Figure

The

C3.-

combination

in a drag-coefficient
sanded
cover

walkway.
plates,

access

Wing

irregularities

of irregularities
increment

The

of airplane

of 0.0022.

remainder
doors,

and

and

of this
butt

leakage
Of this

increment

joints,

20 (Vought-Sikorsky

for

the wing

total,

0.0010

was

attributed

and to air

leakage.

F4U-1).

of airplane
was

attributed
to a large

20 resulted
to the
number

of

APPENDIX

:._i_!ii:!
i;_i_!:i
ii!_!iii_!ii
? iii!:?::ililili{
iii:i
?i_il
iil
i!ii!
ii_i_i_!iiii
!iiii!iliiiiiiiiiii:iiiiiii!ii!iiiiiiiilil

ii:::_i:iii_iiiii:!
i_iiii
iil
_iiii:i
i:_i_!!!!i:i:i:iiii_ii:i:i_iil
_:_i!_;_!;_i_i!i!_:_i!ii_i_!_!_!i!i_iiiiiiii_!i!i_iiiii!iiiiii
___

(a) Original

(b) Faired
Figure

The

wells

sealed
increment

56

Fairing

wheel

and wheel

installations

installation

of airplane

of the oleo

reduced

the

cover

plates,

to 0.0005.

struts

Landing-gear

landing-gear

of 0.0019.
wheel

D2.-

oleo

condition.

struts

landing-gear
together

and

on airplane

4 resulted

rounding

the

drag-coefficient
with

cover

the faired

plates.
4 (Vought

in a drag-coefficient
edges

of the

increment
oleo

L-76-175
SB2U-1).

struts,

rear

to 0.0015.
reduced

increment

halves

the

of the
Use

of

landing-gear

APPENDIX

.:."..'Z?':

...-_

... _:

,/:

...

i,ii ,

(a) Original

(b) Faired
Figure

Sealing
cient
ficient

the

by 0.0007.

D3.-

gaps

and

sealed

Landing-gear

on the

Additional

landing
use

oleo

condition.

struts

and extended

installations

on airplane

gear

of extended

of airplane
wheel

wheel

7 (Curtiss

7 reduced
covers

covers.
L-76-176

reduced

the

XP-40).

airplane
the

airplane

drag

coeffi-

drag

coef-

by 0.0009.
:2:":!:".":":

2117:i:i
57
,.?_L/: ::
: ;

...,

NACA
Figure

The
into the
this

58

D4.-

Landing-gear

installation

on airplane

installation

of airplane

8 allowed

landing-gear

wing

installation

and

included
was

only

wheel
0.0002.

cover

plates.

The

8 (Seversky

the

increment

oleo

strut

in drag

17816
XP-41).

to be retracted
coefficient

due

to

:{

APPENDIX

_:ii:(.{
::}I:/_: > i '

i_

}: I}I

H.-,-

v:&.!i:?/::
i
._._:_
======================
:::
::::
:::::
:::::::;5::
:::::::

NACA
Figure

D5.-

Landing-gear

gear

on airplane

installation

on airplane

9 (Bell

18462

XP-39).

i:{:_?/<
The

tricycle

the fuselage

and

about

one-third

drag

coefficient

provided
in coverless
coefficient

for

had

main

of the
for
full

tire

this

nose-gear

wheel
increment

wells.

wheels

9 had a nose
which

thickness,
landing-gear
retraction
However,

wheel

protruded

as shown

from
in the

installation
and
the

which

allowed
modified

was
the

the

did not fully

wing

by an amount

photograph.

The

0.0019.
main

installation

retract

also

equal

increment

Subsequent
gear

into
to

in

modifications

to be fully
had a high

submerged
drag-

of 0.0016.

!'ii_
2}::,i>

59

..!..

j:!..

.:. :' -

/"

7.

(a) Completely

sealed

wheel

;..:: :...

well.

)::!:i:ii

2r::'-"::

(b) Partially

enclosed

wheel

well.

;':_:?..;

!:_:i!i:
i):::?:.:
I
): .,?.

(c) Original
Figure

D6.-

Completely
cient

by 0.0014.

cient

by 0.0007.

6O

Landing-gear

wheel

installations

sealing

the

open

Partial

enclosure

wheel
of the

well.

on airplane

well

of airplane

wheel

well

17 (Grumman

17 decreased

decreased

the

XTBF-1).

the
airplane

drag
drag

coefficoeffi-

,-.

-:

APPENDIX

,..'

..:l

.
.

_:
/

-:..

._ ....

-.-.

//

: /

-: ::-_

i-_."i_..,..
.

::...

- :C/:

Figure

The
ment

partially

of0.0005.

DT.-

Landing-gear

open

wheel

installation

wells

on airplane

on airplane

19 produced

19 (Curtiss

SB2C-1).

a drag-coefficient

incre-

: _'!:_:il
:___::_:_!_i
:_:::__:_
:i!_
iili:_i_:::_:
_:_::_:
!L_

APPENDIX

(a) Original

full-length

fairing.

(b) Short-length
Figure

D8.-

Removal
retracted

Landing-gear

of seals

from

installation

the

landing

gear

on airplane

air

was

leaking

through

ing,

adopted

for

that

measured

ing that

and

to the

the
for

airflow

production
the

completely

disturbance

fairing_

edges

of the

on airplane

original

21 increased
the gaps

airplane,
sealed
of the

around

drag

the

cover

fairing.

exposed

full-length

the

increased

21 (Grumman

fairing

coefficient
plate.

F6F-3).

over

the

by 0.0009,
The

the

drag

coefficient

This

drag

is due

both

indicat-

short-length
by 0.0012
to air

fair-

_(=i!i![=

over

leakage

parts.

22 "_!: _i=-

62

_':.
_i_ii
ii:ii/_:::_i_C:
i_i!Ji_!i_i_i_;?ii_/:ii!
if:!/_
_''i_=i/:il
::i_
:ii:::::
/ __:":_ i:_::!,
_!il
i!ii_ii:!':i
:::_:_'::
_ ::i:ii:7;_,i!
_ :;!i?':!!
'::C:_i_
.....:!i?_:k
!:II::: :,::,,:iii!:::i
_: ::,

APPENDIX

DRAG

Results
discussed

of tests

DUE

to reduce

the

TO

drag

COCKPIT

CANOPIES

increments

produced

by cockpit

canopies

are

herein.

(a) Original

canopy.

:-..

- 7

(b) Modified
Figure

Rounding

El.-

the

Cockpit

windshield

of airplane

of the windshield

and

By replacing

quarter-spherical

drag-coefficient

the

the

reduction

canopies

forward

hood

of 0.0019

canopy.

on airplane

L-76-177
6 (Brewster

6 and eliminating

reduced

canopy

tail

was

obtained.

the

airplane

section

the
drag

XSBA-1).

sharp

edge

coefficient

with a streamline

at the

juncture

by 0.0011.
shape,

a net

u-i

/,

._,f

APPENDIX

-_.

!iiiii_iiii_}iiiiiiiiiiiiii!ii
_iiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iii_iiiiiiiiii_iiiiii_i!iiiii!_iiii_ii!ii_iii_i_i_i_i_i_i_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_i_
ii_iiil}!_i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!ii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!i!i!i!iiiiiii
(a) Original

(b) Lowered

canopy.

canopy.

:.2:i(_S.2il
:::
(d) Lowered
length

Comparison
coefficient
height

increment

of the
tail,

reduced

length

of the

ment

of 0.0003.

sure

resulted

lowered

with and

of only

enclosure

canopy

64

of data

0.0004.

in order
the canopy
canopy

Adding
in a canopy

without

the

One

the

drag-coefficient

a flat-sided

section

and

which

expansion

resulted

increment

9 showed

of the

to 0.0002.

lowered
of 0.0004.

a drag-

of reducing
flow

over

shortened

the

the

Decreasing

drag-coefficient
and

tail

windshield.
L-76-178

consisted

angle

in a canopy
to the

with reduced

flat-sided

airplane

increment

windshield

drag-coefficient

for

modification,

to decrease

tail

canopy

canopy

increenclo-

the

APPENDIX

::i:-i
!_i"

( :
:

:7:.::::
..-..
:.

(a)Original canopy.

.,.
..................................
_:...................
_,.._.
........
_.-_ _
"_i_l
ii!::

;::iiii:

[111151117_iiiiiiiii?
ill ==??
2=27212112111:

"_.........
.. .....

. :

_ ..................

............
:
"_ :_.....
..........
..............

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::

2::

:=::i_ _

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::'"""'
.:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:
'

:::::::: : ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
....
i
,_? iiSi_

'''''_'_"

(b) Modified canopy.

Figure E3.- Cockpit canopies on airplane I0 (Grumman

Increasing

the

reducing

the windshield

airplane

10.

radius
slope

of the juncture
resulted

formed

in a reduction

by the

L-76-179
XF4F-3).

windshield

in drag

coefficient

and

hood

and

of 0.0004

for

i>i-ii:i
%:

i_ 2

65
i -_

_i;

2? i

Figure

E4.-

Cockpit

A well-rounded
canopy
opy

66

of
was

canopy

airplane
larger,

canopies

20
the

and

airplane

was
to

provide
drag

on

installed
greater
coefficient

airplane

to

20

(Vought-Sikorsky

eliminate
pilot

visibility.

was

decreased

the

sharp

F4U-1).

peak

Although
by

0.0004.

of
the

the

original

modified

can-

APPENDIX

DRAG

Drag
planes

coefficient

are

DUE TO CONTROL-SURFACE

increments

discussed

GAPS

due to control-surface

gaps

in the

tails

of three

air-

herein.
,---

(a) Airplane

17;

(b)Airplane 21;

AC D = 0.0009.

(c) Airplane
Figure

F1.-

Tail-gap

drag

21 (Grumman
An increase
removed

from

and

Reduction

ening

22.

holes

the

rear

and

contour

the

in the

bulkhead.

in drag
gaps

measured

on the

horizontal

spars

drag

airplanes

reductions

17 (Grumman

and

22 (Bell

the

tape

when

and vertical

due to these

of the fixed

Further

for

Z_CD = 0.0007.

F6F-3),

was

of the

22;

portion
may

AC D = 0.0005.

gaps

may

of the tail
be obtained

P-63).

seals
tail

XTBF-I),

and

metal

surfaces

be obtained
and/or
through

fairings

of airplanes
by sealing

sealing
careful

the

were
17, 21,

the
fuselage

attention

lightat
to gap

details.
67

DRAG

Examples

DUE

of drag-coefficient

TO

APPENDIX

ANTENNA

INSTALLATIONS

increments

due

to antenna

installations

are

presented

herein.

'_.

<

y4_

<_>.\

_j,

"_:

(a)

Original

antenna

installation.

"'<

"J

.__

"_.

',,._,,

(b) Modified
Figure

of

The
0.0007.

to

0.0002.

68

G1.-

antenna
By

Antenna

installation

shortening

antenna

installations

on

of airplane
the

mast

and

the

installation.
airplane

10

(Grumman

XF4F-3).

10 produced

an

increment

in drag

wire

length,

this

increment

was

coefficient
reduced,

APPENDIX

.:<-

.,

<: :,..

t_:;:?:_;7:L;_;]

(a) Airplane

13;

AC D = 0.0004.

i! :ii
I:L:L!;:::7
i.:.::!
_::W,.,
..
+,.. :

\\\

\\>

_/_./f

_'-

i..-

i'"

''7"

,[.i

7-:'.

'.

: :

js-:-X
(b) Airplane

17;

(c) Airplane
Figure

G2.-

Antenna

17 (Grumman

The

drag-coefficient
installed

and

removed.

tributions

from

both the

masts

21;

AC D = 0.0003.

drag

on airplane

XTBF-1),

and

increments

antennas

AC D = 0.0004.

were

Therefore
a.nd the

wires

21 (Grumman

measured
the

13 (Curtiss

drag

of the

as the
of these

XSO3C-1),
F6F-3).

difference
installations

in the

drag

included

with
con-

antenna.

!if:?

APPENDIX

(a) Airplane

22.

(b) Airplane
Figure

G3.-

Antenna
and

No increase

7O

in drag

was

installations
23 (North

measured

23.
on airplanes

American

for

these

22 (Bell

P-51B).

antenna

installations.

P-63)

REFERENCES
:

1. Roskam, Jan, ed.: Proceedings of the NASA/Industry/University General Aviation

Drag ReductionWorkshop. Univ. Kansas, July 1975.
2. Dearborn, C. H.; and Silverstein, Abe: Drag Analysis of Single-Engine Military Airplanes Tested in the NACA Full-Scale Wind Tunnel. NACA WR L-489, 1940.
(Formerly NACA ACR, Oct. 1940.)
3. Lange, Roy H.: A Summary of Drag Results From Recent Langley Full-Scale-Tunnel
Tests of Army and Navy Airplanes. NACA WR L-108, 1945. (Formerly NACA
ACR L5A30.)

: ii41i::

4. DeFrance, Smith J.: The N.A.C.A. Full-Scale Wind Tunnel. NACA Rep. 459, 1933.
5. Goett, Harry J.: Experimental Investigation of the MomentumMethodfor Determining
Profile Drag. NACA Rep. 660, 1939.
6. Silverstein, Abe; and Becket, JohnV.: Determination of Boundary-Layer Transition
on Three Symmetrical Airfoils in the N.A.C.A. Full-Scale Wind Tunnel. NACA
Rep. 637, 1939.
7. Silverstein, Abe: Experiments on the Recovery of Waste Heat in Cooling Ducts.
NACA ACR, May 1939.

r:'J.

::;':2-?.::::'-i

8. ICuchemann,Dietrich; and Weber, Johanna; Aerodynamics of Propulsion. First ed.

McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1953.
9. Hood,Manley J.: The Effects of SomeCommonSurface Irregularities on Wing Drag.
NACA TN 695, 1939.
10. Hoerner, Sighard F. : Fluid-Dynamic Drag. Publ. by the author (148BusteedDrive,
Midland Park, NewJersey 07432), 1965.

71

TABLE

Airplane

Weight,
N
(lb)

I.- BASIC

GEOMETRIC

Wing area,
m2

Span,
m

(R)

(ft 2)

CHARACTERISTICS

Reference
chord,
m

(ft)

OF AIRPLANES

Overall
length,

19.42

10.67

2.15

7.81

Root:

(4 932)

(209.0)

(35.0)

(7.04)

(25.61)

Tip:

24 233

21.66

10.36

2.49

8.13

Root:

(5 448)

(233.2)

(34.0)

(8.17)

(26.67)

Tip:

24.71

9.75

(4 478)

(266.0)

(32.0)

1.52

(5.00)

27 889

28.36

12.80

2.54

(6 270)

(305.3)

(42.0)

(8.33)

,, .:.....,
.-

Wing section

(ft)

21 937

19 918

C': :

TESTED

6.75

Clark

NACA

23018

NACA

23009

NACA

23015

NACA

23009

Y-H

(22.14)
10.36

Root:

(33.98)

Tip:

NACA

23015

NACA

23009

32 261

29.60

12.65

2.92

9.68

Root:

(7 253)

(318.6)

(41.5)

(9.58)

(31.75)

Tip:

26 337

23.97

10.06

2043

8.47

Root:

(5 921)

(258.0)

(33.0)

(7.96)

(27.79)

Tip:

30 171

21.93

11.37

2.64

9.66

Root:

(6 783)

(236.0)

(8.67)

(31.70)

Tip:

30 046

20.78

10.97

2.33

8.41

Root:

(6 755)

(223.7)

(36.0)

(7.64)

(27060)

Tip:

Seversky

27 355

19.79

10.36

2.54

9.07

Root:

NACA

(6 150)

(213.0)

(34.0)

(8.33)

(29.75)

Tip:

25 910

24.15

11.58

2.48

8.53

Root:

(5 825)

(260.0)

(38.0)

(8.14)

(28.00)

Tip:

NACA

2415

NACA

2409

Clark

Y-H

A:- : L

10

11

12

13

14

29 357

15.79

9.94

2.23

8.33

Root:

(6 600)

(170.0)

(32.6)

(7.33)

(27.33)

Tip:

26 688

21.93

11.37

2.74

9.30

Root:

(6 000)

(236.0)

(37.3)

(9.00)

(30.51)

Tip:

24 713

26.94

11.58

3.05

10.44

Root:

(5 556)

(290.0)

(38.0)

(1O.00)

(34.24)

Tip:

85 179

43.20

18.69

3.35

14.63

Root:

(19
15

150)

64 496

(14 5oo)
16

249

088

(56 000)
17

18

19

20

21

22

23

(37.3)

(465.0)

(61.3)

(48.00)

Tip:

30.43

15.85

2.13

11.53

Root:

(327.5)

(52.0)

(7.00)

(37.83)

Tip:

97.36

33053

4.26

(1048.0)

(110.0)

(14.00)

(11.00)

2O.22

Root:

(66.33)

Tip:

64 282

45.52

16.51

3.63

12.47

Root:

(14 452)

(490.0)

(54.2)

(11.92)

(40.92)

Tip:

28 912

15.79

9.48

2.20

8.87

Root:

(6 500)

(170.0)

(31.1)

(7.21)

(29.10)

Tip:

56 832

41.06

15.15

3.66

11.18

Root:

(12 777)

(442.0)

(49.7)

(12.00)

(36.67)

Tip:

48 928

29.17

12.49

2.67

10.16

Root:

(11 000)

(314.0)

(41.0)

(8.75)

(33034)

Tip:

50 890

30.03

13.05

3.03

10.31

Root:

(11 441)

(334.0)

(42.8)

(9.93)

(33.83)

Tip:

34 081

23.04

11.68

2.54

10.02

Root:

(7 662)

(248.0)

(38.3)

(8.33)

(32.87)

Tip:

37 417

21.66

11.29

2.64

9.83

(8 412)

(233.2)

(37.0)

(8.67)

(32.25)

clark

18% thick

Y-H

NACA

11.8% thick

2215

NACA

2209

Seversky

NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA

3, 16.7% thick
3, 8.2% thick

23009
23015
23009
23016.5
23009
2215
2209
23017
23009

-, "2:'?--

23018
23009

23016
23009

Consolidated
NACA

NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA
NACA

;;)/i:i(

0015

Consolidated

NACA

22% thick
9.3% thick
:-::;:, :: :'y..

23015
23009
23016.5
23009
23017
23009
23015
23009
23015.6

(Modified)

NACA 23009
NACA
NACA

NACA-NAA

66 series
66 series
compromise

low

drag

i:i_ii:;i

ORIGINAIj PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY

! ;i:i;!il
i!l

::

::X_ _:_:_

:'_;/".}/i

TABLE

H.-

POWER-PLANT

INSTALLATION

Engine

Airplane

Propeller
diameter,
m
(R)

Power,

Propeller
gear ratio

3.12

Direct

drive

(10.25)
2

(hp)

3:2

3.05

2.74

671
(900)

Direct

drive

(9.0)
4

3.35

3:2

3.28

16:11

2.74

Direct

drive

3.35

2:1

746

3.35

16:9

820
(1100)

9:5

3.17

858

(10.4)
10

(1150)

2.97

3:2

746

(9.75)
11

(1000)
858

2:1

3.20

(1150)

(10.5)
12

16:9

3.05

746

(10.0)
13

(1000)
3:2

2.82
(9.25)

14

3.43

16:9

2:1

3.56

16

3.66

16:9

17

4 at 895
(1200)

16:9

3.81

2at1007
(1350)

(12.5)
18

858

2:1

3.05

,(1150)

(10.0)
19

3.66

16:9

(12.0)
20

4.06

2:1

21

3.99

2:1

3.38

2.23:1

858
(1150)

(11.08)
23

3.40

44:21

969
(1300)

(n.17)
a Power

at specified

altitude

and

2550

Twin-row

2100

Single-row

2550

Twin-row

2300

Single-row

radial, air cooled

2100

Single-row

radial, air cooled

2600

Inline, liquid cooled

2700

Twin-row

radial, air cooled

radial, air cooled

radial, air cooled

4887

: " ::/ i2

radial, air cooled

(16 000)
4572
(15 000)
4877

a "...2

__

(16 000)
4572
(15 000)
6096
(20

geared
2950

000)

6096

3658
(12

2550

with

Inline, liquid cooled

Twin-row

with

clmrger

radial, air cooled

two-stage

geared

3000

Inline, liquid cooled

2700

Twin-row

3000

Inverted

2400

Twin-row

3000

Inline, liquid cooled

with

supercharger

000)

4420
(14

radial, air cooled

supercharger

turbosuper

(20 000)

radial, air cooled

500)

3505

V-12,

air cooled

radial, air cooled

(11 500)
7620
(25 000)
7620
(25

3962

2600

Twin-row

radial, air cooled

two-speed
2400

(13 000)
3658

with

supercharger

000)

with

Twin-row

supercharger
radial, air cooled

two-speed

with

supercharger

3000

Inline, liquid cooled

2400

Twin-row

(12 000)
3962

(1650)

(13.08)
22

3658

(13 000)

1230

Single-row

(12 000)

1007

(1550)

2100

000)

(1350)
1156

(13.33)

3048
(10

3658

(1400)

rpm

(15 200)

(12 000)

2 at 1044

(12.0)

(ft)

4633

336

(1400)

(11.67)

(450)
2 at 1044

(11.25)
15

559

'i

Type

4328

(1000)

(11.0)

._L:I'

and rpm

(14 200)

(750)

(11.0)

altitude,

559

597

(9.0)

characteristics

(750)

(800)

(10.75)
6

611
(820)

(11.0)
5

559
(750)

(10.0)

AIRPLANES

(a)
kW

OF

7772

2550

6828

radial, air cooled

3000

Inline, liquid cooled

radial, air cooled

two-stage

stage
3000

(24 200)

with

supercharger

Twin-row

(22 400)
7376

Twin-row

2700

(25 000)

with

supercharger

two-stage

(25 500)
7620

radial, air cooled

two-speed

C;.i;c
L.- :.

with

supercharger
with auxiliary-

supercharger

Inline, liquid cooled

with

supercharger

rpm.

ORIGINAl; PAGE II_

OF POOR QUALITY,

73

-!

TABLE
ENumbers

IIL-

SUMMARY

in parentheses

(a) Airplanes

OF

refer

DRAG

RESULTS

to figure

1 to 11 at

or table

C L = 0.15

(ref.

numbers

2)
..

..

.L

Airplanes

Item

1 I 2 1314

coefficient,

CD

Drag

15 I 6 I 7 18 r9 I lO111

Airplane
in original
condition

0.0377
0.0328

/ 0.0390
f

0.0267

0.0320

Drag-coefficient

0.0362

increment,

0.0257

0.0275

0.0034

0.0023

a0017

Cowling

Carburetor

air

cooler

(A9)

0.0008

0.0009

0.0003

(B1)

(B1)

(B1)

(IV)
0.0007

(A17)

(A18)

0.0007

0.0017

a.0003

a.0009

(A19)

(A20)

Intercooler

0.0019
(A14)
0.0040

(A21)

0.0011

stack

0.0016
(Similar

0.0010
to

airplane

0.0003

(A26)

(2(g))

0.0005
(A26)

b0.0006
(A15)

(AI6)

0.0008

(A22)
0.0012
(A12)

0.0014

0.0003

(A26)

(A26)

0.0033
#:5 :::;; :i}

(A30)
gear

0.0007

0.0016

0.0019

b0.0009

0.0002

la.0005
(D1)
Cockpit

0,0001

5)

Supercharger

Landing

-i- ,"

a.0011

(IV)
Exhaust

"

(A5)
0,0013

0.0006

0.0020

": '

(A1)

(A8)

(A13)
Oil

0.0011

0.0020

b0.0010

scoop

0.0201

a.0008

(A4)

leakage

0.0269

ACD

Cooling

Cowling

0.0329

(2(c))

(D3)

(D2)

(D4)

b0.0019

canopy

0.0019
a.0016
(D5)
0.0004

(El)
Antennas

(E2)
0.0008

b0.0004
(E3)
0.0007
a.0002

(iv)
aDrag-coefficient
bDifference

74

increment
in airplane

drag

of the modified

installation.

coefficients

the

for

original

and

the modified

installations.

(m)
?"

"i'_.:_:

TABLE

(b) Airplanes

12 to 23 at

CL

as

IIL-

Concluded

required

for

hlgh-speed

flight

condition

(ref.

3)

Airplanes
Item
12113

Airplane

in original

14

I151

16

17

Drag

coefficient,

CD

c 0.0361

0.0264

18

0.0243

0.0337

XL0386

0.0293

0.0203

0.0313

0.0282

0.0222

0.0040

b0.0004

a 0.0011

(A7)

(A2)

19

20

21

22

23

0.0280

0.0284

0.0293

0.0221

0.0208

0.0219

0.0215

0.0210

0.0171

0.0173

condition
Airplane

in sealed

faired

and

0.0183

0.0160

condition
Drag-coefficient

Cooling

increment,

AC D
b 0.0005

:!:"i-,?.

a.0012
(A6)

(A3)

..

t
a 0.0041

Cowling

(A10)
Cowling

Oil

leakage

010018

cooler

0.0004

0.0005

(m)

(m)

0.0008

0.0005
(B1)

b 0.0004

a.0008
(A23)
Exhaust

(A24)

(A25)

stacks

0.0008

0.0021

0.0010

0.0005

0.0007

(A27)

(A27)

(A28)

(A29)

(A29)

0.0040

Super charger

a .0027
(A31)
Wing

irregularities

wing

0.0022

and

(C3)

leakage

Landing

0.0014

gear

0.0005

0.0009

a.0007
(D6)
Tail

wheel

arresting
Cockpit

"-

iG ii:

a.0012
(D7)

-7

. . :.;.: j'!:

(D8)
0.0005

and

(B2)

hook
b0.0004

canopy

(E4)
Tail

0.0009
(F1)

0.0005
(F1)

(F1)

0.0004

0.0004

0.0003

(G2)

(G2)

(G3)

(G3)

gap

Antennas

a Drag-coefficient
b Difference
c Estimated

increment

in airplane

drag

of the

modified

coefficient

for

(G2)

0.0007

,:.:,

:-.

'.

::.- ;.

, ]'-

installation.
the original

and the modified

installations.

value.
,

-,.-, 7:.:

;-,.?.:.._.:
.;:
?::-i.,:::.:: :: ,:.,

= I AL

PA G2

QVAU

75

:':.'.(

::': -

TABLE

IV.-

RESULTS

OF

FOR

Airplane

TESTS

AIRPLANE

TO

IDENTIFY

SOURCES

8 (SEVERSKY

OF

XP-41)

condition
C D
Condition

(CL
Completely
long

i'J:

faired
nose

blunt

_ii!_iii_:
I

added,

/i:!:_/i

seals

cooler

Carburetor

Sanded

walkway

Ejector

chute

10

Exhaust

stacks

11

Inter

12

Cowling

fairing

Cowling

.0205
.0203

removed
air

cooler

14
:%

0.0020

.0188

and

installed

Canopy

Accessory

.0186

no

12.0

cowling
.0002

1.2

.0017

10.2

removed

13

.0169

condition,

through

Landing-gear

Oil

ACD'
cent

fairing

cowling

airflow

fairing

per

0.0166

condition,

faired
nose

Original

= 0.15

fairing

Completely

AC D

Description

number

: _?

DRAG

scoop

added

added
added
added

added
exit

opened
exit

fairing

opened
and

seals

-.0002

-1.2

.0209

.0006

3.6

.0216

.0007

4.2

.0219

.0003

1.8

.0225

.0006

3.6

.0236

.0011

6.6

.0247

.0011

6.6

.0252

.0005

3.0

.0261

.0009

5.4

.0262

.0001

.6

.0264

.0002

1.2

.0267

.0003

1.8

.0275

.0008

4.8

removed
15

Cockpit

ventilator

16

Cowling

venturi

17

Blast

18

Antenna

tubes

opened
installed

added

installed

Total

a Percentages

based

0.0109

on

completely

faired

condition

with

long

nose

fairing.

'

TABLE

V.-

PROFILE

DRAG

Description

Airplane

AND

LOCATION

OF

TRANSITION

of wing

covered,

larger

Metal

brazier-head

rivets

of wing;

facing

covered,

row

laps

facing

Fabric

WINGS

OF

AIRPLANES

Calculated

1 TO

11

d
ACD,w,o

CD,w,o

i _i}:i:i
_,i:

(c)
0.0090

0.0032

0.0058

portion

.0083

rivets;

.0062

.0021

on upper

0.15c

behind

:::{. : i

L.E.;

back

covered,

drag
Front

rivets

about

THE

back

brazier-head

of larger

surface

(b)

FOR

Measured
CD,w, o

rivets;

on forward

laps

t_.
c

(a)
Metal

POINT

raised

measured
portion

stitching;

on lower
of wing

.0084

.0070

.0014

.0070

.0063

.0007

wing

metal

covered,

:.A:/,:

flush

rivets;

covered,
Metal

rear

flush

covered,

0.18c

behind

dive

flush

rivets

L.E.,

remainder

rivets;

and

landing
flush

of wing,

laps

fabric

covering

perforated
7

Metal
facing

Metal

Metal

covered,

a Chordwise

Wood,

0.0020

rivets
facing

and

.0106

on front

AC D

back;

due to perforated

flaps,

half;

landing

.0041

.0065

0.0016

flaps
0.176

0.48

0.126

.0079

.0060

.0019

rivets,

.198

.41

.134

.0070

.0059

.0011

rivets,

.180

.42

.135

.0073

.0060

.0013

flush

rivets,

flush

flush

laps

,,,

.,,

,<,-...

See

covered,

flush

rivets,

figure

C2

.0077

.0061

.0016

.O074

.0061

.0013

joints
filled

location

b Spanwise

location

c Maximum

wing

d Calculated

flaps,

joints

filled
11

due to perforated

laps

covered,

filled
Metal

AC D

forward

joggled

10

.0037

.0072

perforated

on rear

dive

covered,

.0109

to about

flaps

covered,

half

fabric

stitching

brazier-head

Metal

portion

values

and

polished

of transition
where

section
based

transition
thickness
on smooth

.180

.35

.130

?t

point.
point

was

measured.

at spanwise
airfoil

location
data.

where

transition

point

was

measured.

_::/?
.i:?

--

,: '%

:'i:_/i

Figure

78

1.-

(a) Airplane

1 (Brewster

XF2A-1).

(b) Airplane

2 (Grumman

XF4F-2).

Three-view

sketches

of the

airplanes

tested.

i!i

(c)

Airplane

(d) Airplane
Figure

3 (Grumman

F3F-2).

4 (Vought

SB2U-1).

1.-

Continued.

(e) Airplane

(f) Airplane
Figure

5 (Douglas

6 (Brewster
1.-

XBT-2).

XSBA-I).

Continued.

(g) Airplane

7 (Curtiss

(h) Airplane

8 (Seversky

Figure

1.-

XP-40).

XP-41).

Continued.

81

" " .',"': 3- " : :, -

(k) Airplane

11 (Curtiss

XP-46).

: ! iii
(1) Airplane
Figure

12 (Curtiss
1.-

XP-42).

Continued.

;ii:_i?:!i::
!!;!

83

-. ,:>,.-..,.
.

i: ,(: i..;.'-::

./1

(m) Airplane

(n) Airplane

14 (Douglas
outer

13 (Curtiss

Note

A-20A).

wing

panels
Figure

removed
1,-

XSO3C-1).

that

airplane
as indicated.

Continued.

14 was

tested

with

(o) Airplane

(p) Airplane

15 (Lockheed

16 (Consolidated
of airplane

B-24D).
16 was
Figure

l.-

YP-38).

Note
tested

that
as

isolated

engine

nacelle

indicated.

Continued.

85

/ir:,_:
_ :_;_L_::<!
!i:i!:!i!iii:!::_i:::<:rk:
_?_/<i:
r,

/
j., /

(q) Airplane

17 (Grumman

XTBF-1).

\%t_/
(r) Airplane

18 (General
Figure

86

1.-

Research
Continued.

Model).

-:

.7

(s)

Airplane

19 (Curtiss

SB2C-1).

filli:i!:i;;i

.: ,2::.

(t) Airplane

20 (Vought-Sikorsky
Figure

1.-

i!::

F4U-1).

Continued.

87

i:.'.:- ,- ?: :;i

..................................................................

;:::(:.!:i:::::.

-- ..,

"

._

(U) Airplane

21 (Grumman

F6F-3).

-_

(v) Airplane
Figure

88

22 (Bell
I.-

P-63).

Continued.

: 12.

...-..-f.

//_-

. ."

.--

"

-2

(w) Airplane

23 (North
Figure

1.-

American

P-51B).

Concluded.

89

"..

.!, . ;

j'

"-

,i? i::i

(a) Airplane 1 (Brewster XF2A-1).

i:i?_i_

(b) Airplane 2 (Grumman XF4F-2).

L-76-180
Figure 2.- Photographsof airplanes mountedfor tests in Langley
full-scale tunnel.

9O

ORIGINA_ PAGE

oF Poor QuAU_

ii!:2i:!2:i:;i:

(c)

Airplane

(d) Airplane

(e) Airplane

5 (Douglas

P AG_

I_

o_ pooaQUALn_

F3F-2).

4 (Vought

SB2U-1).

XBT-2)

Figure

DI_IG_A_

3 (Grumman

2.-

with

modified

Continued.

cockpit

canopy.
L-76-181

91

(f) Airplane

__.._:._._.:_.._.m
"_,:":':"

XSBA-1)

with

.....................
_..._."..
'_! i:!:i::[ii:_i:i_::
:i:'_:iiii!i!!:

"
....

6 (Brewster

..

._........_....._

canopy.

_i$_i:i:i:i:i:_:i:_!

.:...........+::..:::

... .....

_...:+:.:.

..::

._.:._,,,._.

&.._

;.:.

..... ........................
_ .....:::::::_
:._:
._...............................................
_
_]!_
___
.............
_{_!
.......
iiiii
............
t................
_!iii:.i::!
.................

"_'ii"!
_i i_iij: ii!iiiiiiii:!:!:i:!:!:!ii:!
ii:i:i:i:ii:iii:i::{:i:!:i:i:i
:i:i:!i!iii!:i:!:!:!j :!i!i_!i!i!i!_:..il
ii}i ii_ii{i_

(g) Airplane

(h) Airplane

cockpit

......................
_._.._,_ ._._!i!_ii..,<-..:..:..:_@_!
..........:m..._:
i!!
_:iii_!: :_:::_:::,._
::
'"!_:::::_:*::"_':':':_::_"
_:::':_ :':':_" ':':':':':

..:::.'.':b_"i:::i:i::ii

....
_ :" .

modified

8 (Seversky
Figure

7 (Curtiss

XP-41)
2.-

with

....._iiii_'; : : :.

::.

XP-40).

streamlined

Continued.

nose

fairing.
L-76-182

i<:ii/:!:

92
:::::,-. !;ii (

(i) Airplane

9 (Bell

XP-39)

(j) Airplane

(k) Airplane
Figure

with external

10 (Grumman

11 (Curtiss
2.-

Continued.

protrusions

removed.

XF4F-3).

X-P-46).
L-76-183
93

=========================
i

_,." __:_
...........

":::':::N_i_._""

"

.., :j

::: :i: .;:' ' :.:'

' .:::

_.;.;_._:_:'".
:::!_.ii:'ri:ii:iriiiii:ili.! _:!_:!'

: i::i:!!ii: "'_ ......

'::

.::

. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::!:

(i) Airplane

(m)

Airplane

12 (Curtiss

:!i

.: :: :::_!::

XP-42).

13 (Curtiss

XSO3C-1).

:._ t?;. _,_.._.. :

.i': a:',

(n) Airplane

14

(Douglas

A-20A)

with

outer

wing

panels

removed.
':-

Figure
94

2.-

Continued.

:. :

L-76-184

:::* (,

L." " : ('"

.."

"

;:::T
tl-:i;;::5:::i!
_.:.

:..:.:

(u) Airplane

(w) Airplane

23

(North

,_

L-10735

(Grumman

American
Figure

_SA-_n_,_y,

21

P-51B)
2.-

Concluded.

F6F-3).

with

exhaust

stacks

faired.
L-76-187
97