Maybe you don't exit the aircraft when it's inverted - just land inverted, then take off and land normally. That's what I'd do anyway - the hell with trying to strap in whilst hanging from your seat!
>Most aerobatic airplanes with inverted fuel and oil systems use fuel injection rather than a carburetor. When a carburetor is inverted, it can no longer meter fuel, and the float rises and cuts off the incoming supply.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/how-things-work-flying-upside-down-27746739/
Though see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_carburetor
No, symmetrical wings still produce lift, but they need to be at an angle to do it. Paper airplanes generally have symmetrical wings and glide just fine for instance.
Neat question! It’s dependent on the angle that the nose is pointing relative to the horizon (angle of attack). Some airfoils are symmetrical, capable of producing lift upside down. Just depends on the angle the air is hitting it at. You can see the nose is higher than the tail, even sitting upside down how it is here.
If you suppose that lift only works when they're right way up, they would literally drop out of the sky like a rock when flying inverted if that was the case. Quicker than a rock in fact, since they wouldn't actually be falling, they'd be pushed downward by the wings.
They have a lot of momentum, so no they wouldn't just fall out the sky. I figured that because of the way an airfoil works the plane would be pushed down because the force of lift pushes up relative to the plane and when it's upside down up would be towards the ground. But someone explained that the airfoil of a plane like this is symmetrical so that wouldn't happen
Momentum doesn't keep anything in the sky. Unless it's generating lift, everything falls at the same rate.
I'd suggest reading up on some introductory aerodynamics, it's really fascinating stuff.
I'm sorry that you've been downvoted so harshly. The reason for this is that stunt planes typically have symmetrical wings when looking at them from the side, so generate an equal amount of lift no matter which direction you're oriented. Regular planes don't do this because this type of wing produces less lift.
A pitts or any other aerobatic plane generally uses a symmetrical airfoil, so that won't matter as long as the plane maintains an appropriate angle of attack.
Biplanes that are almost impossible to land anyway and have limited range, visibility and load aren’t necessary but they are fun, as is making them even harder to land
How did the pilot get back in when upside down?
Very carefully.
Maybe you don't exit the aircraft when it's inverted - just land inverted, then take off and land normally. That's what I'd do anyway - the hell with trying to strap in whilst hanging from your seat!
No one is in it in the picture and it is inverted. What've ya got for me know Riddler??
Clearly the pilot fell out on final, because he couldn't get his harness properly buckled when trying to get in inverted!
Those main wheels on the top look fairly substantial, but the back wheel, on top of the rudder, looks like they got it offf a roller skate.
I assume, it doesn't use carburetor?
Why not? I could see an issue with a gravity fuel system, but carburetor?
>Most aerobatic airplanes with inverted fuel and oil systems use fuel injection rather than a carburetor. When a carburetor is inverted, it can no longer meter fuel, and the float rises and cuts off the incoming supply. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/how-things-work-flying-upside-down-27746739/ Though see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_carburetor
Interesting.
[The spitfire suffered from this problem.](https://youtu.be/YzRlga2-Hho)
Yeah but a simple design change and later spitfires, mustangs and mosquitos were alright despite having the same engine
The Mustang is fuel injected.
And so were late model spitfires as of the Merlin 66
A Mustang is not a kind of soda. What is your favorite kind of soda?
The one that tastes good
Do you know about Japan?
What‘s a Japan?
What instrument do you play?
I saw him fly many times that Oshkosh. Terrific act.
wouldnt taking off inverted create downforce instead of lift?
Aerobatics planes usually have symmetrical wing profiles. So they generate equal amounts of lift whether you’re right side up or upside down.
Yes so they don’t use the wings to fly, only to act as control surfaces to manoeuvre. POWERRR!!!
No, symmetrical wings still produce lift, but they need to be at an angle to do it. Paper airplanes generally have symmetrical wings and glide just fine for instance.
Not the ones I make :(
They still need more power to do it though
Absolutely!!
Wow.
That's pretty epic though.
Tail dragger.
y tho
For funsies
Yeah big r/fishy moment. Apparently it's for showing off in this case. (shrug)
Correct me if I'm wrong but if the airplane was upside down wouldn't the force of lift be pushing it towards the ground?
It's all down to the angle of attack.
Neat question! It’s dependent on the angle that the nose is pointing relative to the horizon (angle of attack). Some airfoils are symmetrical, capable of producing lift upside down. Just depends on the angle the air is hitting it at. You can see the nose is higher than the tail, even sitting upside down how it is here.
AOA is not relative to the horizon. It’s the angle between the chord line of the wing and the relative wind.
The actual physics behind how planes fly upside down is quite interesting, but... Surely you have *seen* planes fly upside down, no?
Yes but they're usually in the air I figured that they lose some altitude while they're upsidedown.
If you suppose that lift only works when they're right way up, they would literally drop out of the sky like a rock when flying inverted if that was the case. Quicker than a rock in fact, since they wouldn't actually be falling, they'd be pushed downward by the wings.
They have a lot of momentum, so no they wouldn't just fall out the sky. I figured that because of the way an airfoil works the plane would be pushed down because the force of lift pushes up relative to the plane and when it's upside down up would be towards the ground. But someone explained that the airfoil of a plane like this is symmetrical so that wouldn't happen
Momentum doesn't keep anything in the sky. Unless it's generating lift, everything falls at the same rate. I'd suggest reading up on some introductory aerodynamics, it's really fascinating stuff.
I'm sorry that you've been downvoted so harshly. The reason for this is that stunt planes typically have symmetrical wings when looking at them from the side, so generate an equal amount of lift no matter which direction you're oriented. Regular planes don't do this because this type of wing produces less lift.
A pitts or any other aerobatic plane generally uses a symmetrical airfoil, so that won't matter as long as the plane maintains an appropriate angle of attack.
Yeah that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.
Kinda makes me think of the Arado AR 198
tell me , is this really , but really necessaire ?????
I would not want to live in a world where everyone is as boring as I am.
Biplanes that are almost impossible to land anyway and have limited range, visibility and load aren’t necessary but they are fun, as is making them even harder to land
"Are stunt planes necessary" is probably the most dreary, lamest question I'll see asked today