High Wing vs. Low Wing

Where do you prefer the wing?

  • Total voters
    83
Pi1otguy said:
High wing, but not a big pref. I just appreciate the reduced fear of striking the tip on x-wind landings. x-wind landings are scary in low wings.
Click to expand...


You will run out of rudder Loooonnnnggggg before you touch a wingtip....
 
dead_smiley_sticker-p217560802465223378qjcl_400.jpg
 
Anthony said:
Then why do you have a low wing in your avatar?
Click to expand...

Because that's what I could afford. My uncle built it in the '60s and '70s. If I was a rich man a 185 on floats, or better yet, a Found on floats, would be great. Fishing machine. The Found is a cantilevered high-wing, though, yet it outperforms the Cessna 206 (same power) in just about every which way imaginable and is built like a real bushplane. In Canada. For less money than a 206.

images


http://www.foundair.com/

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
Because that's what I could afford. My uncle built it in the '60s and '70s. If I was a rich man a 185 on floats, or better yet, a Found on floats, would be great. Fishing machine. The Found is a cantilevered high-wing, though, yet it outperforms the Cessna 206 (same power) in just about every which way imaginable and is built like a real bushplane. In Canada. For less money than a 206.

images


http://www.foundair.com/

Dan
Click to expand...


Interesting. Thanks for the info. I never even heard of a Found and I have been flying and around airplanes for a pretty long time. Looks really cool.
 
Jim Logajan said:
I actually thought about adding a "both" option, but I also hate wafflers, though I do enjoy eating waffles.

(Good thing I didn't asked which was better! Just which one pilots prefer. :wink2:)
Click to expand...
I have one of each and generally prefer the wings to be attached at the same location as when the plane left the factory (or homebuilder's garage/hangar) on any plane I'm flying. Beyond that I don't care. I've flown airplanes with high wings, low wings, high and low wings, and mid wings.
 
Flown dozens and dozens of models of airplanes. Some high wings are great; some suck. Some low wings are great; some suck. Personally, I think high wings are a bit dorky looking and have generally -- but not exclusively -- bought low wings.
 
When flying a low wing airplane I feel like I am riding on a bird. When flying a high wing airplane I AM the bird. I would rather BE the bird. :yinyang:
 
I like em both because you can fly ... but I prefer high wings simply because they are easier to get in and out of - to me.
 
Jeanie said:
I like em both because you can fly ... but I prefer high wings simply because they are easier to get in and out of - to me.
Click to expand...

You haven't tried to get in and out of my airplane (or an Avid Flyer...):wink2:

Having the stick RIGHT THERE doesn't help one bit.
 
John Baker said:
There seems to be more than a few naysayers as to the topic of this thread. I'm thinking perhaps it is because no one seems to take this subject seriously. Perhaps if more of us would make some honest, in depth, contributions about the issue, more would come on board.

Myself, I like low wing for several reasons, I own one, and they are much better.

John
Click to expand...

The naysayers are present because this has been a topic of discussion almost as often as:
* what is the best headset
* ATITPPA
 
For low and slow sightseeing and looking into people's back yards, high wing, or fling wing. :thumbsup:

Otherwise it doesn't really matter.
 
If looking at the ground is what one wants to do, one can remain upon it.
 
Diana said:
When flying a low wing airplane I feel like I am riding on a bird. When flying a high wing airplane I AM the bird. I would rather BE the bird. :yinyang:
Click to expand...

Which points out, of course, that there are no low-wing birds. At least I know of none.

Dan
 
Satchmo10th said:
Does a rotor disk count as a high wing? :wink2:
Click to expand...

Not for this poll ("For airplane drivers....") :wink2:

You could always start a poll asking where rotorcraft pilots prefer the rotor. (Other than ground effect vehicles, I don't know of any production rotorcraft that ever had the rotor below the fuselage.)
 
I've always felt that if ones head is above the wing, it is a low wing airplane. If ones head is below the wing, it is a high wing airplane. Mid wing shmidwing. Are birds high wing or low wing? Pelicans fly with their head above the wing. Watching pelicans fly in formation is pure delight, they are almost perfect gliders. This is obvious evidence that low wing are much superior aircraft. :)

John
 
John Baker said:
I've always felt that if ones head is above the wing, it is a low wing airplane. If ones head is below the wing, it is a high wing airplane. Mid wing shmidwing. Are birds high wing or low wing? Pelicans fly with their head above the wing. Watching pelicans fly in formation is pure delight, they are almost perfect gliders. This is obvious evidence that low wing are much superior aircraft. :)

John
Click to expand...


I agree with this. Many say the F-15 is high wing, but look where the pilot and weapons officer sits. Above the wing.

Pelicans are cool to watch. I like when the fly in formation also, just like two fighter planes. I also like to watch them flare to land and how the curve their wings to generate lift and drag like putting down flaps.
 
John Baker said:
I've always felt that if ones head is above the wing, it is a low wing airplane. If ones head is below the wing, it is a high wing airplane. Mid wing shmidwing. Are birds high wing or low wing? Pelicans fly with their head above the wing. Watching pelicans fly in formation is pure delight, they are almost perfect gliders. This is obvious evidence that low wing are much superior aircraft. :)

John
Click to expand...

Eagles fly with their heads down below the wing, and they're better gliders than pelicans.

Dan
 
Aren't the placement of wings on birds more a function of the mechanics of flappping their wings? Last I heard, airplane wings are fixed.
 
It seems to me that all birds, whether low or high wing, have their heads well in front of their wings in order not to obstruct their view either up or down. :idea:
 
John Baker said:
If birds are high wing, where are the struts? Eagles are scavengers.

John
Click to expand...

Eagles and hawks are raptors. Crows and ravens and magpies are scavengers. Raptors kill their own food, scavengers eat stuff already dead.

Birds have cantilevered wings, like the 177 or 210.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
Eagles and hawks are raptors. Crows and ravens and magpies are scavengers. Raptors kill their own food, scavengers eat stuff already dead.

Birds have cantilevered wings, like the 177 or 210.

Dan
Click to expand...

Ravens kill their own food as much or more as they scavenge.

Our national bird scavenges as much or more than it kills its own food.

Go figure.
 
Jim Logajan said:
I believe those are either gliders or spacecraft, so aren't airplanes for the purpose of this poll.
By de creator of dis poll.
Click to expand...
One of them (the M2-F3) used on-board rockets to climb and fly so that is more than a glider. Since it also flew in the atmosphere it is clearly not just a spacecraft. Wiki agrees as well, "A lifting body is an aircraft configuration in which the body itself produces lift" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifting_body

"First flight of the M2-F3, with NASA pilot Bill Dana at the controls, was June 2, 1970. The modified vehicle exhibited much better lateral stability and control characteristics than before, and only three glide flights were necessary before the first powered flight on November 25, 1970." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_M2-F3

They should be included for consideration in this poll.
 
Last edited:
Jim Logajan said:
I believe those are either gliders or spacecraft, so aren't airplanes for the purpose of this poll.
By de creator of dis poll.
Click to expand...

Bzzzt. :no:

From the left, that'd be the Martin Marietta X-24A, the Northrop M2-F3, and the Northrop HL-10.

They're all powered... So they ain't gliders. :no:

None of them ever made it to space, nor were they designed to. :no: The highest altitudes reached were 70,400, 70,500, and 90,030 MSL respectively.

That said, they don't really even have wings at all... So despite the incorrect reasoning, they don't belong in the poll. What's really curious is that there is no FAA rating that covers a lifting body! It's not an airplane, a rotorcraft, a glider, a powered-lift vehicle, lighter than air, powered parachute, or weight shift... So no category of aircraft that's put on a pilot certificate applies!

And I'll still fly anything that flies, as long as it's not a death trap. I don't give a rat's behind where the wings are, or if it has wings.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
What's really curious is that there is no FAA rating that covers a lifting body! It's not an airplane, a rotorcraft, a glider, a powered-lift vehicle, lighter than air, powered parachute, or weight shift... So no category of aircraft that's put on a pilot certificate applies!
Click to expand...


What is the reason it doesn't qualify as an airplane?
 
Henning said:
What is the reason it doesn't qualify as an airplane?
Click to expand...

Well... It has NO wings.

FAR 1.1 said:
Airplane means an engine-driven fixed-wing aircraft heavier than air, that is supported in flight by the dynamic reaction of the air against its wings.
Click to expand...

Though I suppose the fuselage in this case could be the "plane" part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top