Talk:Forward-swept wing

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Physics: Fluid Dynamics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Rutan boomerang and rearranging[edit]

I'm going to add the Rutan Boomerang to the article, as it is a forward-swept wing aircraft. However, due to its nature as a one-off prototype, I'll leave the order of production of civilian forward-swept aircraft as it is. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 21:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and rearranged the article into a military use and civilian use section. Hopefully someone can come along and expand this, and bring it up to standard. I'm not sure of how to mark something as a stub, can someone do this for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AniRaptor2001 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forward Wing-Sweep and Stall Prevention[edit]

The information in the top summary about "Increased maneuverability, due to airflow from wing tip to wing root preventing a stall of the wing tips and ailerons at high angle of attack. Instead, stall will rather occur in the region of the wing root on a forward-swept wing." is not entirely correct. Yes spanwise flow does go from tip to root, but the wingtip twists to a higher angle of attack than the wing root for conventional forward-swept wings. Higher angle of attack at the tip increases overall lift for the wing and the effectiveness of ailerons or other control surfaces on the wing. The higher lift and control surface effectiveness gives the plane most of its increased maneuverability. This section of the article should probably be reworded. Jim May Jr. 16:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmayjr (talk • contribs)

Belyayev works[edit]

What about Viktor Belyayev works? Of course, he worked with slightly swept wings, but he started it before Germans. See Belyayev DB-LK and other. I think, it must be mentioned.Ходок (talk) 17:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I added the DB-LK and the planned Babochka, even though they have backwards-swept tips, on the basis that their tips are not large enough to make them M-wing configurations. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major rewrite[edit]

I have done a major rewrite, breaking up the sections in a different way and adding loads of stuff. If you don't like it, there is an [undo] link in the article history, specially for you. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:12, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence on yaw instability is not as clear as it might be. Perhaps a tweak would help? Arrivisto (talk) 12:47, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Advantages[edit]

Reading this article gives a good idea of problems with forward swept wings, and mitigating technologies and strategies, but the section on advantages is quite small and buried in the wing characteristics section. A section with a more thorough treatment on that would be helpful Cutoffyourjib (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Forward-swept wing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060213192427/http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/six5th_5.html to http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/six5th_5.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]