Quote:
Originally Posted by palker4
Whatever I guess you are the expert. What idiot would used stressed skin construction on supersonic jet makes no sense.
|
I guess I am yes
Seriously, to be 100% accurate what we have on WW2 and modern fighters is a semi-monocoque construction, where the combination of stringers, bulkheads and stressed skin makes for the shape and robustness of the aircraft.
The reason is mainly because you save a lot of weight and material by doing things this way: whilst it's unthinkable to do a supersonic fuselage on a traditional Warren truss & canvas method, the use of an all metal structure needs to be thought after in a practical and weight saving manner.
There are interesting transitional hybrids, which were a good compromise between performance and structural ruggedness, such as the Hurricane and the S.79 Sparviero. They both sported a mixed solution of tubular frame covered with canvas/metal and semi-monocoque parts, like the semi-monocoque metal wing of the Hurri or the wooden box construction of the Sparviero's wing.
Some other designs weren't particularly happy, but proved to be very rugged, like the Vickers Wellington's geodetic structure.
Another fantastic example of non hortodox aeronautical engineering is the structure of the DeHavilland Mosquito, almost completely made of a wood sandwich which can be imagined as a sort of pre-historic carbon fibre.