Originally Posted by Cap_n_Dave
Take a look at the underlined bit. Is this really correct or did you have a typo?
If, in fact, the area is listed ... then computing the wing loading ought to be rather straightforward.
Well, it's not a typo on my part and I don't think it would be a typo on the triptych (artwork) as it is written in the designers own hand.
However, i have taken the image into CAD, traced over it and what the designer is calling DMQ should of been written as DMK. The designs that I am refering to were done in the late 40's / early 50's and that might of been the way area was expressed then. with the representation symbol as DMQ, though this document
states that DMQ is for cubic decimeters. After all, cubic starts with a Q right? Just say it out loud.
Anyway, when one takes the numbers, and plugs them into square instead of cubic, it comes out right, about 6.8 oz / sq. ft, Maybe not to bad for a NACA6409 airfoil? (A similar drawing is attached bellow.)
Thanks for your input, and it seems that it's a simple difference in symbol interpretation that ignited my confusion.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program.
Just learned that the Dmq is not decimetre cube, it is decimetre quadra or squared. just lost in translation. Humm, they should make a movie about that.