It's a daft question

[yoink 321]

but what do stablisers actually do and how?

[flyhi 24]

They turn a wing into an airfoil.

High pressure on the bottom of the canopy wants to go where there is low pressure; the top. The result is wing tip vortices. When it goes from the bottom to the top, it creates a lateral component which pushes the air moving from front to back on the top of the canopy toward the center. Since the only portion of air across the wing which produces lift is that portion which is moving in the direction of flight, this movement of air means less air is capable of producing lift. Stabilizers break up the wingtip vortices and allow the lift productio to be maximized.

On the attached simplificated graphic, V is your flight velocity, H is the horizontal component introduced from the wingtip vortices. R is the resultant airflow moving from front to back on your canopy. Pythagorean says R is less than V, and R is the wind producing lift.

Stabilizers break up the wingtip vortices so H is less and R is closer to V. Greater lift. Wings are finitely long and airfoils are infinitely long. for airfoils, the air always moves parallel to the movement of the airfoil. For a finitely long wing, you get the horizontal push.

Again, the attached graphic is not to be used to construct any flying object, but you get the idea.

Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics.

[frost 1]

What happens if the canopy has no stabilizers? Less lift, less efficient wing?

[tetra316 0]

I think it makes for a faster wing/less drag...?? A few years ago a guy at my dz took his off the canopy and liked it better.

[crazydiver 0]

Quote

I think it makes for a faster wing/less drag...?? A few years ago a guy at my dz took his off the canopy and liked it better.

Frost was posing a loaded question. He flies a JVX, which has no stabilizers for the reason of reducing parasitic drag. It does a nice job of that and is still super packed with lift characteristics.

I think he was waiting for an opportunity to pounce, as many on here do.

Cheers,
Travis

[tetra316 0]

Nice one then.

[flyhi 24]

Actually with elliptical canopies you would almost think no one would need stabilizers. The purpose of the elliptical shape is to reduce induced drag. Stabilizers added to elliptical planforms only address residual induced drag. At the same time, they introduce, as was stated, parasitic drag and parasitic drag quadruples as airspeed doubles. It's a balancing act. Where do you get the best lift/drag relationship? It might not be the most lift or least drag, but it's the best you can do.

Apparently some manufacturers think the stabilizers' effects are worth it. Others don't. I'm sure they all have testing and data to support it. And I'm sure we'll never see it. I trust them.

Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics.

[AggieDave 6]

There's been quite a bit of debate around that says that canopies are large enough with a high enough wingloading or flying fast enough to really require stabs. Is that true or not, I couldn't tell you, my wife is the engineer, not me. Would I like a definite answer? Yes. Has there been qualified people with qualified educations argue both side effectively? Yup.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."