Here’s a little Piaggio video for you guys. The fastest biplane I’ve ever flown for sure:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6bbDyhBNx1c

Awesome video!

One quibble / I think fuselage lift contribution is closer to 20% of lift at cruise! Will double check though…

I remember checking out this plane somewhere in Texas in 2020. Didn't go for it at the time.

How did you all conclude that fuselage lift is a good thing? Every pound of lift that is generated by the fuselage is a pound that is not generated by the wings. Wings are more efficient at generating lift, and therefore generate less induced drag. 20% fuselage lift sounds like a more sellable way of saying “x% more induced drag.”

Are you sure that this is a feature and not a bug? Is is possible that the designers noticed “Ah %#$@, the fuselage is generating lift — and drag!” and then the marketing folks said “Oh, cool, the fuselage is helping!”

We do have to take pitching moment into account, of course, and it’s possible that the fuselage is offloading the forward wing and horizontal stabilizer, allowing them to be smaller, lighter, and less draggy, but in general, bluff bodies aren’t particularly good lifting bodies.

And no, the fact that the P180 is faster than other similarly sized and similarly powered airplanes is not proof that fuselage lift is good. Drag is a sum of many contributions, and speed is very engine and altitude dependent.

Mind you, I still want one

Your friendly neighborhood engineer,
Martín

It is better than a fuselage that is only drag.

A fuselage is a necessary element to make the plane useful. Given that, if it generates lift, all the better.

I'm pretty sure my fuselage generates negligible lift during cruise flight.

Mike C.

It is better than a fuselage that is only drag.

A fuselage is a necessary element to make the plane useful. Given that, if it generates lift, all the better.

I'm pretty sure my fuselage generates negligible lift during cruise flight.

Mike C.

Martin / I believe the fuselage lift in Piaggio enables smaller wings and less drag in general. I have read before it is considered one of the most optimized production airframes ever built.

20% of lift would be better than none, which would just be additional induced drag.

The fact the cabin is 6’ wide (same as a Falcon 50) also might make an argument that a ‘bigger’ cabin is more useful than ‘bigger’ wings!

The triple lifting body patent was for fwd wing, main wing and tailplane. I believe the fuselage lift was an added bonus to the design.

The primary reason for the forward wing AND the fuselage lift is to eliminate the need for downward lift force on the tail in cruise. This is a huge benefit in induced drag reduction far more than any drag reduction emanating from the production of lift by the fuselage. The specs speak for themselves. Plus as Mike said above a "normal" fuselage just creates drag *mostly*

There was a joke going around at Cessna that with enough lifting surfaces, you could get interference thrust.