Airfoil Data
N64110

NACA 64-110 AIRFOIL

Max Thickness
5.52%
Max Camber
2.76%
0.15 0.05 -0.05 -0.15
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Chord (x/c)
Click to expand

Airfoil Geometry

N64110

NACA 64-110 AIRFOIL

Max Thickness
5.52%
Max Camber
2.76%
0.15 0.05 -0.05 -0.15
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Chord (x/c)
Profile
Camber line
Chord line

Press Esc or click outside to close

Wing Geometry Simulator

Live Geometry
Aspect Ratio 3.33
Area (S) 0.300
MAC 0.311m
Taper (λ) 0.50
Params

The NACA 64-110 AIRFOIL is a thin 5.5% chord-thickness airfoil with a maximum camber of 2.8% at 40% chord, suited to high-speed UAVs, sailplane tip sections, and propeller blade design. At zero angle of attack the cambered geometry generates positive lift, giving an estimated zero-lift angle of -2.8°.

Thin airfoil theory predicts a stall angle near 11.9° and a peak lift-to-drag ratio around 51 at typical UAV and light-aircraft Reynolds numbers — useful benchmarks before running a full XFOIL or NeuralFoil polar. The slim profile minimises pressure drag at higher speeds but leaves limited spar depth for structural integration.

The N64110 appears in the wing design of at least 1 documented aircraft — notably by Davis-Costin. Its proven track record across canard designs makes it one of the more field-validated profiles in the UIUC database.

Designers evaluating the N64110 typically compare it against profiles of similar thickness: DSMA-523B AIRFOIL, DSMA-523A AIRFOIL, S6062 8%, NACA 63-209, NLR-7223-62 AIRFOIL. The NACA 64(2)-415 [NACA 6a series from Theory of Wing Sections] is another reference profile frequently considered alongside it.

Aircraft Using the N64110 Airfoil

Aircraft
1
Manufacturers
1
Tapered wings
1
Top manufacturer
Davis-Costin
1 aircraft
Davis-Costin Condor
Davis-Costin
Goettingen 426NACA 64-110

Wing lofting: 1 of these aircraft taper from N64110 at the root to a different tip section. Use the Tapered filter to isolate them, then click any tip airfoil link to compare geometries.

Related Airfoils

Engineers evaluating the N64110 frequently compare it against profiles with comparable geometric constraints. Below are the closest matches based on maximum thickness (5.5%) and max camber (2.8%).

Similar by Camber
Loading calendar...