Thread title: Vodafone McLaren Mercedes MP4/25:
myurr wrote:wrcsti wrote:volarchico wrote:
Also planes can fly at 10mph. Some guy designed one that had a curved section of wing around the propwash, thus using the prop as forward movement and lift.
Pretty old concept actually:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_V-173
Gawd, not another reference to an American failed idea again, no wonder this aero problem cannot be sorted. Stability was aweful by the way on the flapjack. Concept tested at Farnborough in 1958 I think, along with that silly tilt wing thing that was also dropped by UK as way to dangerous. Strange it is in American service and still killing marines. But then so is that Hummer thing, tum te tum.
I am helping to test a new concept in autogyros tommorow. Rotating 2 bladed wing, teeter bearings, non powered rotor, 200mph with forward traveling blade, 100mph on trailing blade. Guess what, there is nobody at the CAA who has a clue how an autogyro flys. This one can fly at 5 mph and tops out at 130 mph, ceiling 18,000ft and a record endurance of 7 hours and all on 60 hp.
Oh by the way, it is silent with NO heat signature and NO downwash, also fully proven in finding and dealing with UXBs. Trouble is the American aircraft industry pays way bigger bribes.
Aerodynamics? Been there done that, come on Nick Wirth, show your stuff.
Sorry but I did not bring up that silly flapjack thing.
Unless blown the near vertical upper section of an F1 rear wing is always in a state of semi stall on the rear surface. Surely that is obvious?