haza wrote: ↑13 Sep 2020, 10:21
charliesmithhd wrote: ↑11 Sep 2020, 15:10
haza wrote: ↑11 Sep 2020, 15:01
I actually was surprised with the nose change I drew a 3D model of something very similar for the MCL-35 though my design had a double flapped cape and 2 openings at the top Sides of the Nose and exit tunnels at the bottom to create a Z-duct
Is it possible to post have a screenshot of it? Seems interesting
I’m still working on the concept but I can give you all an idea on the concept, the idea is for the nose to have 3 openings one at the tip an 2 on the top sides of the nose the idea is for airflow to go through these channels and out of 2 tunnels that exit at the bottom rear of the nose theoretically it should send the airflow through the nose and out the bottom towards the turning vanes and bargeboards and the cape is effectively a double cape that is basically designed to add a small amount of downforce it is still very early designs and I am yet to do CFD Simulations between the current nose and my concept for comparison
The 2018/2019 nose was actually very similar to this. The central nostril exited at the bottom of the cape, creating a low-pressure zone underneath. The problem with the vented nose philosophy seems to be consistency of airflow and robustness of the structure. The current nose already hangs by a thread on the fw neutral section; if you remove the bulky pillars like on the Mcl35 while creating a hole significant enough for airflow to pass through for aero, then the crash structure is compromised. But if you create holes large enough for aero on a slim nose then you'd have to make the mounts bulky which impede the air and make it inconsistent.