Coming Soon: Canards
10-20-2008, 12:38 PM
#106
Rennlist Member
sorry, mistyped.
mk
mk
Uh, you have it backwards. The curved top portion of the airfoil is the side that models Bernoulli(higher speed, low pressure across a venturi). The action/reaction bottom surface models Newton. Although they are only representations of the two schools, and not a direct coorelation.
10-20-2008, 12:41 PM
#107
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: not where you think I am
Posts: 1,466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what Dave, your absolutely right.
I should tone it down. Your a guy who I've never met but who's opinion I do respect.
Carl, sincerest appologies, I am sorry for carrying on like a dip ****, or for being Douchey.
I appologize, my posts did become insane ranting and that does no one any good. I do still strongly disagree with you though.
We should just argue over beers instead!
Cheers!
Unfortunately things can too often get out of hand here. But in the end, we do all love the same car. So that makes us all a family in a way.
I should tone it down. Your a guy who I've never met but who's opinion I do respect.
Carl, sincerest appologies, I am sorry for carrying on like a dip ****, or for being Douchey.
I appologize, my posts did become insane ranting and that does no one any good. I do still strongly disagree with you though.
We should just argue over beers instead!
Cheers!
Unfortunately things can too often get out of hand here. But in the end, we do all love the same car. So that makes us all a family in a way.
Take your own advice Ryan-----your attack on Carl was totally overblown and unnecessary....to the point of getting personal.
Actually, had you bothered to read the rest of the thread, you will see that yes, I did know what I was writing about......
there was NO personal attack.
Like i said, i thought it was common knowledge to not speak on subjects we dont really understand? Didnt we all decide its best to sit in silence and JUST LISTEN and LEARN when reading about stuff we have no knowledge in, instead of speaking as if we do?
How is that a personal attack? Now it sounds like you've gone fishing for trouble again and im not sure what your trying to accomplish now.
Like i said, i thought it was common knowledge to not speak on subjects we dont really understand? Didnt we all decide its best to sit in silence and JUST LISTEN and LEARN when reading about stuff we have no knowledge in, instead of speaking as if we do?
How is that a personal attack? Now it sounds like you've gone fishing for trouble again and im not sure what your trying to accomplish now.
Per the Charter rules, the next time you have something to say to me, or about me personally....take it off thread to a PM>>>>>
Have a nice day.
10-20-2008, 12:51 PM
#109
Nordschleife Master
had i attacked carl personally, i would have said something like
"Carl your a one eyed purple people eater!" PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE
And actually i had gotten confused and thought that the Dave that i was responding to was Big Dave. But i got the two mixed up. oops
"Carl your a one eyed purple people eater!" PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE
And actually i had gotten confused and thought that the Dave that i was responding to was Big Dave. But i got the two mixed up. oops
10-20-2008, 01:05 PM
#110
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Clearwater Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all know that all accessories and enhancements serve three functions 1) cool factor 2) potential aero help 3) cool factor. You get the idea. The functionality of aerodynamic parts can always be contested, even on factory cars, in fact, factory cars are more concerned with cosmetics and several other consumer factors...and let's face it...there is something sexy to consumers about anything that seems out of ordinary or of potential technical merit....soooo I say it's great that Carl is making these for those who choose to use them. If you want to split hairs on aerodynamics, this may not be the most appropriate forum for it. Just sayin'
10-20-2008, 01:07 PM
#111
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: not where you think I am
Posts: 1,466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-20-2008, 01:08 PM
#112
Nordschleife Master
just as a final reply to the most recent post by TAREK
as Carl and i discussed on Saturday, he did ask for opinions, good bad or indifferent.
That was the subject of the thread he wanted feedback and i think thats what he got.
as Carl and i discussed on Saturday, he did ask for opinions, good bad or indifferent.
That was the subject of the thread he wanted feedback and i think thats what he got.
10-20-2008, 01:33 PM
#114
Rennlist Member
10-20-2008, 01:54 PM
#115
Rennlist Member
10-20-2008, 02:02 PM
#116
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Doc's quote ..."If you look at aircraft, you'll notice the lack of gewgaws." Cars try to make downforce for only one reason ....Traction . Aiplanes have no problem going DOWN staying UP is usually considered desirable 
Drag is far, far more important to airplanes than it is to most race cars for a variety of reasons. I think you can agree that if the total down force exceeds the total LIFT the Cesna is going down. To me it sounds FUNNY ! speaking about downforce with airplanes. As the discussion evolved it indicates to me that cars and airplanes have very little in common. The ground effect lift that occurs as an airplane gets near the ground is but one indication that the dynamics change greatly compared to flight in free air as well as for cars "flying" upside down 3 inches off the ground.... Too bad this thread turned into a clash of egos. Race cars may opt to trade drag for downforce and the benefit of traction....winged sprint cars being the most extreme example where the have far more horsepower than any 1,200 lb car should ever have and they drive on mud !
Drag is far, far more important to airplanes than it is to most race cars for a variety of reasons. I think you can agree that if the total down force exceeds the total LIFT the Cesna is going down. To me it sounds FUNNY ! speaking about downforce with airplanes. As the discussion evolved it indicates to me that cars and airplanes have very little in common. The ground effect lift that occurs as an airplane gets near the ground is but one indication that the dynamics change greatly compared to flight in free air as well as for cars "flying" upside down 3 inches off the ground.... Too bad this thread turned into a clash of egos. Race cars may opt to trade drag for downforce and the benefit of traction....winged sprint cars being the most extreme example where the have far more horsepower than any 1,200 lb car should ever have and they drive on mud !
10-20-2008, 03:26 PM
#117
Rennlist Member
Downforce is just lift. Just as any other force can be applied in a positive or negative direction. Wings produce lift and 2 types of drag. parasitic and due to lift. Dont make this more complicated than it is.
Airplanes just cant retract their wings to go down, they do need "negative" lift or forces downward to go down. (some have spoiles that help to do this) airplanes can cut the power,or induce downforce lift, by using the elevators to "lever" the airplanes angle of attack to create forces needed to get the plane down. a plane in a straight down dive can create postive or negative Gs to get out of it. either way, the wings are producing lift with negative forces or positive forces relative to the way the pilot is sitting.
Ground effects are an entirely different discussion
Sure, cars need downforce, in addition to their weight to handle and accelerate out of turns. The mix of downforce to drag is part of the tuning races cars are put through. as you know, generally, downforce comes at a cost of about 10:1 lift to drag. (this is drag due to lift) some downforce is really found in lift reduction, like with the resultant effect of splitters.
mk
Airplanes just cant retract their wings to go down, they do need "negative" lift or forces downward
to go down. (some have spoiles that help to do this) airplanes can cut the power,or induce downforce lift, by using the elevators to "lever" the airplanes angle of attack to create forces needed to get the plane down. a plane in a straight down dive can create postive or negative Gs to get out of it. either way, the wings are producing lift with negative forces or positive forces relative to the way the pilot is sitting.Ground effects are an entirely different discussion
Sure, cars need downforce, in addition to their weight to handle and accelerate out of turns. The mix of downforce to drag is part of the tuning races cars are put through. as you know, generally, downforce comes at a cost of about 10:1 lift to drag. (this is drag due to lift) some downforce is really found in lift reduction, like with the resultant effect of splitters.
mk
Doc's quote ..."If you look at aircraft, you'll notice the lack of gewgaws." Cars try to make downforce for only one reason ....Traction . Aiplanes have no problem going DOWN staying UP is usually considered desirable Drag is far, far more important to airplanes than it is to most race cars for a variety of reasons. I think you can agree that if the total down force exceeds the total LIFT the Cesna is going down. To me it sounds FUNNY ! speaking about downforce with airplanes. As the discussion evolved it indicates to me that cars and airplanes have very little in common. The ground effect lift that occurs as an airplane gets near the ground is but one indication that the dynamics change greatly compared to flight in free air as well as for cars "flying" upside down 3 inches off the ground.... Too bad this thread turned into a clash of egos. Race cars may opt to trade drag for downforce and the benefit of traction....winged sprint cars being the most extreme example where the have far more horsepower than any 1,200 lb car should ever have and they drive on mud !
Drag is far, far more important to airplanes than it is to most race cars for a variety of reasons. I think you can agree that if the total down force exceeds the total LIFT the Cesna is going down. To me it sounds FUNNY ! speaking about downforce with airplanes. As the discussion evolved it indicates to me that cars and airplanes have very little in common. The ground effect lift that occurs as an airplane gets near the ground is but one indication that the dynamics change greatly compared to flight in free air as well as for cars "flying" upside down 3 inches off the ground.... Too bad this thread turned into a clash of egos. Race cars may opt to trade drag for downforce and the benefit of traction....winged sprint cars being the most extreme example where the have far more horsepower than any 1,200 lb car should ever have and they drive on mud !
10-20-2008, 04:02 PM
#119
Shameful Thread Killer
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
10-20-2008, 08:10 PM
#120
Nordschleife Master