View Single Post
Old Mar 21, 2012, 11:53 AM
dave1993 is offline
Find More Posts by dave1993
RC beginner
New York
Joined Oct 2008
6,054 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
Not that that has anything to do with whether lift involves a downwash (which it does), but still, it seems to be one of his favorite topics, so why won't he share the evidence with us? Maybe-- it's because that would belong in the "modelling science" forum? Which this is not...
well... since op and anyone else sharing his viewpoint were simply run out of town then it must be open season topic wise. in any case understandable why those who dont read and/or understand posts might think they are ot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
This is the "bash academic theory" / "extol the virtues of my favorite branch of RC flying and bash the rest" / "make generalized physic arguments about lift based on quirky things I think I'm seeing in slow flying aircraft" / "misrepresent my opponent's statements/ predictions" / "engage in illogical arguments" / "argue against the existence of logic" / "accuse everyone else of being a religious nut case" forum.
lol! cant argue with that. pretty obvious a few guys here do NOT like it when their pet theories are challenged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
You mentioned playing with cooling fans in your last post. We all know that a propeller makes a strong propwash behind, but not in front of, the propeller disk. So, is this yet another manifestation of the idea that an airfoil has a stronger high-pressure area on the bottom and only a weaker low-pressure area on top?
its not so much that one is stronger than the other but as i said before:

"mostly im not convinced low pressure above is as effective as air from below."

at least in term of lift. i repeat this for any interested parties who actually do read the posts here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
Real world this, real world that, we would be all ears if you would tell us something from the real world that pertained in any real way to what we've been talking about.
how many actual experiments have you conducted and posted since the start of this thread. you know, ones with photos and description of results. in fact going though your post history not many since joining this forum. let me count... well.. there must have been at least ONE. no?

going through a persons forum history can be very telling. browsing list of attachments in their blog too. imo some guys here would be much happier in ltup where most have never even seen an rc model let alone built or flown one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
Rather than saying "you'd get all this if you knew about thin films, so go google thin films".
thin film technology is fasicnating and i have played with vacuum deposition at the school but i dont recall ever bringing that up here. maybe you confuse it with my response to dpates query about single surface wings. my description of os film was quite appropriate if somewhat unappreciated. maybe more so for those with actual sense of humor too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999 View Post
This thread is long overdue for being put out to pasture... On the other hand maybe it ought to remain as a special preserve for this kind of twisted discussion-- sort an exhibit, a museum, a zoo?
lol! like i said...
dave1993 is offline Find More Posts by dave1993
Reply With Quote