Originally Posted by jlcamp7

I haven't read any papers and I'm not qualified to get into this argument, but I will say I've been in rivers many times with my friends using different canoes and have watched us follow the same route and some go fast than others. Aerodynamics absolutely have effect because with your comment regarding the two ducks try it and I guarantee they won't stay side by side.

I personally don't know all of the science behind it and I don't really care to too much. All I know is my ladybird absolutely destroys my mqx in windy conditions.

Most likely due to better stabilization. A Ladybird flying into a 5mph headwind will need an airspeed of 5mph to maintain a hover, and so will the mqx. Their size is not the issue.

Originally Posted by Gerry__

Most likely due to better stabilization. A Ladybird flying into a 5mph headwind will need an airspeed of 5mph to maintain a hover, and so will the mqx. Their size is not the issue.

Wow, it's like I summoned it.

Here's the perfect example of going directly from theory to conclusion.

Now, if only I could use my powers for good...

Originally Posted by Brandigan

Wow, it's like I summoned it.

Here's the perfect example of going directly from theory to conclusion.

Now, if only I could use my powers for good...

You still are not understanding. You're not even good at ridicule. I'd try understanding there.

personally don't know all of the science behind it and I don't really care to too much. All I know is my ladybird absolutely destroys my mqx in windy conditions.

That's fine but you don't have the knowledge to start attributing reasons to that fact. Your conclusion doesn't follow. The Ladybird can go 5 mph with plenty of instant power to go faster than that if needed. The mqx is less able to quickly change power requirements and has less reserve power left at 5 mph. So the problem is one of components, not weight or "sail area."

According to Bruce over at RCModelReviews, he was shocked that the Ladybird was that stable because in his experience the little ones are much WORSE in turbulence than the larger quads. The Ladybird has something going on that allows it to respond quicker and more accurately to force impulses than lots of other quads. I don't have the technical knowhow to go further than that.

Originally Posted by Gerry__

Most likely due to better stabilization. A Ladybird flying into a 5mph headwind will need an airspeed of 5mph to maintain a hover, and so will the mqx. Their size is not the issue.

That isn't even what was being discussed, you quite clearly are trying to sound smart but you're bringing up something totally irrelevant.

Hold up a cardboard disc into the wind, measure the force required to hold it still. Now reduce the size of the disk by 50% and measure the force required to keep it in place in the same wind. With a quad you are multiplying this disk by four. You most certainly gain an advantage with smaller size.

Otherwise sailboats wouldn't need big sails, since you are proposing that the surface area going into the wind has no effect at all you can just as easily hold up a small sheet of paper and have the same effect as a massive sail right?

Clearly you are revolutionizing the field of fluid dynamics here...

Originally Posted by skitchen8

That isn't even what was being discussed, you quite clearly are trying to sound smart but you're bringing up something totally irrelevant.

Hold up a cardboard disc into the wind, measure the force required to hold it still. Now reduce the size of the disk by 50% and measure the force required to keep it in place in the same wind. With a quad you are multiplying this disk by four. You most certainly gain an advantage with smaller size.

Otherwise sailboats wouldn't need big sails, since you are proposing that the surface area going into the wind has no effect at all you can just as easily hold up a small sheet of paper and have the same effect as a massive sail right?

Clearly you are revolutionizing the field of fluid dynamics here...

Dreadful example, as the cardboard disk is attached to the ground.

The sailboat analogy is even worse because they are nothing like an aircraft flying in a moving block of air.

Let's settle this...........Does ANYONE agree with Gerry? If you do, how about you all form your own thread and discuss it?

Originally Posted by MassiveOverkill

Let's settle this...........Does ANYONE agree with Gerry? If you do, how about you all form your own thread and discuss it?

Who thinks this is wrong: A Ladybird flying into a 5mph headwind will need an airspeed of 5mph to maintain a hover, and so will the mqx.

Nobody argued that. The power required to maintain 0 ground speed will be different, and the way the wind effects either quad will be different. Something with a smaller surface area would accelerate slower to 5mph than something with a larger surface area.

I don't see why you are so confused by this if you're apparently an expert on fluid dynamics

Originally Posted by skitchen8

Nobody argued that. The power required to maintain 0 ground speed will be different,

Of course.

and the way the wind effects either quad will be different.

Incorrect, the wind (steady at 5mph) is having the same affect which is why they both fly at 5mph.

Something with a smaller surface area would accelerate slower to 5mph than something with a larger surface area.

Why?

I don't see why you are so confused by this if you're apparently an expert on fluid dynamics

I'm not confused at all.

I don't know anything about the science but what I do know is this:

My MJX x100, with smaller and higher rpm props, is much easier to fly and hover in the wind than my WL v929, with larger and slower rpm props.

But of course up here in Canada we have 'metric' wind and it takes more of it to be a problem - 8 km/h vs 5 mph.

regards . . . g
.

Originally Posted by MassiveOverkill

Let's settle this...........Does ANYONE agree with Gerry? If you do, how about you all form your own thread and discuss it?

Gerry is correct. Facts are not subject to votes. They are true even in the face of ignorance and unwillingness. You cannot settle the question of whether the moon is made of blue cheese by holding a "vote." Holding the vote demonstrates a quality a bit more worthy of contempt than mere ignorance. The only true vote is reality. Reality is solidly in Gerry's corner, and so you are thereby outvoted infinity to one.

If you really want to know what you are talking about you will have to get outside of yourself and ask the ones who know. The clues are right there in Gordonzo's post. He is a good observer.

I volunteer to settle this once and for all...

Someone send me a Ladybird, and a mQX (could be same or different person who send LB), and I will do all sorts of experiments in all sorts of wind conditions, all meticulously documented of course. I will report my findings when I'm finished. (Or until one or both crafts are destroyed, which ever comes first.) Thanks in advance.

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Gerry is correct. Facts are not subject to votes. They are true even in the face of ignorance and unwillingness. You cannot settle the question of whether the moon is made of blue cheese by holding a "vote." Holding the vote demonstrates a quality a bit more worthy of contempt than mere ignorance. The only true vote is reality. Reality is solidly in Gerry's corner, and so you are thereby outvoted infinity to one.

You both are right. People making parachutes have it all wrong. People sky diving should just jump out of planes without them.

Originally Posted by MassiveOverkill

You both are right. People making parachutes have it all wrong. People sky diving should just jump out of planes without them.

That statement is completely unworthy. You can't advance a discussion by tossing something irrelevant onto the trash heap.Try thinking a bit about what Gordonzo said in his post. He has already detected one of the reasons one of his quads handles turbulence better than the other. He just hasn't formed the right cause and effect relationship yet.

Here its calm, quads of any size is stable today .

From own experience its a fact that when i am going at high altitudes and i lose orientation V929 drifts away lots faster compared to the smaller X100, when no cyclic is applied. But iam not able to explain the physics behind it.