(Scott McQueen) wrote in message ...
In article , Russell Kent wrote:

While the obvious differences in density and
Reynolds
numbers makes comparing airfoils to hydrofoils dubious, it isn't obvious to me
that
comparisons of "ended-ness" are invalid. Can anyone explain why?


I have read a few books on boat design. The only author
that said anything about front versus rear propellers
thought that a front mounted propeller would be slightly
more efficient. He then stated that he would never put one
on the front of a boat because accidental groundings and
collisions with debris floating in the water at or just
below the surface would damage or destroy a front mounted
propeller. A rear propeller is protected by the bulk of the
boat as it moves through the water.

I doubt that any aircraft designer feels a need to concern
himself with debris in the path of a flying airplane.

1¾
************************************************** *
The reply e-dress is a dead end.
If you want me to read your e-mail, send it to "dropbox" at the same ISP.

Unless you're the guy that designed the Space Shuttle.

Neal