![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Major snip...
My apologies: I thought you were actually interested in discussion the technical details of the design. I guess by your non-response my calculations are correct... They may be or they may not be, and if you're designing such a craft as Dale Kramer is attempting, I've no doubt you can find qualified people to look over your shoulder. This is America, have at it! Given the original topic of this thread (which I took as a "Hey guys! Lookit this...and oh by the way, here's how you can kick in some money if you're sufficiently interested in funding further experimentation." sort of post), "your calculations" seem to have become something of a terribly-important-to-you sub-focus...probably more important to you than to many/most of the original intended audience. I offer this opinion as a degreed aerospace engineer having little personal/user interest in hybrid VTOL flight, "hybrid" in this context meaning capable of (some) verticality but of primarily "fixed-wings-based" horizontal capability. Given today's materials, I simply don't see "serious practicality" on any near horizon for it...similar in that sense to (say) man-powered flight. Nevertheless, both are technically interesting (to many, including me); both have been successfully performed; both will (probably) continue to be investigated and perhaps even advanced (maybe even in my lifetime). And if you somehow or other engage my interest sufficiently, I might even be motivated into "calculation checking" beyond merely noting something I've missed seeing anyone else note, i.e. that the "main prop atop" configuration is arguably inherently stable in descending, vertically-oriented, flight simply by the expedient of momentarily lessening "lower down" thrust. That's not to suggest the physics of such flight are simple, but to rather suggest the "balancing a pencil upon one's fingertip" analogy previously noted herein is more appropriate for a rear-exhaust rocket than a "top-biased descender." Respectfully, Bob W. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Andrew Chaplin | Military Aviation | 8 | July 12th 04 11:25 PM | |
Art Kramer, your computer may be infected | old hoodoo | Military Aviation | 6 | May 24th 04 12:43 PM |
Question for Art Kramer. | M. H. Greaves | Military Aviation | 2 | May 10th 04 05:17 PM |
More B-26 Nonsense from Art Kramer | funkraum | Military Aviation | 7 | January 21st 04 10:53 PM |
ATTN: Art Kramer | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 2 | July 4th 03 02:33 PM |