"Richard Isakson" wrote in message Bull****, Jay.

I worked for several years as an engineer in Boeing's Aero Staff.
Everything you just said is wrong. The people that design wings at Boeing
use the best technology available that's consistant with the production
materials that are available.

I suppose nobody ever approved using composites untill just recently
(wasn't on the QPL), so I guess it wasn't the engineer's fault that
they didn't get to use these materials until 30 years after the
homebuilt guys were using them in their garage. Right?

They don't design on the basis of some
political whim.

You must have had better luck working in large organizations than I
have.

They don't design biplanes because it's easy to show
mathematically that the mutual interference between the circulation of the
two wings decreases the efficiency of both wings.

Ya sure, but for what airfoil, chord, span, stagger, flow model?

You seem to have strange theory that just because something isn't done it
must be a good thing to try.

No, the theory is just because someone else hasn't been able to do it
right, doesn't mean it won't ever work. Give yourself some credit.
Its happened before.

Subsonic aerodynamics was well explored by
World War II.

Ya, and we know what kind of advanced tools they had at their disposal
during that time. I think their computer was a group of ladies in a
room with adding machines.

Much of transonic and supersonic flow was understood shortly
after. If you think that you've come up with something new that just means
you don't understand why thinks work.

When the Wright brothers came up with this idea of heavier than air
powered flight didn't mean they just didn't understand how things
worked. If they'd listened to the early 1900's version of people with
that attitude, we'd be celebrating some French guy inventing powered
flight. They had intuition that they may be something there, and
didn't give up just because lots of other people had failed.

If you want do to something different
just to be different go ahead, but it will be an inferior product and
possibly dangerous.

I'm not building anything yet, I'm just discussing some ideas with
people interested in looking at old problems with new eyes.

Your current design has at least three fatal flaws.
You need to open some books and understand the theory of flight before you
start designing airplanes.

Instead of running numbers on Excel with formulas filled with fudge
factors from experimental data taken 70 years ago, I think I'm going
to throw some wings on my FEA computer model and let the computer take
care of the algebra at 2.4GHz.

Rich