Aesquire
Well-Known Member
Thread mission.
To illuminate, explain,and flame war
about design decisions that struck a compromise that seemed unwise.
To correct any prejudices of mine that are wrong. ( the ones that are correct can stay. I'm prejudiced about carrying liquid Fluorine in a pocket. I think I'll keep that one )
To inform future designs of the costs & payoffs of compromises from the past & present.
I do NOT intend to pick on any person or company. If Brand X gets multiple mentions, it's because of my familiarity, or lack thereof, with a subject. I might mention a popular design instead of an obscure one to make it more universally interesting.
I'd rather get it right than win an argument. There will be much subjective judgement involved. Why you or I make those judgements is one of the key questions.
Multiple categories. "That got fixed" "Is that why they are out of business?" and "They STILL do that?" & "That's an easy one" for suggestions... There will be mixes.
................
In the "that got fixed" range, the Zenith CH-701 has a transition at the top of the windshield that pretty much acts as a spoiler for flow over the top of the fuselage. The CH-750 seems to have fixed that.
Early Lancairs seem to be under winged, and under tailed. Ditto Glasairs. In both cases later model corrected the flaw, and most of the blame for problems seems to rest with builders making them far too heavy. 8 way power Porche seats and full space shuttle steam era instrumentation in a Lancair 235, for example.
In the "??" category, the Sonex line which seems to start the tapering of the fuselage about at the flap hinge.
This seems to violate one of the basic drag reduction principles, and I don't remember seeing a fillet there in pictures??
To illuminate, explain,and flame war
about design decisions that struck a compromise that seemed unwise. To correct any prejudices of mine that are wrong. ( the ones that are correct can stay. I'm prejudiced about carrying liquid Fluorine in a pocket. I think I'll keep that one )
To inform future designs of the costs & payoffs of compromises from the past & present.
I do NOT intend to pick on any person or company. If Brand X gets multiple mentions, it's because of my familiarity, or lack thereof, with a subject. I might mention a popular design instead of an obscure one to make it more universally interesting.
I'd rather get it right than win an argument. There will be much subjective judgement involved. Why you or I make those judgements is one of the key questions.
Multiple categories. "That got fixed" "Is that why they are out of business?" and "They STILL do that?" & "That's an easy one" for suggestions... There will be mixes.
................
In the "that got fixed" range, the Zenith CH-701 has a transition at the top of the windshield that pretty much acts as a spoiler for flow over the top of the fuselage. The CH-750 seems to have fixed that.
Early Lancairs seem to be under winged, and under tailed. Ditto Glasairs. In both cases later model corrected the flaw, and most of the blame for problems seems to rest with builders making them far too heavy. 8 way power Porche seats and full space shuttle steam era instrumentation in a Lancair 235, for example.
In the "??" category, the Sonex line which seems to start the tapering of the fuselage about at the flap hinge.
This seems to violate one of the basic drag reduction principles, and I don't remember seeing a fillet there in pictures??
