Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that the general tone of the comments on the latest couple vids is a bit more critical and less fanboi-ish than usual?
In space terminology, it's what we call "Protoflight" . There are no ground test articles, so you use the first flight article for qualification testing. Lower test ranges than you'd do a normal ground-test item, but higher than you'd normally subject flight hardware to.It's more of a mockup, I think. But can be considered a prototype if used for some testing according to this definition: Mockup - Wikipedia
No, it's not just you. The fanboi comments seem to have dropped into the minority.Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that the general tone of the comments on the latest couple vids is a bit more critical and less fanboi-ish than usual?
Interesting video. Some tidbits I heard on the video: "two years experimenting", "pressure port for dyno", "only the best bellows will avoid disasters", "cast elbows not available till now", "no room under hood".... etc.Another great compound turbo video. Little hard to listen to his uh's and uhm's, but lots of good info
Peter had an excellent welder close by to join the exhaust bits (Britt sp?). They were cut out and fitted by Peter and his crew if I recall. No problem to cut and fit tubing and flanges yourself, it's the selection of materials (only 321 or Inconel tubing should be used on aircraft), allowances for thermal expansion (either bellows or slip joints) support of the turbochargers (never hang them off light gauge tubing) and gauge of material (.045 minimum wall) that's important. A first time turbo system builder will know none of these things.So a welding shop made the parts?
At about the 6:00 minute mark, he comments that with a more loaded canard, the AOA will be lower.latest YT Video.
I think he is correct but not anywhere near 3° difference. Remove some load from the back wing and the back wing can fly at less AOA. With more load on the canard it will need to lift more with the elevator.That's completely backwards, right?
I was thinking he was talking about the canard. Which would need a higher AOA to carry more weight. He can achieve that through aircraft pitch attitude or by using the elevators to increase the effective AOA of the canard.I think he is correct but not anywhere near 3° difference. Remove some load from the back wing and the back wing can fly at less AOA. With more load on the canard it will need to lift more with the elevator.
.045? I've seen .063 manifolds crack often. I developed a taste for Sch10 or thereabouts.Peter had an excellent welder close by to join the exhaust bits (Britt sp?). They were cut out and fitted by Peter and his crew if I recall. No problem to cut and fit tubing and flanges yourself, it's the selection of materials (only 321 or Inconnel tubing should be used on aircraft), allowances for thermal expansion (either bellows or slip joints) support of the turbochargers (never hang them off light gauge tubing) and gauge of material (.045 minimum wall) that's important. A first time turbo system builder will know none of these things.
But the canard is rigidly fixed with the wing. They work together, he can't change the canard incidence relative to the wing.I was thinking he was talking about the canard. Which would need a higher AOA to carry more weight. He can achieve that through aircraft pitch attitude or by using the elevators to increase the effective AOA of the canard.
I thought so, too...but they are back tonight! Maybe they're just the first to watch it and will be drowned out by other comments, or maybe it's just that there isn't much substance to comment on in this one.Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that the general tone of the comments on the latest couple vids is a bit more critical and less fanboi-ish than usual?
But the effective incidence increases with nose-up elevator. This increases the ift generated by the canard, reducing the lift required to be generated by the main wing, so slightly lowering the overall aircraft AoA.But the canard is rigidly fixed with the wing. They work together, he can't change the canard incidence relative to the wing.