topspeed100
Well-Known Member
Good day ladies and gentlemen !
I claimed at the GFC thread that there is more than one way to overcome aviation efficiency.
People in aviation are in GA aviation seemed to be glued to see the high AR span efficiency to deliver all solutions.
I dare to say we are just learning to see the ways how energy efficiency can be obtained.
From what I have so far seen the pusher developements seem to have better speeds at lower hp output which is same as efficiency and good mileage in aviation.
Long very narrow wings are good in soaring ( AR 12> )...but what good are they beyond 300 mph ? Seriously they bring lot more weight and drag.
I have tried to reach something via ground effect. Meaning that I sacrifice some lift in high speed flight in order to get airborne with less power and get a cushion when landing to avoid having extra long wings. This would mean partially lifting body design.
I have 8 years ago mentioned the downward bent wingtips too...generally they are pointed up...but to collect cushion near ground they need to be opposite way...I have usually been laughed at by aviation folks for that.
Any way I am certain that a 200-230 kg 2 seater that goes 280-300 mph at 100 hp is doable with this approch. Tell me why not if you oppose ?!
Have a good day !
rgds,
Juke
I claimed at the GFC thread that there is more than one way to overcome aviation efficiency.
People in aviation are in GA aviation seemed to be glued to see the high AR span efficiency to deliver all solutions.
I dare to say we are just learning to see the ways how energy efficiency can be obtained.
From what I have so far seen the pusher developements seem to have better speeds at lower hp output which is same as efficiency and good mileage in aviation.
Long very narrow wings are good in soaring ( AR 12> )...but what good are they beyond 300 mph ? Seriously they bring lot more weight and drag.
I have tried to reach something via ground effect. Meaning that I sacrifice some lift in high speed flight in order to get airborne with less power and get a cushion when landing to avoid having extra long wings. This would mean partially lifting body design.
I have 8 years ago mentioned the downward bent wingtips too...generally they are pointed up...but to collect cushion near ground they need to be opposite way...I have usually been laughed at by aviation folks for that.
Any way I am certain that a 200-230 kg 2 seater that goes 280-300 mph at 100 hp is doable with this approch. Tell me why not if you oppose ?!
Have a good day !
rgds,
Juke
Last edited: