OT: 1929 biplane blueprints needed for refurb - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    6,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    706
    Likes (Received)
    2854

    Default

    Airplanes....kinda like exhaust systems on cars. Everyone loves to tell you EXACTLY how to build one and why their preferred design will do all sorts of wonderful things. But, in truth, very very few people really know anything and they very seldom are the ones talking.

    I'm not even convinced anyone even knows why a plane flies at all, lol.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    30,421
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    9511

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregSY View Post
    Airplanes....kinda like exhaust systems on cars. Everyone loves to tell you EXACTLY how to build one and why their preferred design will do all sorts of wonderful things. But, in truth, very very few people really know anything and they very seldom are the ones talking.

    I'm not even convinced anyone even knows why a plane flies at all, lol.
    Given the eggheads have been LYING about the physics of it to over-stress one-HALF of it since before aircraft DID fly? No surprise.

    Think it through. The pointy-noggins have gone to great lengths to explain that NOOOO the pressure of air UNDER a wing does not lift it! It is the partial vacuum the shape of the wing creates in the flow of air ABOVE it that lifts it. Distorted viewpoint of the "bigger picture" that is.

    Go and get Daniel Bernoulli's ghost as witness, put the f**king airfoil in a vacuum chamber and tell me how much lift it generates?

    Surely there is a reduction in pressure generated when in a "fluid".

    Even so, it is the imbalance that lets the pressure of the air on the other side PUSH the airfoil TOWARD that zone of reduced pressure. Not the suction. It has no force.

    Some high-performance aircraft wings even happen to be symmetrical. EITHER side can generate the same force. The choice is made with angle of attack, and it can get a mite touchy.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Modesto, CA USA
    Posts
    7,358
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1279

    Default

    I did not know that there was real geometry that generated the curves for airflow. I knew there was complicated math to describe the forces and shapes after they were created by eye. I learn something new everyday on this site.
    Bill D

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    30,421
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    9511

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill D View Post
    I did not know that there was real geometry that generated the curves for airflow. I knew there was complicated math to describe the forces and shapes after they were created by eye. I learn something new everyday on this site.
    Bill D
    The usual case is some dumb-ass with a keen eye who did not get the memo that he could not goes and builds something that JF works, first. Doesn't have to be a genius. Bumblebees ain't aware of the math of vortex lift, may never learn it, don't even pay attention in class. They just use it well.

    A krew of OTHERWISE unemployable "portable brains at large" comes along later and INVENTS the mathematics to fit the reality.

    The "good news" is that once all that math is well-developed, they can put it into expensive computers and simulate how an aircraft will perform before they actually build it.

    The bad news - F-35 but the latest example of many - is that by the time they get done f**king around with the math and simulations, actually build one, then find out it wasn't quite right, all the money has gone into the masturbation, and they need more money to fix it. Again.

    Meanwhile, financially responsible "enough" but far less affluent defense-waste-wise Sweden, Israel, or China goes and JF builds a scary-good fighter aircraft with far less f**king around and has them actually flying on-the-cheap.

    Time was, Soviets did "on the cheap" too. Some of their best folks up and LEFT for greener pastures and/or retired or just died. The stay-behinds have a problem.

    The best of the assets they need were stripped and sold-on, else left to rot, the younger generation has scant left to work with. If even they want that sort of work at all, there is a multi-decade "gap" to leap past. Outlook is not great for them. China is now ahead of them technologically for-sure.

    They are not alone. India has a proud history of never FINISHING a defense project, only seeing-off the last of the money and starting the next one. Even they were able to tell the Russians WHERE they had screwed the pooch on the PAK-50 and send them away.

  5. Likes digger doug liked this post
  6. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dublin Texas
    Posts
    2,605
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1413
    Likes (Received)
    920

    Default

    They say be careful what you wish for. I found a source for .pdfs of the original blueprints. I've never seen a dimension referenced as a percentage of another dimension. Its going to take some time to desipher these things.
    have fun
    i_r_

    capture.jpg

  7. Likes Mike C. liked this post
  8. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    30,709
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    They got that from the original NACA (eventually NASA) airfoil data

    You have to start somewhere. NACA either originated or simply gathered airfoil data (say like CLARK Y) and the builders followed - with the expectation that it would perform.

    Quote Originally Posted by i_r_machinist View Post
    They say be careful what you wish for. I found a source for .pdfs of the original blueprints. I've never seen a dimension referenced as a percentage of another dimension. Its going to take some time to desipher these things.
    have fun
    i_r_

    capture.jpg

  9. Likes Mike C. liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •