Wildfire

[morss]

Re: Wildfire

there is no empty space between the eng and pilot. on the C/g is the fluids bay. 2 50 gallon fuel tanks one 50 gal adi tank one 25 gallon oil tank one ? gal hyd tank.
dave

[Unregistered]

Re: Wildfire

there is no empty space between the eng and pilot. on the C/g is the fluids bay. 2 50 gallon fuel tanks one 50 gal adi tank one 25 gallon oil tank one ? gal hyd tank.
dave

All of the fluids, especially consumables, should be incorporated into the wing. This would put them on the CG and allow the wing to be moved up for all of the aforementioned reasons.

4 years ago, I spoke to an extremely admired engineer at Stead (one step in public recognition under Pete Law). We were looking at the Bear, which this engineer claimed a long history with. I pointed out the large areas of separated flow caused by the wing inlets, the leading edge stagnation, and the inversion on the horizontal. Despite the aircraft dripping in oil data that proved every one of these effects in gory detail, he couldn't (or wouldn't) see it.

At some point in most engineers' and mechanics' carreers, they stop learning and innovating. At that point, everything they see is from the perspective of their highest understanding and they never progress beyond that. The trouble is, the science keeps going.

80 years ago they were looking for the "ether" that waves propagated through, even after Einstein proved that velocity dialates time. 50 years ago it was impossible to increase compression without increasing detonation. 20 years ago most wing roots still had big fillets. In case this is too subtle, all of these things were proved to be BS.

20 years from now, many of the details that I espose here will have been superceeded by superior information. We all have a choice. We can either continue to learn, adapt, and grow as new information comes to us no matter how much it destroys dearly, religeously held dogma. Or we can be ostridges.

In racing, ostridges get dusted.

[morss]

Re: Wildfire

it seems there are ostridges that can build an unlimited racer and(anonymous) nay birds who say I could do it better.

dave

[speeddemon]

Re: Wildfire

it seems there are ostridges that can build an unlimited racer and(anonymous) nay birds who say I could do it better.

dave

He shoots.....HE SCORES!!!

[spacegrrrl]

Re: Wildfire

When I lived in AZ there was an annual ostrich race in Chandler. I wonder if some of these racing ostrichs are the ones are building unlimited racers. :-)

Michele

[AirDOGGe]

Re: Wildfire

All of the fluids, especially consumables, should be incorporated into the wing. This would put them on the CG and allow the wing to be moved up for all of the aforementioned reasons.

I wonder if that would be better or worse for the sport of pylon racing, where aircraft spend a lot of time in close proximity to each other and at high bank angles.

Moving all that fuel mass to the wings, away from the fuselage centerline (longitudinal axis) would reduce roll response, would it not? Considering that these aircraft spend plenty of time moving in and out of each others wake vortices, I would think that better roll response would be an inportant factor for control and safety reasons.

Of course, more mass in the wings might make the aircraft less susceptible in roll to influences by the wake flow of a preceding aircraft, so that's why I am pondering which would be better for a pylon racer.

[Victor Archer]

Re: Wildfire

May be this poor unknown fellow is just feeling ostracized

[John]

Re: Wildfire

May be this poor unknown fellow is just feeling ostracized

Oh man that was funny! -even though I consider our "poor unknown fellow" as the God of aerodynamics.

Like I said: all in fun!

[Red]

Re: Wildfire

I for one applaud their effort.

It may have some issues, but at least someone is going for it. This sport needs new blood, and new planes if it is to survive. I for one salivate anytime I hear of "something new" on the way. I hope they get it ironed out, and at least make it a safe, it runs whatever speed it runs, racer. I wish there were more of this thing going on.

Dave, any news on a test flight?

Red

[Victor Archer]

Re: Wildfire

Oh man that was funny! -even though I consider our "poor unknown fellow" as the God of aerodynamics.

Like I said: all in fun!

Yup... Just havin fun with a stupid word. If you can't have fun with a word like "ostracized" then your taking life a bit too seriously

[2101]

Re: Wildfire

The consumables need to be placed close to the cg to keep the balance so as not to exceed the cg limits.You are correct about keeping them close to the roll axis,but cg is more important.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: Wildfire

The consumables need to be placed close to the cg

See..... that's really the problem with life..

The consumables DO stick next to the CG....

I'm beginning to be living proof of this and I know a few other "examples" of this exact phenominon...



Ey Guys... (gals??) am I right?????

[AAFO_WSagar]

PS.....

Happy Friday!

[Blue Foam]

Re: Wildfire

See..... that's really the problem with life..

The consumables DO stick next to the CG....

I'm beginning to be living proof of this and I know a few other "examples" of this exact phenominon...

Yes, and this does not have a significant effect on the roll inertia; either for aircraft or ground crew. We all roll quite nicely, even with an overload of centrally stored fluids...

On a more scientific note, tanks located in the inboard wing area have negligable effect on roll inertia. Tip tanks have an effect, however all the fluids in question could be located inboard of the ailerons and that's far enough inboard.

This is all a moot point, it would take several major modifications to move the fluids to the wings and move the wing up. The trade study should have been performed before the decision was made. The results would have been interesting.