Duncan.
Sorry for the shot, but your new response was worthy. A couple more
sentences
explains your position, which is much more useful than
just stating it.
It is an intriguing subject. When I initially brought this subject up, I
had
recently been fondling the wing of some sort of military
craft. I don't recall what it was. I described the surface as feeling like
'smooth
sandpaper'. The military officer explained that
there were two reasons for the rough surface. One was to contribute to the
stealthyness,
and the other was speed. He didn't go into any
detail as such, but said that the speed increase was dramatic over the same
airplane
with a smooth surface.
Jeff
McFadyean wrote:
> Thanks for the insult!
> If you read the Sport Aviation article carefully (i.e. between the lines) I
> think
the conclusion is apparent.
> Dimples work well on golf balls. On a well proportioned airfoil at zero angle
of attack the effect is also zero or negative.
> By comparison, VGs on wings can improve certain aerodynamic characteristics;
but I never heard that terminal speed was one of them.
> I'm sure that dimples have their place, but in situations of making the best
of an already bad aerodynamic job
>
> Duncan McF.
>
|