SSA Convention Presentation...was this as good as it sounds?

[Stewart Kissel]

http://sinhatech.com/

[[email protected]]

On Feb 25, 3:56 pm, Stewart Kissel
> wrote:
> http://sinhatech.com/

yea it was pretty interesting. Dick Johnson seemed convinced that
they worked, and thats good enough to convince me that they work.

[Bill Daniels]

A lot of things 'work' but, in the end, prove impractical. For example,
suction boundary layer control works spectacularly using tiny amounts of
power for the suction fans but the whole thing quickly gets plugged up with
dirt and is a nightmare to clean.

I don't doubt that Dr. Sinha's device works essentially as he says but the
membrane seems very fragile. If it is as humidity sensitive as it appears,
how would you wash the glider? What precautions would be needed to fill
ballast tanks?

Then there is the question whether the same result can be achieved less
intrusively. For example, could a flow be 'deturbulated' with ultrasonic
transducers below the wing skins.
(http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4741498.html) (Hmm, if you get 100:1 can
you drive dogs nuts in three states?)

None of this prevents me from hoping that it works it all out. If it does,
I'll be standing in line to get it.

Bill Daniels


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Feb 25, 3:56 pm, Stewart Kissel
> > wrote:
>> http://sinhatech.com/
>
> yea it was pretty interesting. Dick Johnson seemed convinced that
> they worked, and thats good enough to convince me that they work.
>

[Shawn[_3_]]

Bill Daniels wrote:
> A lot of things 'work' but, in the end, prove impractical. For example,
> suction boundary layer control works spectacularly using tiny amounts of
> power for the suction fans but the whole thing quickly gets plugged up with
> dirt and is a nightmare to clean.
>
> I don't doubt that Dr. Sinha's device works essentially as he says but the
> membrane seems very fragile. If it is as humidity sensitive as it appears,
> how would you wash the glider? What precautions would be needed to fill
> ballast tanks?
>
> Then there is the question whether the same result can be achieved less
> intrusively. For example, could a flow be 'deturbulated' with ultrasonic
> transducers below the wing skins.
> (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4741498.html) (Hmm, if you get 100:1 can
> you drive dogs nuts in three states?)
>
> None of this prevents me from hoping that it works it all out. If it does,
> I'll be standing in line to get it.

If it can do for your Nimbus what he claims it does for a Cirrus, that
would be something :-)
Same/similar airfoil?




Shawn