![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "patrick timony" wrote in message m... wrote in message ... I think the HPOs like the English channel one, require so much energy because they are not using their weight efficiently. The style of natural flight they are trying to imitate is soaring. I am talking about hovering flight like a bumble bee or a humming bird or a butterfly. The butterfly is really important I think because it has low aspect ratio wings and if you watch them you can see that they're moving just like a swimmer doing the "butterfly", which is sort of how I think a human powered stroke would have to work. But I think we are built more for the crawl stroke or a combination of the breast stroke and the crawl, becuase our legs are so much more powerful and the leg stroke would have to support most of our weight. I think the stroke that would work best would be one that allows the flyer to adjust the speed and style of each limb to support his body maintaining a certain position in the air. This would probably look like three dimensional running. Actually it would probably look pretty much like an exagerated doggy paddle, if you've ever seen a dog swimming in place in the water. All the Ornithopters I have seen on the net are using bird=like or dragonfly=like wings. I think they should lower their aspect ratios, start thinking about vertical take off, and use curves, concave surfaces, and even spirals in their wing design. Patrick Have you ever seen a three-hundred pound butterfly? Butterflies fly very nicely down in the low Reynolds number regime -- where the air behaves more like honey -- using the "clap - fling - ring" mechanism. Their wings touch at the top of the stroke (the "clap"), then are peeled briskly away from each other to start the circulation around the wing (the "fling"), and at the bottom they touch again, shedding a vortex ring downward (the "ring"), which pushes them upwards. They may or may not hold the wings out midway on the upstroke for a short, fairly steep (but low sink rate) glide. This flight mechanism is why their flight path looks so erratic. Other insects have waxy pads on the bottoms of their feet and can walk on the surface tension of the water. But buttering up your tootsies won't let _you_ walk on water, because some things just don't scale. Tim Ward |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
new theory of flight released Sept 2004 | Mark Oliver | Aerobatics | 1 | October 5th 04 10:20 PM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | April 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | March 1st 04 07:27 AM |
Powered Parachute Plans- correction | Cy Galley | Home Built | 0 | July 11th 03 03:43 AM |