polarbear 1 #26 November 27, 2006 I don't have my aerodynamics books at home with me, but I looked up 'winglet' in Wikkipedia. According to them: 'The exact upward angle (called cant) of the winglet, and its inward angle (or toe) is critical for correct performance, and is determined for each aircraft application. The vortex which rotates around from below the wing strikes the angled surface of the winglet, generating a small lift force that angles forwards relative to the direction of flight — thus the energy in the vortex contributes to thrust rather than drag as it normally would'. Thia would agree with what I am saying, that winglets aren't there to reduce wing tip vorticies. Instead, they use the airflow created by the vorticy to produce a lift force that is vectored forward. "Holy s*** that was f***in' cold!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
polarbear 1 #27 November 27, 2006 I didn't mean that stabilizers had to be pushed out to work, just that in the case of non-rigid stabilizers (like the fabric ones we have on our canopies), they WILL be bulged out if they are working. Think about it, the stabilizer has high pressure on one side and low pressure on the other. The high pressure will push the non-rigid stabilizer in the direction of the low pressure, thus bulging it out. The bulging isn't necessary for the stabilizer to work, it's just a sign that it is working. If you can get your hands on the video 'Parabatix', there is a scene where Wyatt Drews swoops over a fire. As his VX (which has stabilizers) flies through the smoke from the fire, you can see a massive wing tip vortex, despite the stabilizer. "Holy s*** that was f***in' cold!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #28 November 28, 2006 Check out the stabilizers on the Xaos.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brianfry713 0 #29 November 28, 2006 It seems to me that the stabilizers would act more like airplanes with droop tips, rather than winglets. I think the droop tips are normally included on Short TakeOff and Landing (STOL) kits. These will reduce the stall speed, and give better slow flight performance, such as at the end of the flare, extending the swoop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #30 November 28, 2006 Quoteand give better slow flight performance yup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cobaltdan 0 #31 December 15, 2006 once in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. btw the aerodynamics of winglet design is not a trivial task. there have been many attempts at adding winglets to parafoils, some even commercialized. however none work and ALL are drag. the simple proof is to fly the wing with only one winglet and view the direction of the induced turn. .Daniel Preston <><> atairaerodynamics.com (sport) atairaerospace.com (military) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_rigger 0 #32 December 15, 2006 Quoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. Do you have a theoretical (math) or empirical (data) proof of this claim?You know you have a problem when maggot is the voice of reason at the exit points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #33 December 16, 2006 Quoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. How about keeping back the air with higher pressure under the wing flow over the top skin on the side and making wingtip vortexes too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #34 December 16, 2006 QuoteQuoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. How about keeping back the air with higher pressure under the wing flow over the top skin on the side and making wingtip vortexes too? wow did you really just tell the guy from atair canopies about canopy design... I have one word for that SUPER Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #35 December 16, 2006 I know who he is. I'm jumping one of his design and I like it very much. It has stabilizers. I'd like to know more about his statement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_rigger 0 #36 December 17, 2006 QuoteI'm jumping one of his design Please all do not confuse Stane with Dan...You know you have a problem when maggot is the voice of reason at the exit points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Flightboz 0 #37 January 9, 2007 I have flown the Intruder many times and it does not meet the 4:1 glide ratio. Where do you get your data from? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skygod7777 0 #38 January 9, 2007 QuoteI have flown the Intruder many times and it does not meet the 4:1 glide ratio. Where do you get your data from? click on the link that is in his post and it is right on the page.... later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Flightboz 0 #39 January 9, 2007 The link to their www on the MC-5 says 3:1 and it is no where near that. Do you always believe what is in print? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #40 January 9, 2007 Have you read the fine text too ? AFAIR glide was dependent on load too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skygod7777 0 #41 January 9, 2007 QuoteThe link to their www on the MC-5 says 3:1 and it is no where near that. Do you always believe what is in print? you justed asked where he was getting his info, and i pointed it out to you, that is all. later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
cobaltdan 0 #31 December 15, 2006 once in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. btw the aerodynamics of winglet design is not a trivial task. there have been many attempts at adding winglets to parafoils, some even commercialized. however none work and ALL are drag. the simple proof is to fly the wing with only one winglet and view the direction of the induced turn. .Daniel Preston <><> atairaerodynamics.com (sport) atairaerospace.com (military) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_rigger 0 #32 December 15, 2006 Quoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. Do you have a theoretical (math) or empirical (data) proof of this claim?You know you have a problem when maggot is the voice of reason at the exit points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #33 December 16, 2006 Quoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. How about keeping back the air with higher pressure under the wing flow over the top skin on the side and making wingtip vortexes too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #34 December 16, 2006 QuoteQuoteonce in flight, stabilizers serve no purpose and are definitively only drag. How about keeping back the air with higher pressure under the wing flow over the top skin on the side and making wingtip vortexes too? wow did you really just tell the guy from atair canopies about canopy design... I have one word for that SUPER Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #35 December 16, 2006 I know who he is. I'm jumping one of his design and I like it very much. It has stabilizers. I'd like to know more about his statement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_rigger 0 #36 December 17, 2006 QuoteI'm jumping one of his design Please all do not confuse Stane with Dan...You know you have a problem when maggot is the voice of reason at the exit points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flightboz 0 #37 January 9, 2007 I have flown the Intruder many times and it does not meet the 4:1 glide ratio. Where do you get your data from? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skygod7777 0 #38 January 9, 2007 QuoteI have flown the Intruder many times and it does not meet the 4:1 glide ratio. Where do you get your data from? click on the link that is in his post and it is right on the page.... later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flightboz 0 #39 January 9, 2007 The link to their www on the MC-5 says 3:1 and it is no where near that. Do you always believe what is in print? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #40 January 9, 2007 Have you read the fine text too ? AFAIR glide was dependent on load too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skygod7777 0 #41 January 9, 2007 QuoteThe link to their www on the MC-5 says 3:1 and it is no where near that. Do you always believe what is in print? you justed asked where he was getting his info, and i pointed it out to you, that is all. later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites