Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover
Great stuff, aerohead!!
Planning those trip legs (time & distance between stops) just became that much more important. Planning the stops so that one has no traffic devices between the standing start and highway entrance seemed obvious. Now it has given the time spent with some satellite images of the "stop" an impetus it didn't have before (for those of us, at present, with fixed configuration trailers and hitch rigging) to kill as much RR problem as possible. Then the problems of aero are a bit more clear. Possible potential gains after as much noise eliminated as planning can make it.
.
|
Yeah,until we can get those tires made from unobtainium we've got to watch our weight.
The stoplight to stoplight is the other killer.I can't tell you how many un-synchronized traffic lights I hit on my trip.Running 1,300-lbs over stock weight really showed in the logbook.Lots of mountains too!
Between Fachsenfeld,Hucho,Hoerner,and NASA I'm seeing repeating number sets for comparative anatomy in trailers.
It appears that,as of 1935 or so,the concept of a mpg-adding,range-extender trailer had already moved from theoretical abstraction,to fully-proved off-the-shelf technology.
Looks like it's just languished since then,buried on the shelves of libraries.
Constructing a trailer of Cd 0.05 today looks to be a no-brainer,which completely eliminates the turbulent wake.Up to a Cd 0.11 drag reduction for any squareback configuration,be it van,suv,motorhome,tongue-pull,or 5th-wheel/gooseneck.
It's an interesting proposition certain to meet with mass disapproval I'm sure.
