View Single Post
Old 08-23-2013, 06:34 PM   #14 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Yeah, the radical (for aircraft) engine is the big part of these performance projections.

I wonder about this layout because of the short couple (distance along the centerline) between the front and rear lifting surfaces. What would conventional aircraft behave like if the empennages were shortened five feet? Everything still works according to flight theory, but the leverage is so short that I would think constant correction would be necessary to maintain level flight and keep oscillating to a tolerable level. So does the Synergy require computer controlled guidance? Is it capable of not only flat spins but tumbling spins? Scary.
__________________


  Reply With Quote