fbov, to the fact that this paper was written on a "Practice Field" and we should therefore treat it with kid gloves somehow is kinda funny to me.
A) This is ecomodder, a blog forum with a bunch of geeky guys blabbing endlessly about stuff that none of our wives/girlfriends are even remotely interested in.....This is not the AeroScientific Review Board, a prestigious peer review committee. But, it is flattering that you think we carry that kind of weight.
B) If the subject paper's authors are wanting to learn....and did happen to stumble upon this...should we all just look at the work they did and say, "That's really nice looking paper Kumar....here's you gold star, now drink some juice and go have a nice recess for 30 minutes"
Or
Do we point out where errors may have been made and talk about how things may have been done better. I really don't see Aeroheads comments as anything like scathing criticism, his writing style is, as always has been, quite perfunctory.
*But that's just him.
C) I'd bet real money that the authors will never in 1,000 years find this forum post.
Annnnyway, you seem like a good, intelligent guy Frank. I hope this does not offend, I just read through the thread again and tried to figure out why it has gone the direction it has,
my ramblings here are just my opinion that maybe we need to maintain perspective here about what this forum is maybe supposed to be about. I respect you Frank, which is why I wrote this....and hit reply.
I had a really terse post for someone else that's here all written up the other day, then I just deleted it. Think muddy pig.
