Quote:
Originally Posted by aardvarcus
Freebeard,
I see what you mean on the inset. Because the panels are curved at the mating surfaces, I will have to use inset and/or backset to make them clear without binding, however inset or backset reduce the effective length of the panel when constrained to nesting within the fixed space so I will try to minimize it. I will be sure all hinges are used in pairs. The folding panels are about 3’ for the top and 2’-6” for the sides. Attached are some accurately dimensioned drawings, a top view and side view, each square represents 3”.
Kach22i/Slowmover,
I examined the bodywork much more closely and based on your inputs I am abandoning the roof chop. There is some slight taper built into the top of the roof, but it gets too steep near the back. I will make the fixed tail meet the top right where the slope gets too steep. Thus step 1 is gone, other than the relocating the third brake light and patching that hole in the roof.
Everyone,
The taper shown in the drawings is based loosely on AST-II (side) and AST (top) rates of change, but are predicated on the assumed length that you are picking up from the existing slopes of the rear of the body. I need to more accurately compare the angles to see exactly where I am starting. I am also looking for more aggressive side tapers, I have a big collection of pictures and posts from Aerohead that I will do some overlays on. The feedback has been great!  |
I'd recommend figuring out where any plan-taper begins on the sides,then respect the taper contour based upon the template,or you're guaranteed separation if you get too radical.
The flow attachment on the aft-body can only tolerate a pressure recovery of that of a 4:1 streamline body of revolution's.
You can be more 'gentle', but you can't be more aggressive.