Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar
[Groan]
No they're not...
I don't quite believe that I am having to do this but here's the rest of the diagram.
1. Note how the wake is shown behind the two shapes.
2. Note how the wake is larger on 'A', indicated in the graph by the solid dots.
3. Note how the waker is smaller on 'B', indicated in the graph by the hollow dots.
4. Note therefore that there is attached flow in 'B'.
Honestly, this is becoming quite ridiculous. |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Again, you completely miss the context of the 'small' wake.
2) This wake is not an artifact of slow, gradual, pressure rise,high base pressure, free of separation - induced,high-drag, three-dimensional, attached longitudinal vortex trains.
3) You've fallen into exactly the same fallacy as with the Porsche 911.
4) It is separation-induced, high-drag vortices which create the downwash which holds the flow down the slope. It violates everything Hucho advocates with respect to streamlining, and why he reasons that streamlined half-bodies are the direction for low drag. ( page-15,16,39,109,117,118,142,144,155,169,175,200,201, and 210.