Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
1) Since long before the pandemic showed up, I posted, exact quotes, and page numbers from the 2nd-edition, which fully illustrated the makings of the 'template.'
2) And I did it at least four times.
3) So here I am, many months later, and it appears that you've never given any effort to examine ANY of the data.
4) Four times!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What am I to make of such behavior?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You've been Johnny-on-the-spot as judge, jury, and executioner.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With an inspection of the material, every criticism of 'templates' fail.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ability of the VW- Flow Body to predict Cd 0.14 is immediately accepted at face value, while the AST is rejected, wholesale, even though the VW-Flow Body, when compared, is essentially the AST!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VW-Blunt Body ( solid border image ) is accepted immediately without question, even though it is virtually indistinguishable from the AST!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same with the VW-Drop Shape!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And we're absolutely deadlocked on the issue until you do what would be considered, normal due diligence.
|
This is what you do all the time. Take the existing argument, realise that you're not going to win on evidence, and so change the proposition to something else.
I have never said the template is not a low drag shape. I have never said that any of the templates are not low drag shapes.
These are all low drag shapes:
But that does not in any way lead to the idea that you can do any of the following with any of them:
- Show where there is separated and attached flow on existing cars
- Guide the shape of rear extensions
- Show how rear spoilers on sedans should be positioned and shaped
- Allow the assessment of the ‘aerodynamic purity’ of cars
They are simply low drag shapes, and the idea that (for example) you can pick one line from them, superimpose it over a completely different shape and then draw some inference from it is absurd.
The argument is not whether these shapes are low in drag. The argument is about the way you were encouraging their application here - to do things that are completely unjustifiable. In fact, quite wrong.