Interpersonal conflict in this subforum
 

Tim (Daox) and I made the unhappy decision to ban both JulianEdgar and aerohead this morning. It's a temporary penalty; hopefully cooler heads will prevail.

Thank you to the multiple members who contacted us or who posted expressing concern about declining levels of civility.

Also we apologize for letting this go on too long; for various reasons, both of us have been visiting the forum less frequently, so we missed the opportunity to address a simmering situation sooner.

---

Speaking just for myself now: it genuinely sucks to see these two guys clashing. Both have motivated me for years to learn more about modifying & testing my own vehicles.

Good work! :thumbup:

Sounds like I missed a good dumpster fire.

It's like counterrotating buzz-saws.

Thank you for making it temporary. I'd hate to lose either voice.

How Long? Is there a list of all the involuntary User Removeds?

What say we about allowing alldarc back, assuming he agrees to play by the rules?

Thanks, MetroMPG. And my sincerest apologies for any egging on I did; sometimes it was hard not to jump in.

I agree with freebeard in that losing either of them would be a detriment to the forum. Things have been more animated here in recent months than at any other time in the last several years, and as a result of all the posts I've added several books to my library as well as various devices for testing.

On that note, if anyone wants to try the Scanivalve pressure sensors I have a couple left to give away.

I liked All Darc.

Not sure of the odds, but I'd say aerohead comes back and JulianEdgar doesn't.

I wish they'd both come back so we can do a good-natured roasting of the both [of them].

Thanks for keeping this place so civil. There are so few places on the internet you can go without ad hominems being the rule rather than the exception.

I hope that both come back. With different opinions, understandings, and viewpoints, you get a better education of novices like me.

Honestly I have avoided the aerodynamics section for months now as it seemed too much like going to the Coliseum. Funny you can't find good Coliseum on TV today without debate, and you can't find good debate with Coliseum.

Hindsight 20/20 Online Forums Non Face to Face conversations
 

FYI

To begin, I want thank both Vman (USA) and Nathan (UK) for their posts and updates have given myself personal insights with modifications and concerns on Toyota Prius. Gen2 and Gen3...

Please everyone be safe, fair, and open to thoughts that may not be of your mindset.

They just could never agree, but like politicians on opposite sides, or people of different religions they both had evidence to support their viewpoint, but could never accept the other ones evidence, they both had a valid albeit contradictory viewpoint. Two people divided by common ground.

Julian being here made this forum more interesting but seemingly every thread became aerohead vs Julian.

Wow. I am glad it is temporary, and I hope it calms the waters for returns. The unreasonableness and the ad hominem tone and the endlessness of it had contributed significantly to my avoiding this forum in the last month or two. But I second everything said here about the knowledge they BOTH had. I didn't agree with either of them all the time. Nothing wrong with that. I learned from them both. Sign the peace accords and come on back, boys!

Hope springs eternal... (not sarcasm)

FYI, for those who asked: it was 1 week.

I just recently started visiting the forum again.
Right off, I saw one or two posts, and could tell there was some bickering going on.
Julian wasn't even a member the last time I was here, so I knew I had a lot of catching up to do to see what all the fuss was about.

It seems that with aerodynamics, nothing is set in stone.
It seems you have to be open to new ideas, even if they go completely against what you have known to be true for decades.
For example, " The Template. "
Not only the EV-1, but now the Mercedes A Class sedans , as well as the Lucid air - (and others ) have superb .22 or under Cds, despite having a departure way before the ideal curve of the template.
( All feature quite a bit of tumblehome, so perhaps that is what is working to keep the flow attached. )

I'm glad to see new viewpoints on ideas that are set in stone, but I'm glad to see the bickering go.

Real soon now... It will be economical to instantiate an adversarial generative AI in some cloud, and have it referee the record that exists here of their positions.

They'd likely both be bested. :)

I didn’t know that even aerodynamics could be a religious topic. I missed those threads because I assumed the topic was over my head.

That said, we don’t have to read every post or thread. To that end, you can hide individuals that don’t add value to your day. Never understood why a contentious thread or individuals would run people off when they have full control of their navigation.

Aerodynamics for cars can usually fall into at least 1 or more categories:
Good, bad and ugly.
No need to argue so much about it.

It’s all relatively easily testable. We’ve got ABA and the accelerator block method.

I have not been in the forum much these past few 3-4 months but everytime I pop into visit the "clash" is unavoidable.

They both have much to offer, but I do wish there was a friendlier way to resolve differences.

In most forums, the lounge is where people talk about whatever they want, and people can choose to engage or not. On SlickDeals for instance, there is "The Podium" where you can talk about any subject you want. People wanting to avoid those discussions can.

Ideas should be fair game to attack, but Ad Hominems should warrant a warning, and further infractions should incur a temporary ban.

.

Time out is for kiddies.

Trying to manage differences in personalities is futile.

This was like the “climate change thread” where people posted facts as they saw them. They wore their convictions on their sleeves and fought to convince others.

It made it interesting and entertaining...

This is (was) no different.


I say...


https://i.postimg.cc/wM0nT0LK/C5-EDA...A140-F9-F7.gif


>

.

I missed what was happening in the aerodynamics conflict other than the thread saying Aerohead was 2nd fiddle on the subject.

The climate change thread had some pretty nasty personal insults posted, which were removed fairly quickly. That likely precipitated locking the thread more than the back and forth exchanges of ideas.

Yes. It is not about the fighting per se, but even fights have rules.
Repeated ad hominems, insults, harassment, all these things should lead to warnings and eventually a ban, of course depending on the severity.

We all like freedom but some can't handle the responsibility that comes with it, else there'd be no need for jails.

It is a pity that it escalated so badly. Should we have flagged their comments?

I've never reported any posts other than spammers. Sometimes I will comment that behavior should be considered more carefully. I'd rather confront someone directly than report them to the authorities.

I've suggested edits to posts before, and people have responded positively to that recommendation. I just like people to have the chance to redeem themselves before we jump to cancelling.

I was just thinking about Goethe's vs Newton's color theory. Two completely different takes on the same physical phenomenon. I like them both. Newton's for it's nod to the octave in the electromagnetic spectrum; Goethe's for mansplaining why the sky is blue and sunsets are orange using the fringes on black and white shadows.

Then Arthur M. Young goes deep under both of them. duckduckgo.com/?q=reflexive+universe

The forum culture could adopt Robert Anton Wilson's Maybe Logic.

I like reading about areas that I can't study, especially areas like aerodynamics where it's a hard science... except when it isn't.

But I don't have to come here to watch adults fight.

There were at least a couple efforts to ask them to chill by other members. It's really a job for the mods. Members just end up ignored or bickering. The third way would be freebeardian irony.

I have been gone for a while, checked this forum on a whim today and saw this announcement. It saddens me that we all can't just agree to disagree.

Members weren't ignored, they were actively countered, usually with "do you suggest I should fail to counter that disinformation?" It wasn't just bad, it was purposely bad.

Well I don't know why you insist to talk politics here, then. Point out any place I have brought politics into a conversation. I loath politics as I loath salesmen.

It's a necessary evil though because we've got to agree who should have authority over who, and that involves consensus on who has the best snake oil in town.

The only problem with the don't view it if you don't like it arguement is when you start a thread in aerodynamics and it gets taken over.

I think the opposing views is good, but the bickering got old really quickly.

I don't think Julian will be coming back. At least not at the same activity level he has been. He has posted 2 videos on youtube about not following templates in the past few days.

I made a comment earlier about being open to new ideas on old proven methods.
I used the Template as an example.
This was just based purely on my own observation with cars such as the A class, which drops sharply from the template and has a very short trunk / boot as well.
I didn't know until just now that so much of this bickering was regarding the template.
I'll give yet another example using the same car : the A class front end. Not only does that car have a drooped rear, but also a front end that has these two massive scoops on the front.
Traditional wisdom tells us to either round off the nose of the car, or drop it low for a low stagnation point.
Just going on looks alone, it's hard to believe that the car has a .21 Cd.
After seeing some of the videos posted by the team A2 windtunnel, nothing surprises me as much as it used to.
http://www.myrideisme.com/Blog/wp-co...s-race-car.JPG

Thank you!

Everyone who wants to talk politics/religion/etc... HEAD ON OVER TO SLICKDEALS! I'll meet you there!

Please Post it on the banner, not bury it in the body perhaps with short comment about this behavior

I'm interested as well.

Using a hand held smoke wand is standard operating procedure for ad hoc testing. Multi-stream side views are for advertising.

I suspect a large part of the alleged result is putting the quarter-elliptic springs in the radiator shell. That really cleans up the hood/wheel interference drag.

MetroMPG, have you considered removing the template from the website seeing as it is so controversial or would removing it be too controversial?

The statement is non-controversial. Troll harder?

What is the referent?

Say what you want negatively about the template, but there have been many modifications built to follow it that have worked. I have done three myself, and got within 1% of the gains I had estimated. (5% half bedcover, 10% full bedcover, 5% kamm shell)

Could I have built something slightly better? Maybe... but what I did worked. So for my fourth big rear tapering modification, I am once again using it as my guide. If my fourth project doesn't deliver as I expect when I test it, I may alter my views but until then 3 for 3 isn't bad. I am always open to other suggestions for tapering patterns.

In fact, there are many examples of these sorts of "template modifications" documented in Julian's book. In fact, page 170 has a full page devoted to a T100 with a full bedcover and a tail... I wonder who built that one...I wonder who picked it as worthy for publication...

Needs a smiley face: :)

People got obsessive about that (actually three) side view. Example from 2018:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-te...le-rates-1.jpg

Schlorwagen is an instantiation. I have my own [un-built] octahedral geodesic aeroform.

One benefit of the Template is giving enough hope to dive in. JethroBodine in 2011 for example, even though he fell wide of the mark.

I think one of the highest uses would be to increase the tumblehome of the top to conform to the front view. Plus blisters and canopies and rooftop air conditioners.

The issue--what I think Julian was arguing, without putting words in his mouth--is that while the template is a low-drag shape, it is often referred to here as the ideal shape. But once you start reading the literature out there, it becomes abundantly clear that there is no one ideal low-drag shape. As RH Barnard puts it in his book Road Vehicle Aerodynamic Design:

Additionally, a thread I posted here several days ago has another excerpt from this author discussing "ideal" shapes in more detail.

Hucho devotes several pages to discussing "ideal" shapes as well, in the 4th edition of Aerodynamics of Road Vehicles, pp. 212-213 and 224-229. It's worth looking at if you have the book.

The elephant hiding in the middle of the room is use case. A vehicle design to any end other than high efficiency at low speeds with require accommodations to a greater or lesser extent.

In this case 'ideal' is a local maxima.

edit: Here's an example of an AI optimized use car — Supercar

https://external-content.duckduckgo....6pid%3DApi&f=1
A.I. Designed this Car

Were this a three passenger/center drive car, I'd call it a worthy successor to the Volkhart-Saggita V2, which was really hard-pressed as a 4-passenger vehicle.