Want low drag? Don't follow a template.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Aerohead doesn't know what Coanda Effect means when applied to road car aerodynamics, won't look at the references I have given, denigrates a professional aerodynamicist who uses the term correctly, and then goes off in his own world of irrelevant musings.

Not very helpful, to put it mildly.

Out of courtesy to Freebeard, I made an effort to acquaint myself with the work of Henri Coanda over a decade ago.
Nothing Coanda did dovetails with anything you've said, or attributed to Dr. Wolf's treatment of the subject. Your words betray a complete void of knowledge pertaining to Coanda.
I don't consider that you're in command of any value-added information which would offer applied technology to anything members might undertake.
You take on the air of someone with an intellectual high-ground.
Your past comments belie an intellectual poverty so extreme, I'm amazed that you still have the courage to open your mouth in a public setting. Long ago you revealed intellectual bankruptcy. Probably why you cannot defend your point of views. Not helpful.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Out of courtesy to Freebeard, I made an effort to acquaint myself with the work of Henri Coanda over a decade ago.
Nothing Coanda did dovetails with anything you've said, or attributed to Dr. Wolf's treatment of the subject. Your words betray a complete void of knowledge pertaining to Coanda.
I don't consider that you're in command of any value-added information which would offer applied technology to anything members might undertake.
You take on the air of someone with an intellectual high-ground.
Your past comments belie an intellectual poverty so extreme, I'm amazed that you still have the courage to open your mouth in a public setting. Long ago you revealed intellectual bankruptcy. Probably why you cannot defend your point of views. Not helpful.

Translation:

Aerohead doesn't know what the Coanda Effect is, as it is used in current car aerodynamics. He refuses to consult the references I have cited, including one freely available, so turns to personal abuse.

And, not content with personally abusing me, he now turns the personal abuse towards the head of Porsche aerodynamics.

That's all pretty sad.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Yes, well some of us are using textbooks and SAE papers more recent than a 69 year old book.

My point remains, and no-one has (or can) address it:

If all this BS about a template were true, current aero references would cover it in great detail. After all, imagine how easy car aero would be if you could just apply a template to find out all the following:

- 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

Here's a clue, and a look into the industry since 1927:
* ' The changes in new models should be so novel and attractive as to create dissatisfaction with past models. Automobile design is not, of course, pure fashion, but the laws of Paris dressmakers have come to be a factor in the automobile industry. Woe to the company which ignores them.' Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., CEO, General Motors Corporation, 1927.
* If all were cars were designed 100% aerodynamic, would they not all look alike, and designers have nothing to do?' H. Schmude of General Motors Corporation, to Walter Korff, Chief Engineer, Lockheed Aircraft Company, SAE Congress, 1963.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Here's a clue, and a look into the industry since 1927:
* ' The changes in new models should be so novel and attractive as to create dissatisfaction with past models. Automobile design is not, of course, pure fashion, but the laws of Paris dressmakers have come to be a factor in the automobile industry. Woe to the company which ignores them.' Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., CEO, General Motors Corporation, 1927.
* If all were cars were designed 100% aerodynamic, would they not all look alike, and designers have nothing to do?' H. Schmude of General Motors Corporation, to Walter Korff, Chief Engineer, Lockheed Aircraft Company, SAE Congress, 1963.

So he replies to a comment about using outdated references with one that is 93 years old and another that is 57 years old.

I think I can see a pattern here!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Can you quote the bit on the paper that mentions a template, or in fact any predetermined low drag shape?

I don't think you've ever read the paper if you're misquoting it like that!

I will, but next week. I'm running out of time here and would like to peruse the rest of posts before the store closes.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Can everyone take special note of this: Aerohead is now denigrating the head of Porsche aerodynamics!

I defer to experts, take their advice and read what they have to say. Aerohead just denigrates any that don't match his views.

It's just unbelievable the arrogance that Aerohead displays.

It's more simple than that. I don't have any respect for Porsche, never did. I believe that they're a source of problems, not solutions. Your affinity for them is a reflection of your character as well. It's difficult to respect anyone associated with them. I'd say more, however it's not for public consumption.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Yes, well some of us are using textbooks and SAE papers more recent than a 69 year old book.

Of course, if this were all really significant, it would be in every recent aero textbook, and many SAE papers, wouldn't it?

And it isn't.

So I guess it must be yet another example of where Aerohead is right and all the professional aerodynamicists are wrong. Truly amazing.

Actually 98-years. And good enough for Hucho.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

It's more simple than that. I don't have any respect for Porsche, never did. I believe that they're a source of problems, not solutions. Your affinity for them is a reflection of your character as well. It's difficult to respect anyone associated with them. I'd say more, however it's not for public consumption.

Dr Wolf is the fifth current profesional aerodynamicist you have denigrated in this group. All have vastly more knowledge of aerodynamics than you or I.

The pattern is that you denigrate anyone who disagrees with you - whatever their experience, qualifications and status.

I defer to professional car aerodynamicists, take their advice and read what they have to say.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Translation:

Aerohead doesn't know what the Coanda Effect is, as it is used in current car aerodynamics. He refuses to consult the references I have cited, including one freely available, so turns to personal abuse.

And, not content with personally abusing me, he now turns the personal abuse towards the head of Porsche aerodynamics.

That's all pretty sad.

If contemporary literature is using Coanda's work out of context it's no fault of mine. If you'd actually studied Coanda my comments would be of no surprise . Keep sticking you feet in your mouth. The comic relief is welcome.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

So he replies to a comment about using outdated references with one that is 93 years old and another that is 57 years old.

I think I can see a pattern here!

Yep! There's the old perspicacity-deficit disorder as always. I don't know how you dress yourself. Foot into sleeve. Neck into fly.......................