Want low drag? Don't follow a template.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by CigaR007

...and what is wrong with that ? He is doing the analysis on his own time, based on actual tuft-testing and body shape observations. If a relation can be established between the template and the observed air flow, I would consider that as added value. if it does not, then so be it. We move on. No drama.

Ironically, aerohead is one of the few people who actually took the time, his time, to provide some feedback in my build thread; yet people have the audacity to criticize him ? Where are the other viewpoints ? oh wait... they are too busy denigrating.

aerohead is not selling anything. Mr Edgar is. Keep that in mind.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that I'd sell far more books here if I criticised no-one and nothing.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by Vman455

What are you all afraid of? Are you afraid your previous beliefs about aerodynamics will have to be rethought? Do you think you'll "regret" learning something new, as someone threatened in another thread (under different circumstances, but the sentiment is what I'm getting at)? Or is it just that the idea that the field of vehicle aerodynamics is actually simple (an idea which appears to be so far from the truth as to be laughable), which has been promulgated on this site for more than a decade, is now so entrenched that you all truly believe it and no contrary evidence will be tolerated let alone investigated? What is it?

1. People here have developed a whole approach to aerodynamics that is based on fundamental misapprehensions. To admit this is actually the case represents a massive loss of face. "You mean for all these years we were just writing - and believing - rubbish?"

2. Aerohead has great credibility here. You and I - and anyone else who reads any books or does any proper testing - know that, unfortunately, a great deal of what he writes is wrong. (And also, if the use here of the template is all wrong, ipso facto Aerohead must be wrong too.) "You mean our revered expert has been misleading us all these years?"

3. When you suggest that people take control of their own understanding by reading or testing for themselves, that is seen as an affront because it requires effort. "You want us to actually do something? I don't have any time / money / ability / etc."

Basically, people are so far down a rabbit hole that they can't get out - even if they wanted to, which I doubt.

[freebeard]

Basically, people are so far down a rabbit hole that they can't get out - even if they wanted to, which I doubt.

Classic Projection. You're not seeing the Cardboard Aided Design and A-B-A testing, or even the whole Instrumentation and Hypermiling/Driver's Ed subforums.

How does one tell if one's head is down a rabbit hole, or up some other?

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Classic Projection. You're not seeing the Cardboard Aided Design and A-B-A testing, or even the whole Instrumentation and Hypermiling/Driver's Ed subforums.

How does one tell if one's head is down a rabbit hole, or up some other?

You have written earlier in this thread that, despite seeing people given advice you know is wrong, you don't bother correcting it.

As the most prolific poster here, that makes you part of the problem, doesn't it?

[freebeard]

As the most prolific poster here, that makes you part of the problem, doesn't it?

Not my fault everyone else are slackers!

If you aren't with us your against us? My silence condemns me?

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Not my fault everyone else are slackers!

If you aren't with us your against us? My silence condemns me?

Well, since you ask: yes.

On a discussion forum I would have thought it normal behaviour to speak out when you know that there is misinformation being put forward in a post.

[Stubby79]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

You have written earlier in this thread that, despite seeing people given advice you know is wrong, you don't bother correcting it.

As the most prolific poster here, that makes you part of the problem, doesn't it?

I, for one, have no interest in policing people for their misinformation. Well, usually.

I'm of an opinion that if people take things they read on the internet - or anywhere else - at face value, without doing their own research into the (likely or not) validity of it, it's their own damned fault.

I'm not remotely up-to-speed on aerodynamics, so who am I to condemn someone's thinking?

Get me on something I have been interested in enough to have a real point of view on, and yeah, I'll probably call someone out on their misinformation.

In other words...if you think you know better, then it's your job to call someone out on aerodynamics, not everyone else's.

I just hope you're in the right. Sucks to later find out you weren't.

Peace.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by Stubby79

I, for one, have no interest in policing people for their misinformation. Well, usually.

I'm of an opinion that if people take things they read on the internet - or anywhere else - at face value, without doing their own research into the (likely or not) validity of it, it's their own damned fault.

I'm not remotely up-to-speed on aerodynamics, so who am I to condemn someone's thinking?

Get me on something I have been interested in enough to have a real point of view on, and yeah, I'll probably call someone out on their misinformation.

In other words...if you think you know better, then it's your job to call someone out on aerodynamics, not everyone else's.

I just hope you're in the right. Sucks to later find out you weren't.

Peace.

You missed the context.

Freebeard earlier said that he agreed with each of my points re how the template is misused here. That is, he is knowledgeable enough to realise the many errors in understanding being disseminated. But he chooses to say nothing.

I think that people who know better, but stay silent when others are being led astray, are part of the problem.

In your language, it is everyone's job to call out misinformation if they are aware it is being disseminated.

That seems a pretty basic idea to me....

[Stubby79]

Might not be in his personality. Might have realized, after all these years, that it's pointless to argue with morons who lock in on the first opinion they read and then tout it as both their own and the best. Who knows.

He is in no way morally or otherwise obliged to correct people. His choice what and when he decides to speak up about. You - and everyone else - don't get to decide for him.

That's the real message I was trying to get across.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by Stubby79

Might not be in his personality. Might have realized, after all these years, that it's pointless to argue with morons who lock in on the first opinion they read and then tout it as both their own and the best. Who knows.

He is in no way morally or otherwise obliged to correct people. His choice what and when he decides to speak up about. You - and everyone else - don't get to decide for him.

That's the real message I was trying to get across.

No you're quite right - Freebeard is not obliged to correct misapprehensions.

I just find it hard to imagine a discussion group where people are completely unworried when they see others being led astray. I've spent too many thousands of hours modifying cars to be cavalier in such a manner.