Відео

Should get around to them. A complete library it would be my friend!🎸🤘🏻, one last, long video👌🏻you’d be the first👍🏻

I know it’s been a year, but the way you put these together… me want more!! All manufacturers Japan as well

Keep goin!!🤘🏻🎸make more!!

I can’t imagine that Stuka tail in flight roatating lol 🤔

Max…lovin the channel👍🏻

New subscriber & Max…❤it!👍🏻

How would a sailplane look if it were designed to the Arnold Rule? The lack of an engine changes where you have to put the cockpit with all the pilot weight.

I promise you that if I ever design a low-wing aircraft, I'll be using the Inverse-Pressure-Gradient Matching Rule. ( I'm eradicating all the name-memorizing from things, in my work, so going the opposite-way, & calling it The Arnold Rule just forces students to do more memorizing. Having things challed what they ARE, reduces memorization & increases understanding, in kids, & that's whom we're supposed to be rigging the world *for*, right? : ) Thank you VERY much for making this video. & for your explanations, including the way it's different from the supersonic Area Rule. Salut, Namaste, Kaizen, & Gratitude, eh? _ /\ _

Very minimal interference drag, so there is that.

I think Mike independently discovered what has been known for ages as the Whitcomb area rule in aerodynamics (look it up Wikipedia)

That's not the same girls l know from Rodeo

Hate to use a cliché , but I was in otherworldly shock , when I saw the shimmering runway , when I made a delivery in my truck about 23 years back , at Rogers dry lake ,,, ! ,,, Well , maybe not otherworldly shock , but definitely overwhelmed ,,, !

This video made me remember the Runz. Max Volume, Jay Ward, Mr Freeze and RIP Neil Down. Don't forget the Toilets. Good times!

G'day, Glorious ! ;-p Ciao !

G'day, Yay Team ! This was GREAT..., Mate ; I loved every minute. It makes perfect sense - It explains a LOT... And ; my Knees are already sore From the strain of kicking my own Arse - For never having recognised the Confluence of opposing Forces to interactively Minimise Drag... Lately I've been mapping the Pressure in the Boundary-Layer around 2 different Airscrews and a pressed Sheetmetal Fan, all 3 run by Peltier-Effect powered Electric Stove-Fans. Buggar Computer-Modelling, I run the things with Incense smouldering upstream so they run in dirty Air...; wherein the constant load of Dust, Smoke, Ash, & condensing Vapour - all accumulate on the Blades In direct proportion to the ambient Barometric Pressure immediately adjacent to THAT area of the Aerofoil. As it spins for hours per day, day after day... (Endless hours of entertainment on cold Wintery Dayze) As a concurrent Experiment I also have at the moment a literal Baker's Dozen of dangling Chuck-Gliders & Scale Models ,(suitably ballasted) hanging around the Hut, as Airflow Direction-Indicators to plot which Propeller works best, and What the hell is going on with the Press-formed Sheetmetal. There are some Counterintuitively Hare-brained ways of doing things which make Lots of money For ruthless Arseholes ; and, eventually those Production-Engineers will encounter their Karmic Comeuppance (!). But, Relative Pressure Gradients are Where it's ALL at. Thanks for posting this, Excellent stuff. Arnold Rule Rulez ! Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao!

I was always impressed by Mr Arnold. He passed too young. I have an RV-7 and built a RV-4 and RV-6. Van's once provided wing root to fuselage fiberglass intersection. He later went to flat sheet metal gap fairing with rubber strip, clean and simple. The fiberglass never fit well and needed modification or making from scratch. I like the clean look. Bu t the root fairings are a thing. Vans planes are flat on sides from firewall to peak of canopy on the RV-7. On transonic or super sonic aircraft AERA rule or coke bottle fuselage shape is the design goal.

Amazing video. The Germans were ahead of their time with those cool concept.

I'm impressed Mike.

Arnold Rule “rules “🫡

I was born in 87 but grew up a huge fan of 80s hardcore. Like, it was my life. Don't take this as an insult, because it isn't, but it's just wild to me to see "old men" playing hardcore, the music of my youth. The unceasing march of time man. Fucking wild.

Well, it does not have a RUDDER. You know, a vertical stabilizer. So that thing is gonna sail hard with side winds, and it is gonna be hell to land with cross winds. If you get the center of gravity just a little wrong? You get big time problems. Don't even get me started on the Mach Tuck. It is a design to make widows. That is what it is really good at-- making widows.

What's your take on the prandlt-D? (A flying wing design, solved for the lowest Drag, not the highest lift.) I enjoyed the video. Mr. Arnold's vids are some of my favorites.

Flying wings, as has been discussed, require nose-up (tail down) trim to remain stable. (UNLESS: You move the CG aft to counter the pitching moment, and utilize fly-by-wire for augmented stability). For positive stability, for conventional designs. Fully 20% or greater wing area is lifting "downward" needing additional wing area lifting up to counter this. It also ruins the ideal lift distribution as there is no constant downwash along the span, in fact there is significant upwash at the wingtips. This requires a much longer span/higher aspect ratio to counter this sub-optimal lift distribution. Yes, the magical Bell shapes lift distributon is sub-optimal from a Oswald efficiency standpoint. It only makes up for this by having a bending moment reduction, allowing far longer spans which generate slightly better induced drag results for the same weight. The bell shaped lift distribution per L.Prandtl, R.T.Jones, A.H.Bowers requires a 30% increase in span for a 15% decrease in lift induced drag. Ordinarily this increase in span would reduce induced drag by a factor of 2x. While incurring a 30% bending moment/weight penalty. So neither option is optimal for most designs. The aspect ratio should always be kept as minimal as possible for the target L/D ratio. One side effect of the Prandtl V.1.02 bell shaped life dist. Is "proverse yaw" but this is not the panacea people think. Becaus it will only produce the appropriate amount of yaw at one specific lift coefficient. At any other condition it will over or under yaw the aircraft. Possibly even adverse-yaw at yet higher lift coefficients, creating a spin entry that is unrecoverable. Flying wings also cannot utilize flaps. Flaps create additional lift, but also a substantial amount of negative pitching moment. You could possibly use "dive brake" style flaps at the Aerodynamic Center for braking effect/slight increment in lift. The advantage of a flying wing, even having +20-50% more area (even +200% of the area, when accounting for lacking flaps). The tradeoff is given this greater size, is the wetted area low enough to justify it? Most airplanes have a wetted area to wing area of 3.5 up to around 5. Assuming 4:1 this means as long as a flying wing has a wetted area not greater than 2.1:1 (top/bottom surface accounting for curvature). Then it must not exceed twice the wing area for the same liftoff speed. This is literally impossible when comparing heavy lift conventional aircraft. Which can achieve CLmax of 4.0. As a flying wing will be hard pressed to reach 1.3. Requiring 300% more wing area to achieve the same liftoff speed. Meanings 6.3:1 wetted area vs the heavy lift 4:1 or 5:2.

"Give Hendrix a pass, coz he did okay..." 😁 Thanks this was great info, much appreciated...

Why did they use the heavy trailer? It could have easily been tied to the roof of a passenger car for how light it was. Nice job coordinating everyone and safety navigating the doorway. And that scale model!! 😃

baaaaaa-dasssss

The greatest guitarist.......ever. Save your applause for someone that needs it.....

Excellent topic!

Hi Max. I met Arnold back in 07, when we both were invited to consult on the Icon amphibian. I appreciate your movies and I had a long conversation with Mike. We really got along and shared experiences! So sad he passed away, way too soon…

"Now get back to work!" 😂 How did you know I keep up with the series on work breaks? Great stuff as always!

I am not for certain, but I believe we are seeing the "Arnold Rule" at work in today's Formula One race cars. They use significant CFD and wind tunnel testing and appear to place their "swells" and "recesses" to no only manage downforce and cooling, but also pressure and aero stability.

Love that design! It’s like a foursome had a baby- Mustang, Corsair, F8F, and Spitfire (the expanding diameter wing root of the spit) I always wondered about that wingroot shape- I guess it looks beautiful for a reason! I have a question- what’s your idea of a good airfoil for high lift (at low speed) and “normalized” (don’t know the term) lift / lower drag at high speed? I noticed you have constant chord (if that’s the term) wing on that beauty- it’s what reminds me of the F8F. (I’m designing an RC airplane thats reinforced to absorb impacts, which happen far more often when you’re piloting from the ground…)

Thank you for a great thought provoking presentation

Thank you for these videos. I remember reading about this plane when I was in high school. 👍👍

❤

Hint: The Dewoitine 520 has a parallel fuselage above the wing and is a low decker. Not a 100% sure it fits aerodynamic check list, but worth a look. Edit: Had a look, the fuselage is parallel, but the cockpit sits behind the wing. Seeing the P 51, i get a bit confused. This looks fairly parallel to me. Incredibile, it seems most high performance propplane designer think it doesn't matter enough in curves, when the AR-6 placed records at Reno. At least till 2014. Couldn't find more about its placements after 2014.

The truck scales, being worried about the weight: Officer, it's under 500lbs!

Awesome!!! ♥️👊🏾

So the America Bomber had more than a 24 hour flight capability with engine's that lasted barely 5 to 8 hours before needing a rebuild?

Featuring the Legendary Ayn Chu,.

Whether you call it inverse pressure gradient matching or the poor man's area rule, the effects are nearly the same. Just getting the air to respond with as little induced energy as possible is the goal. By shifting the canopy, fuselage, wing cross section and fillet radii, reducing the pressure gradient and air volume dynamics to move and stretch the air (an elastic medium) as little as possible can't help but make sense. I just wish I'd been taught this sort of thing in college. Thanks, Mike, and RIP. We remember you.

Every design is a collection of compromises. We can never have it all.

How about airfoils, interference drag and weight amd balance? 🥳🕺🏾🤣🥂🚠

ILSA

ILSA

ILSA

ILSA

ILSA

ILSA

Why should I watch a dubious history video where the header can’t even correctly spell Heinkel?