An undercambered airfoil provides a higher coefficient of lift for a given angle of attack than a flat-bottom airfoil in most cases. The penalty, however, is in penetration. Since an undercambered airfoil achieves a higher CL at the cost of a higher CD, the flat-bottom airfoil will have an advantage in penetrating the wind. The undercambered foil is what is often called a "one speed airfoil', and a flat-bottom or semi-symmetrical foil is more adept at cutting through the air with less drag. You will see that for less camber you get better penetration, but you will also get a lesser lift coefficient. Everything is a trade-off in airfoil selection, and undercambered airfoils are the preferred choice for slow airplanes that need copious amounts of lift without regard to the associated drag. In other words, SLOW. Like doing all your flying with the flaps down. So, the most meaningful way to characterize an airfoil is by its mean camber line and maximum thickness, not by flat bottomed or undercambered. Draw the chord line from the nose of the leading edge to the trailing edge. Then draw a line that is half way between the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil. The maximum distance of the mean camber line from the chord line, expressed as a percent of the chord length is a meaningful number. The next most meaningful number is the maximum thickness expressed as a percent of the chord. These two numbers are encoded in the NACA four digit designations, precisely because they are the most meaningful way of briefly describing an airfoil.
Flaps are extendable... well, "flaps" on the wings that create lift, you are thinking of ailerons, which control roll of the aircraft. Also, you aren't supposed to make a fully fledged unpowered glider with 4 axes only to fall a couple of metres into water and break, its about making a small glider without control, like paper aeroplanes
Should have done a Hang glider cross bar steering and pivot for the pilot . He hasn't enough movement from center of gravity. To steer and control up down.
What airfoil it has ? It seem higher Cm airfoil, so need to compensat by tail. If they choose zero Cm airfoil, canard and tip rudders, they will succeed better.
simflying Airfoil MH 83. I did a lot of simulations with Xfoil, we had a lot of different shapes to choose and decided that classic shape, because it's more stable. specially for pilot with no experience.
Big wing. Small undersized tail surfaces set too close to the wing. With such light, hitec carbon framage the tail feathers could easily be sufficiently big enough and set far back enough without weight balancing penalty. Midgetized distorted framage yields mediocre results. What were they thinking?
@@georgehunter2813 yes i agree, also improper cg is what does it for a lot of the attempts. IMO the best setup would be a flying wing that curves down on the sides to catch some ground effect, pilot on top, launcher built up tall for more potential energyand perhaps a slingshot or other secondary launch. Also im not sure if anyones done this but the people launching could have sticks to push from further back so they dont need to slow down before the drop?
if you can leave the ramp at about 30 mph, you’ve got it. so hire 5 world class usane bolt track stars to push you. otherwise, the only way you’re gunna generate lift is with the 30’ of altitude you’re given. it’s a delicate balance trading altitude for airspeed esp when you don't have much of either. these guys did great! and control surfaces are useless here, no time for that, too much weight and drag.
Matthew Chandler for sure, but we had just 4 months for design, building, testing and very limited in people. If you ask me can we do it better: of course but at least in one year time or more.
@@loganreuter6072 Right!!!! But don't forget that p51 Mustang was designed and built by North American Aviation. It was one of the biggest military company those years!!! We did it for FAN and to promote our company. It wasn't done for profit and we spent our free time to build this craft.
Yeah I don’t think it’s right to compare you guys to a company like that. Just wondering is there a reason why you didn’t put dihedral in the wings. I would assume it would make it more stable considering that it doesn’t look like you have any control on the plane except for maybe shifting the pilots weight
Damn, that sure looks very similar to Volmer Jensen's VJ-24 hang glider.... I bet it even has the 1% dihedral.... ua-cam.com/video/Vy9GowNBgus/v-deo.html dorothy.air-war.org Looks like it's covered in Teldar, the same stuff they use on Lazairs... or? You are going to need some ridge lift or a taller hill to launch it... Damn, just finished watching the video, that plane was too damn nice and well built to dump in the ocean at Flugtag like a bunch of idiots. Why did you do that?
CHOPPERGIRL's AIRWAR It came like idea first, but later became serious. we did it for fun. our company has a lot of carbon offcuts so we decided to use it. we didn't have enough time to bo it perfectly ( just 4 months for design, building and test flights), but I'm proud that we did it!
![Felix Baumgartner Space Jump World Record 2012 Full HD 1080p [FULL]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vvbN-cWe0A0/mqdefault.jpg)
Triple thumbs up on your flight. The video was a Greek tragedy.
Would something with a thinner wing section and more undercamber give more lift?
No but thanks for asking
An undercambered airfoil provides a higher coefficient of lift for a given angle of attack than a flat-bottom airfoil in most cases. The penalty, however, is in penetration. Since an undercambered airfoil achieves a higher CL at the cost of a higher CD, the flat-bottom airfoil will have an advantage in penetrating the wind.
The undercambered foil is what is often called a "one speed airfoil', and a flat-bottom or semi-symmetrical foil is more adept at cutting through the air with less drag. You will see that for less camber you get better penetration, but you will also get a lesser lift coefficient. Everything is a trade-off in airfoil selection, and undercambered airfoils are the preferred choice for slow airplanes that need copious amounts of lift without regard to the associated drag. In other words, SLOW. Like doing all your flying with the flaps down.
So, the most meaningful way to characterize an airfoil is by its mean camber line and maximum thickness, not by flat bottomed or undercambered. Draw the chord line from the nose of the leading edge to the trailing edge. Then draw a line that is half way between the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil. The maximum distance of the mean camber line from the chord line, expressed as a percent of the chord length is a meaningful number.
The next most meaningful number is the maximum thickness expressed as a percent of the chord.
These two numbers are encoded in the NACA four digit designations, precisely because they are the most meaningful way of briefly describing an airfoil.
How much did it cost to build? I saw flyte test's plane was built with a budget of $500.
Min 5000 - 7000€
Nerd Herd Productions same
I cost us about 10000$ in material... And couple of hundreds working hours...
Man..... Don't run with the camera, please...
Do they know about hang gliders?
Hang gliders have been used in the past and not got much further.
no flaps? how you control wings?
Lightcar SISTEME DE AVERTIZARE your not supposed to they just run it off a ramp and it glides into water a couple meters below
Flaps are extendable... well, "flaps" on the wings that create lift, you are thinking of ailerons, which control roll of the aircraft. Also, you aren't supposed to make a fully fledged unpowered glider with 4 axes only to fall a couple of metres into water and break, its about making a small glider without control, like paper aeroplanes
Should have done a Hang glider cross bar steering and pivot for the pilot . He hasn't enough movement from center of gravity.
To steer and control up down.
did I just see the judge give them a three when he was 3 feet from the world wrecord
A little less pull-up and they had it!
Yea that 'Porpoising' killed it. Could have maybe gone 50% furher staying level
how can i join sir.
Great looking build. Who did the carbon D spars?
Pct Dubai
malibu188
malibu188 everithing was done on Premier Composite Technologies, Dubai
So what was the total length of this flight"??
Why the heck do you run while filming??
Redbull gives you wings. Redbull needs to give them better wings. 😂
That is a good looking airplane.
Stop running with the camera!
Ted Fryman no doubt. You can hear a drone hovering above them and I assume it was there to record... but we get the shots recorded with a wristwatch.
Ted Fryman
Magnifique model😍
What airfoil it has ? It seem higher Cm airfoil, so need to compensat by tail. If they choose zero Cm airfoil, canard and tip rudders, they will succeed better.
simflying Airfoil MH 83. I did a lot of simulations with Xfoil, we had a lot of different shapes to choose and decided that classic shape, because it's more stable. specially for pilot with no experience.
Dzmitry Bryleu haha! So it was you who made this aircraft? Well done it flew great. Better luck next year
Yes, I design it
If launched from a higher spot and with a qualified pilot, this glider may actually fly as well as any foot-launched gliders.
Great job guys!
gostei PARABÉNS pela equipe
piloto furacao finalmente um brasileiro
pois é meu amigo
Big wing. Small undersized tail surfaces set too close to the wing. With such light, hitec carbon framage the tail feathers could easily be sufficiently big enough and set far back enough without weight balancing penalty. Midgetized distorted framage yields mediocre results. What were they thinking?
Gotta fit it on the platform I guess
@@clethtinthiallor9179 Okay, but maybe a flying wing tailless is the way to go then. Balance point must be super critical and touchy as is.
@@georgehunter2813 yes i agree, also improper cg is what does it for a lot of the attempts. IMO the best setup would be a flying wing that curves down on the sides to catch some ground effect, pilot on top, launcher built up tall for more potential energyand perhaps a slingshot or other secondary launch. Also im not sure if anyones done this but the people launching could have sticks to push from further back so they dont need to slow down before the drop?
Do you know if they got it?
+TheWaggishAmerican Oop, never mind. I should really watch the whole video before i ask questions :P
TheWaggishAmerican
Whizwheel 1
My first comment on you tube: great engineering; worst camera work ever!
Excellent camerawork! Hope the flying is better.
if you can leave the ramp at about 30 mph, you’ve got it. so hire 5 world class usane bolt track stars to push you. otherwise, the only way you’re gunna generate lift is with the 30’ of altitude you’re given. it’s a delicate balance trading altitude for airspeed esp when you don't have much of either. these guys did great! and control surfaces are useless here, no time for that, too much weight and drag.
Otto Lillienthal was doing better with less money in 1895!
Another UFO is ready this time five feet
Invention i love these people
Really admire how they treat women
Fucking moron lmao
Spelling is impeccable
is that all carbon?
RedstonePyroMan It's fully composite (mostly carbon)
Uhhhhhhhh, maybe mount the camera on the glider next time? I fell out of my chair trying to watch this thing.
Test flying in gusty turbulent wind? Maybe you are just testing it's crashworthiness.
tem q ter velocidade pra ter a impulsão
Alexandre Mariano er mesmo
Flugtag means is german "flight day"
Why dont people just bring out hang gliders?
Why doesn't he wear shoes? Weight saving?
fleeing in reality
they did a better job in the 1940's
Matthew Chandler for sure, but we had just 4 months for design, building, testing and very limited in people. If you ask me can we do it better: of course but at least in one year time or more.
P-51 mustang they got it from the idea to a flying prototype in about 120 days
@@loganreuter6072 Right!!!! But don't forget that p51 Mustang was designed and built by North American Aviation. It was one of the biggest military company those years!!! We did it for FAN and to promote our company. It wasn't done for profit and we spent our free time to build this craft.
Yeah I don’t think it’s right to compare you guys to a company like that. Just wondering is there a reason why you didn’t put dihedral in the wings. I would assume it would make it more stable considering that it doesn’t look like you have any control on the plane except for maybe shifting the pilots weight
Pendulum effect on the legs better timing .
Damn, that sure looks very similar to Volmer Jensen's VJ-24 hang glider.... I bet it even has the 1% dihedral.... ua-cam.com/video/Vy9GowNBgus/v-deo.html
dorothy.air-war.org
Looks like it's covered in Teldar, the same stuff they use on Lazairs... or?
You are going to need some ridge lift or a taller hill to launch it...
Damn, just finished watching the video, that plane was too damn nice and well built to dump in the ocean at Flugtag like a bunch of idiots. Why did you do that?
CHOPPERGIRL's AIRWAR It came like idea first, but later became serious. we did it for fun. our company has a lot of carbon offcuts so we decided to use it. we didn't have enough time to bo it perfectly ( just 4 months for design, building and test flights), but I'm proud that we did it!
Pulling with the car
Top
Go kuya ricky!
Good concept . Needs a little more dihedral 20 to 30 degree should work into the wing and needs elevator , rudder control .
На допинг их надо проверить, а то гляди и до соревнований не допустят как наших спортсменов!
Indonesia 🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩
they don't know what they do! this is not ggood enough!!
Imagine caring this much about Red Bull Flugtag...
Areuweuh gawe 😂
don't hold the wings,
Read more
😂😂😂 you tricked me.
👍👍👍
It stalled; it could have done better.
ونهوبه ذا
Fgbfgbbbbbbb is a great day to be a good time to get a new one and only a couple of weeks
To far forward
Domage qu'il ne sache pas piloter
i dont like what I'm seeing here...
Dennis Morris what exactly? can you do better?
Con molto, molto meno ho fatto molto ma molto meglio. 30 di volo e mai un incidente. Saluti a tutti!
bosta ................................
marcos arndt tua bunda
worst photography ever
cheater!