I’ll tell yo what is wrong with it: You never designed it. You may have made three view drawings of it, but that is not designing. Not even if you made a model of it, as it looks like. I do believe that nobody was interested.
And you are right, I should have better things to do on my off-days than follow a grown man’s Walter Mitty-dreams of being a designer.

Are you saying this was not an aerodynamic study of a racer plane…is it really just a 2D drawing still to you ?

Even after 7 flights it is still just a drawing ? Just like the model flying in my avatar.

I can understand Wanderlei perfectly well. I do not write very entertainingly, and do not understand this subject enough to write anything about it. I am just trying to tell the, possibly unsuspecting, followers that this is a case of Emperor’s new Clothes. Topspeed is the emperor, and he indeed has about the same understanding of the subject as I do. Like Andraxxus earlier pointed out.
Mr T is very good at dropping names and terms, but that’s about it, he is just obsessed with his so called “designs”.

I am trying to make out one thing. You have only commented on my threads….and only negative comments.

The other is the ” Homebuilt aeroplane made in a garage ! “….and the other is this thread ” Stealth scenario… “.

Why does a grown man with 20 000 flying hours even bother bully one person all this time.

I also designed a Merlin powered racer TIGERSHARK II in the AAFO.com site 10-11 years ago.

It was a swept wing design with fuel tanks in the wings and extremely diminutive approach ( guns away ala Tsunami ).

Totally doable as well, but no one was interested.

It reappeared a year ago in a modelling mag here ( Pienoismalli ). It is still on my book shelf at home.

Tell me what is wrong with that ?

This is not part of the topic, but yes I am. Same in Finnish: totta helvetissä olen.

Okay…how can anyone in Finland gain 20 000 flying hours without being a Finnair pilot. Wait a minute…I know one guy.

Oletko jo eläkkeellä ?

And what makes you think I fly for Finnair? Or any other Finnish airline…

Are you saying you are not a finn….I thought you were a finnish pilot.

This would be pretty stealthy too….WIG….VAWT wing tested in ground effect.

It moves like perpetual motion machine….in ground effect ( under the radar ).

Very informative way to collect aerodynamic data in seconds.

I can understand Wanderlei perfectly well. I do not write very entertainingly, and do not understand this subject enough to write anything about it. I am just trying to tell the, possibly unsuspecting, followers that this is a case of Emperor’s new Clothes. Topspeed is the emperor, and he indeed has about the same understanding of the subject as I do. Like Andraxxus earlier pointed out.
Mr T is very good at dropping names and terms, but that’s about it, he is just obsessed with his so called “designs”.

It is incredible that you have been accepted to be a pilot. I will never fly Finnair after having read your comments…never.

FINNAIR put millions to develope this kinda ****.

It makes me puke…just like you.

I have to say although I think they should be about 25% larger, I enjoyed following Topspeed’s designs.
Much more than Finny “rubbish” posts.

Thank you Wanderlei…I like this kinda spirit more as well.

You are correct that it would have to be larger just to get the wiring, structures etc working…by how much would need a thorough design by several engineers for weeks.

In order to design something (even with quotation marks), one must base its design on some mathematical grounds. Otherwise such pure drawings remind me of myself: I once claimed I have designed a car-shaped time machine when I was 4 years old…

But when people ask “how”, if I can’t show any calculation but only say “I tested a prototype it does” or “it could”, I would be ignored at best, or declared mad at worst.

@topspeed: I will repeat myself that you don’t use ANY number to backup anything you are saying. Without that, people are right when they do trash talk your works (to be frank, I am one of those people). That being said; i will try to do a relatively more constructive critisism this time; Like I’ve said before, you have some fatal problems in your designs.

a) You are working purely on 2d sheet, and on 3d you don’t have enough volumes to fit half the things you say inside the airframe.
b) You are ignoring several dozen items that necessarily exist inside the aircraft.
c) you are shrinking the size of many components that exist inside the aircraft.

————

And about wood. You need VOLUME. Wood is good for cheap consruction; its easy find, easy to machine easy to assemble, easy to repair etc etc. You don’t need any of that in a fighter aircraft. Once again, you need VOLUME.
Best woods for such application barely have ~1/5 tensile/compression strength of Aluminium, and they have ~1/4 density. So they are NOT light. They offer *LESS* strength per weight as Aluminium in the best circumstances, and waste 5 times internal volume. They are also very weak in shear strength, and they have much lower fatigue life, and resistance to environmental conditions. They are NOT good materials, period.

I finally had the time and sleep to be able to answer to few ( remaining ) Andraxxus points, which are pretty good.

1. Leonardo DaVinci also just drew things…and nobody ever claimed or asked his mathematical skills. I have an A from SATs for advanced calculus.

Here is his wing design enclosed.

2. Wood is one thing, but woodcomposite is another ( 70% stronger than aluminium and ½ the weight…Duramold according to H.Hughes ).

Here is also my VAWT ( volumetric ) wing…it has 2.4 kg/m2 loading. I consider that a number.