What is Digg?Sponsored by Guitar Center
When Heavy-handed Hints Fail--Guitar Center Wishlist Posters view!
guitarcenter.com - Cool personalized designs send a friendly reminder that a new Stratocaster would rock, thanks.
33 Comments
- absolutelytrue, on 05/26/2009, -0/+16This story just gives me such an awesome visual.
- sikkdog, on 05/23/2009, -0/+13The whole point of dimples on golf balls is to trip the flow around the ball from laminar to turbulant. Turbulent flow stays better attached to the surface of the ball and creates a steady pressure field around it, causing the ball to stay more stable in flight. The flow around most airliner wings is already turbulent, therefore this strategy will not be effective.
- hfactor, on 05/23/2009, -0/+7FTFA: "the wings of the planes themselves won't waggle"
- xmaschimp, on 05/22/2009, -1/+6When will we see these planes in action? And f the whole plane thing - I want my rocket car already!
- collution, on 05/23/2009, -0/+5I hope you aren't a writer or an editor.
- WindWalker84, on 05/23/2009, -1/+6Why don't planes have dimples on their wings, kinda like golf balls? wouldn't that reduce drag in the same way?
- HappyScrappy, on 05/23/2009, -0/+4No, they're not going full steam ahead with implementing it, but going full steam with researching it. The article mentions they won't even have the wings ready for testing until 2012. They don't speak at all about full scale roll outs.
I agree the guy got over excited and said something that doesn't really make sense. But you don't need to add to the problem by doing the same. - hfactor, on 05/23/2009, -1/+3The point is, as long as we don't have a grand unified theory in physics we don't know anything - we don't know why present-day planes fly, for example. You just have to settle on a certain level of abstraction above which you know what happens and below which you don't. That's what has always been done in every single engineering project.
- inactive, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2aircraft mfr's have been coming up with ways to save fuel for years, except it didnt used to be called greener, it was called economical.
- HappyScrappy, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2We know why present-day planes fly. The high speed airflow across the top of the wing creates lift.
And I don't see how a GUT will increase our knowledge of how planes fly. The GUT will help with particle physics and understanding gravity. I don't think it'll change our understanding of airflow. - retral, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2@lovewidescreen: You know, with that last paragraph you just made yourself look like an ass.
- himself2606, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2Yes, these 'air jets' on the wings have been studied for like 20 years, and when they say they don't know, they're really saying they don't want to explain that they're taking somebody else's ideas. It's kinda funny that they're calling it 'waggling'. How scientific.
http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/Engineering-and-manu ... - Bloodwine, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2I think we are a ways off from rocket cars, but only because we're simply not ready.
Look at all the bad drivers out there, and how they are getting worse due to all the distractions.
I don't know if I want to give them an additional degree of freedom so they can drive through my roof while texting.
Seriously, I wonder if the human race can handle flying cars. It makes me sad, because I want one too! - retral, on 05/23/2009, -0/+2RTFA before you post a dimwitted comment..
- Gloogle, on 05/23/2009, -1/+2scrap this and fund teleportation research instead
- ehead, on 05/23/2009, -0/+1"....with the pressure of climate change we can't afford to wait around to find out"
*****!!! - ultralights, on 05/24/2009, -0/+1"....with the pressure of climate change" so it has nothing to do with making your aircraft more efficient, allowing airlines to make more MONEY (using less fuel), so they buy your aircraft, so you can make more money....
- DaNuKaSAN, on 05/24/2009, -0/+1Newton's theories of gravity and motion were incomplete. He even said so on many occasion that he does not know WHY these laws present themselves or why they worked. So much so that we couldn't understand why Mercury's orbit was impossible predict.
Oh...then Einstein came along with general relativity and gave an underlying reason.
And as for high speed airflow...what actual underlying principles dictate that when there's a difference in pressure, we generate a force called lift? We don't know. We just accept the fact that through observation we notice that it seems to be a constant that differences in air pressure along a wing generates a force of suction.
They're called theorys for a reason people. - sandipc, on 05/23/2009, -0/+1agree with hfactor above. we don't really understand why a lot of things work as they do, but we have some decent models that seem to explain things nicely.
- sandipc, on 05/23/2009, -0/+1... page not found error?
- BDOUG, on 05/23/2009, -5/+6Neat discovery but I can't help but wonder if it would cause additional "metal fatigue".
- frontaxle, on 05/23/2009, -2/+3Couldn't we just strap motors to sharks TODAY?
- waspbr, on 05/23/2009, -2/+2they are probably going to make it with composites
- LoveWidescreen, on 05/23/2009, -2/+2So, developing a theory of gravity and designing a complicated flying machine on an unknown premise are similar trains of thought? Really? Wow! I'll bet even Newton would be surprised to know that!
- ELWOOD_BLUES, on 05/23/2009, -4/+4So, they invented Vortex Generators?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_generator
Been there, done that. - brucealmighty, on 05/23/2009, -1/+1Since no one seems able to fully explain the effect, how about we try them first for a while on cargo flights before installing them on a lot of passenger planes?
- primary0, on 05/23/2009, -0/+0flap flap flap
- DaNuKaSAN, on 05/23/2009, -4/+3Why don't you go back in time, and tell that to Newton?
- ryanonfire, on 05/23/2009, -5/+1Why is Gillette whoring out it's brand name to ***** products >>>>>
- Stuffburger, on 05/23/2009, -10/+3I am sick of hearing the word "green" out of context. The title should have said for CHEAPER air travel, or maybe even more EFFICIENT air travel.
"Green" to me means "reducing environmental impact at the cost of being more expensive and/or less useful." I can't wait for this buzzword to die. - DaNuKaSAN, on 05/23/2009, -8/+1For a second there...I read it as"Airbus Developing a Waggling Willy..."
- HKtheGreat, on 05/23/2009, -10/+0Nothing like instilling anxiety and fear amongst airline passengers while watching the wings of their aircraft - flapping like a bird.
Just imagine kids looking out the windows...I can hear the uncontrollable screaming, in my brain, right nao. Haha - LoveWidescreen, on 05/23/2009, -18/+4Wait ... WHAT?!
"This has come as a bit of a surprise to all of us in the aerodynamics community. The truth is we're not exactly sure why this technology reduces drag, but with the pressure of climate change we can't afford to wait around to find out."
You have no idea WHY it works but you're going to go full steam on trying to get it implemented under the ol' global warm...er..."climate change" moniker?! What's the article going to say in five years? "The truth is we're not exactly sure why all of the planes that implemented this suddenly crashed, but with the pressure of climate change we couldn't afford to wait and at least have removed a bit of the excess population to help the planet out."
***** YOU!! Figure the science out *FIRST* before putting people in those flying cages on (literally) a wing and a prayer!
Yeah, yeah, I know that they'd put this under years of testing before actually deploying, but just the fact that they're still pushing forward on this with no knowledge of why it works the way it does is ridiculously scary. "We don't now why it works but it works. Hey, just trust us. We've tested it out." Yeah, right.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is