Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty

[SPARKY]

There reportably lots of spins real close to the 4 on the long course at almost the same spot

[jl222]

   As far as proving aero stability and facts.
   Which aerodynamist are you to believe, as porkpie says ask 10 aerodynamist and get 10 different answers.
   As far as Blues theories, unstreamlined bikes at 270 and passenger car at over 340 proves him wrong by real racers
   What do you think of a rapid lane change at 600 mph as suggested by an aerodynamist?
   The same person suggested I try it at high speed in the 222 car to test aero stability. I replied, suggesting that showed his basic missunderstanding of traction on salt of rear wheel drive vehicles.
  As far as responding with facts go back and look at all the post with unanswered questions to Blue.
  Its as though he started this thread so he can sit back and say [I told you so]
  Paul who is your aerodynamist?

 JL222

                JL222

My opinion is irrelevant, what is relevant though is that you feel he is talking through the top of his head and that opinion is fine and the right of anyone else on the forum. All I was suggesting is, rather than gathering a lynch mob cause "were gonna have a hanging", Offer some genuine facts as to why he is wrong then people can use those fact to assist them with their projects.

Once the arguing starts, the topic goes to pot and the discussion results in a waste of server space and may as well be deleted. I have no intention of standing up and telling anyone on these forums that they are doing it wrong, I'm here cause I want to learn about aerodynamics and vehicle stability, I am here because I want to design and build a vehicle that will travel across the face of the earth at over 1000 mph and the back again, with one sole purpose in my mind and that is, at the end of it, the driver can climb out un aided and say "We did it"!

As for my aerodynamist, I am not going to divulge and information re: any of the personnel involved in The Bullet Project at the moment. I designed the car and CFD testing will commence in due course. I can say that our aerodynamist was the chief CFD engineer for a major Formula One team and has recently left Formula One just last year.

We are 10 years + behind all the other teams out there in this challenge. Only one of them has acknowledged the fact we are going for 1000 mph (thank you Waldo) the rest are pretending we don't exist. My site has links to all the other players websites I get none in return. Thats why I'm playing my cards close to my chest. All up to date info will be on our website.

Cheers

Paul   
 

  Paul...I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying if you have to prove aero stability on cars,roadsters,lakesters and motorcycles,
it will outlaw most vehicles [ get it]?
  Do you honestly think a roadster will prove aero stability, if not who is going to be hanged?

     JL222

P.S. You want facts so other people can use them, yet you wont even name your aerodynamist.

                

[desotoman]

A2WindTunnel,

You have a PM.

Tom G.

[SPARKY]

a hint 

[racergeo]

   Sparky, I think  Seth is going to run 340 NA before he puts a hair dryer on it for the big #s. Are you a gambling man??? Of course you are. You stay every year in Wendover.

[SPARKY]

  lol 

[healewis]

  Paul...I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying if you have to prove aero stability on cars,roadsters,lakesters and motorcycles,
it will outlaw most vehicles [ get it]?
  Do you honestly think a roadster will prove aero stability, if not who is going to be hanged?

     JL222

P.S. You want facts so other people can use them, yet you wont even name your aerodynamist.

                 

Hi Jl222, I really do feel that if someone builds a vehicle to reach a speed whereby the speed has not yet been achieved, and then attempts that speed without proving the stability of the vehicle first then that said person should not be allowed to run his vehicle. If you have concerns about a roadster being able to prove aero stability, then don't build a roadster! I will not run any vehicle unless it is proven to be capable of reaching its intended speed safely. I don't want to risk that precious gift called life, nor do I want that on my conscience nor do I want any spectators of the sport to witness injury or worse just because I think I know and understand enough about aerodynamics that I don't need to test.

Safety should be paramount! First and foremost and if we have the will do do something then, usually we will find a way to do it.

Just my opinion on this subject and it should not concern anyone else nor offend anyone else because I do not intend to sport with anyones feelings. Good health

Paul

PS I know a man who is building a WLSR car who claimed that he didn't need CFD and that's why I am not working with him! 

[SPARKY]

If you didn't want to rub anyone the wrong way--then why did you spout off 

[jl222]

  
 Paul...I'm not building a roadster but plenty of people have and gone fast. If people like you and Blue were around
in the beginning of LSR there would be none today and highboy roadsters would never have reached speeds of
 291 mph +
 
         JL222

 P.S.  I personally know of a highly successfull lakester that used a high dollar CFD computer program to design his body that had to redesign the body [ added tail ] this year as it was having a bit of handling problems. So don't put to much trust in those programs, just something for you to think about on the way to 1000 mph

  

[PorkPie]

Actually, the 675 mph lane change was attempted by Craig Breedlove and resulted in an upset.  I was the schmuck who had to figure out why it happened and fix it. 

Very strange......there was nothing to fixed...due to this that Craig had fixed it for the 1997.......only what he forgot was to align the bent frame after the 2 mile U - Turn in 1996....
Decal Dave done this than in 1998......the car was 12 inch out of the alignment after the accident......but strong enough to protect Craig......

....and the lane change......did someone forgot which cause this lane change......

[desotoman]

         JL222

 P.S.  I personally know of a highly successfull lakester that used a high dollar CFD computer program to design his body that had to redesign the body [ added tail ] this year as it was having a bit of handling problems. So don't put to much trust in those programs, just something for you to think about on the way to 1000 mph

  

7717  AA   FL    323.473   Tanis Hammond   New Record, not to shabby.  Is this the Lakester you talk of JL222? I heard rumor that this was done on gas, anyone know?

Tom G.

[Dynoroom]

         JL222

 P.S.  I personally know of a highly successfull lakester that used a high dollar CFD computer program to design his body that had to redesign the body [ added tail ] this year as it was having a bit of handling problems. So don't put to much trust in those programs, just something for you to think about on the way to 1000 mph

  

7717  AA   FL    323.473   Tanis Hammond   New Record, not to shabby.  Is this the Lakester you talk of JL222? I heard rumor that this was done on gas, anyone know?

Tom G.

Gasoline & a bit of the bottle Tom. 

[akk]

Sparky...glad to meet you.

Our bluff wide track roadster...AA/GMR car #920 set the record at 284 MPH...we went out and re qualified at 287 with a 13 MPH head wind...sure wish it was calm ..or better yet a tail wind....Ro Yale said the car handled fine...the wind blew him around a bit but he could drive it back to the middle just fine!

Akk

[desotoman]

I heard rumor that this was done on gas, anyone know?

Tom G.

Gasoline & a bit of the bottle Tom. 

Thanks Mike.

Tom G.

[fredvance]

I will put my experience in for motorcycles specifically. I crashed at Speedweek. When I made my modifications the lower part of my fairing was not symmetrical. The right rear went from horizontal with a nice smooth 90 to vertical, tucked in tight to the frame and swingarm. The left side went from horizontal to a 45dg, 3 or 4 inches out from the frame. this section is about 14 inches long. Sound like a nice wing? Yup, at 180mph it started leaning the bike over. On the first run the bike had virtually no clearance. It rubbed holes in the bottom of the fairing. We raised the bike up about an inch. The next run I went down at about 210. I guess raising the bike up allowed enough air to get under it to eventuall unload the rear tire. Me and the bike are a little beat up but nothing broken. We live to race another day. The moral of the story is keep it symetrical.

  Fred