Yeah, the person actually asked a pretty fair question. Just this secretproject guy made me presume it's some random internet pretend expert again lol
Shenyang next gen combat aircraft thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Yeah, the person actually asked a pretty fair question. Just this secretproject guy made me presume it's some random internet pretend expert again lol
It really doesn't need it considering it has 8 individual trailing edge control surfaces, not even counting the AMWs.
lcloo
Captain
Try to get a window seat near the wing next time you fly on a commercial jet. Pay attention to the fluttering of control surfaces (flaps) and ponder why all those flaps keeping on fluttering no stop during landing. take off or encountering air turburlence.
I used to be frequent air flyer (as passenger), taking around 10 trips in a year between Kuala Lumpur to Hong Kong and Shenzhen ( 3 hours trip) and always got window view of the wings.
Having one of my members who's an interesting guy, a regular poster with an interesting history in the industry being essentially made fun of here wasn't nice.
My forum secretprojects.co.uk has been around for 19 years and has some very knowledgeable members, though not many China Aviation experts. Which is why I also hang out here and other places.
I was actually a member here back in 2006 and other forums as 'overscan' or 'aerospacetech'.
I find your forum to be very interesting with a lot of good information and quality content, and while I don’t know the guy personally I’m sure he’s a good person and a good engineer. However to be fair, the initial impression that you created for him here is that he’s swinging the “I’m an experienced aerospace engineer who worked on multiple classified projects and anyone disagreeing with me doesn’t know what they’re talking about because they’re underqualified” bat around, which is not what his post was about in the slightest. If you don’t want your forum members made fun of, maybe don’t say things that make yourself (and by extension him) look disrespectful and aggressive.
People were dismissing the observation because it seemed, tbh, overly simple and fails to consider some pretty basic aspects of control theory and aerodynamics. If you want to have create an atmosphere for a good technical discussion maybe reposting what he said word for word and asking for some detailed opinion on it would be better.
Last edited:
Well I'm probably way too used to internet violence to think I could be hurting people's feelings, if you started by telling us that we could have saved a lot of misunderstanding
If you read the posts I quoted, they were all disrespectful and aggressively disparaging, but it seems everyone was reacting to the idea of his post and not reading the actual post.
Yes, but when someone talks about stuff in another forum that doesn’t make sense on face value, people tend to (rightfully to some extent, since 99% of these claims are nonsense) just dismiss the whole thing. The original poster didn’t provide a link or a direct quotation which I think created the rather aggressive attitude here to some degree. Not an accusation in any way, but if you had provided the direct quote that probably would have helped show people that he gave an observation and was asking for input, instead of outright claiming that the AMWs are not effective whatsoever, and helped turn the mood here. After all not everyone here is also on SPF
I guess a more productive line of discussion is - why use tiperons at all? Its an unconventional solution.
I don't find a lot of research happening in the West at least, and most mentions are in the context of hypersonic designs, and effectiveness at low and highly supersonic speeds.
I don't find a lot of research happening in the West at least, and most mentions are in the context of hypersonic designs, and effectiveness at low and highly supersonic speeds.
Last edited:
There was a lot of testing actually and research, mostly wind tunnel / simulation.
Attachments
-
TLD-1.jpg