Select to expand quote
Lambie said..juandesooka said..RAL INN said..
May not be safe to assume that only front wing will change. As both wings lift, changing one will effect balance.
I am intrigued by the canard capabilities: 1) easier turning, 2) less wipeouts when front wing breaches. I haven't yet ridden a spitfire, I am hoping to demo one this summer. In the meantime, I've seen one and my plan is to turn my fuselage around and carve a couple wings with similar profile out of g10 ... I'd call them a copy, but they will no doubt be such a botched franken-job that it would be disrespect to say so!
I am going to carve the wings 20% larger, to see if that helps with the low wind take off and slow speed stall potential. However, I won't have anything to compare to, until I also carve a normal size wing or try an actual spitfire.
In layout out my templates last night, I scaled up both main wing and front wing 20%, but the front one looked way too big. So now I've scaled the back one 20% and front one 10% ... so I will be able to report if this caused a balance issue soon.
I figure the nice thing about going bigger....I can always carve them down, but once too small, that's it.
Foils - the good ones are driven by science and phyiscs ?? Im sure you can play around to your hearts content but if you dont really understand hyrodynamics / or fluiddynamics - then its just a hobbie ! And nothhing wrong with that !
It would be interesting to know how much of foil design is super computer simulation testing versus making a shape, trying it out, refining, until it rides well. I suspect there's some rigorous scientific methods going on for fighter jets and world cup sailboats (and the high end racers), but other than that it's mostly one step up from the "DIY Foil with Angle Grinder and Rubbish" thread. An all-time fave for half-assed making it work spirit!
For the spitfire specifically, seems to be about as simple a foil design as there is. I don't think there's a huge amount of science in sanding a flat piece of G10 into a foil shape. I can see your point with some of the complex designs with anhedryl, dihedryl, etc ... though I sometimes wonder how much of this sophisticated shaping is performance based or the designer having fun with the artistry of it all just because they can and also because shiny complex designs fetch a higher price?
My DIY experiment pre-dates the XLW ... and if anything, looks like I didn't size up the front wing enough. Looking at bigtone's photo above, I'd guess rear wing is scaled up maybe 25%, but front wing 150%. That's a huge increase in surface area -- and I assume this is focused on earlier lift and not dropping off foil as lower speeds. The strong positive reviews sound like the spitfire v1 may be the initial experiment, but the XLW is the keeper. If the spitfire is a specialty sports car, the XLW is an all rounder.