henra
I've discussed this with many folks, and frankly neither approach is completely "correct" Only insofar as one rejects the other completely, and it is a fascinating discussion.
A "Fat wing" with 0 AoA may of course produce a "suction", but as above, and I believe this is an important and pivotal point, there cannot be a "suction" absent a "push". Picky? No. Accelerate the fatty to whatever velocity you like, the wing will not leave the ground. Not because it's a mystery, but because the mechanism of Flight is done a disservice by disallowing the underwing "pressure".(NOT Ground effect, that is for later, and it too is not mysterious).
Wait, you say, eventually the wing will have plenty of suction at "X" knots! No, it won't, the "center of lift is changing" and will constantly lower the LE to balance the "Suction". If you try to overcome this aftward drift of CL, you are pretending to be the Tail, with its downward (increase, actually) effect on AoA. The wing by itself will constantly compensate for what is claimed is lift, by biting less air.(decreasing) AoA.There is no airfoil that will produce lift without an AoA. This is why Flying wings are hideous without FBW. Same, Harrier.
I think it was Glenn Edwards who said, after the wing crashlanded and caught fire, at Muroc. "I wish they hadn't put the f*****g fire out" It was prophetic, the wing eventually killed him. That is why "Edwards" AFB. Why "Muroc"? The only people living on site when the AAC set up shop were named Corum, Muroc, backwards.
Christiaan?
Last edited by bearfoil; 27th Aug 2010 at 22:52.