CFD and Reynolds, while may be fine for subsurface vessels, are just a mere estimate of aerodynamics.
Fooling with Reynolds numbers to 'scale' aerodynamic flow is simply that, a model, with only relative meaning in actual aerodynamics. While fluids have a nominal ability to compress, this is not well understood, nor defined in any but the theoretical complex dynamic analysis models.
Air can be compressed, and has an infinite number of compression ratios due to temperature, altitude, and humidity, far too many variables for a CFD model.
If the mechanics of aerodynamic wing design were understood, the wing designs would generally tend to gravitate to a similar solution over time. This has not happened, as each manufacturer claims to have the most efficient design, yet the wings look completely different.
Look at wake turbulence, the rollup of the lift component of the aircraft, the entire aircraft including the center wing, and influenced by the flap configuration, landing gear, and engine location.
AND completely misunderstood in mechanics of creation, rollup, velocity, and advection.
Yes, with advances in technology, unfortunately, many, many people have wasted their time in school..then again, history is fraught with examples of this..unless you still think that you can drive off the edge, continents dont drift, and of course the heresy of evolution.
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 20th Jun 2013 at 03:36.