Thank you all for the answers. (I hope the OP finds it all "on topic", as I do.)
Originally Posted by henra
No, that doesn't exist.
Because at the same time the other theories will provide zero as well:
Same Speed above and beklow means => no circulation (obviously) and also no net vertical component behind the wing, because that would require more mass flow and thus flow velocity above the wing than below.
Note that I am asking about existance of a shape with certain properties; not whether it is consistent with the theories. Not that I insist that the two are necessarily different; it's just that I'm looking here for some factual evidence.
You obviously saw that I was trying to do away with the circulation theory, for at least one airfoil case. But I don't get the reasoning about equal speeds leading to "no net vertical component".
In the simplified Newtonian theory, extremely easy to catch intuitively, the stagnation line (SL) is approximated to be level and passing close to the leading edge. Then the air below SL has to accelerate down (because of the approaching non-porous barrier = wing) and the upper air fills the vacuum behind the wing (which is its top side), also accelerating down. Simple and no contradictions. Except that I found out that the SL is not where it was postulated.
Originally Posted by awblain
supercritical section...
the airflow over the top...
gets to the back first...
How about a flat plate, to keep it simple. Or your typical rudder section, to keep it realistic. Symmetrical by design, since Wright brothers.
What is this obsession of the air "above" with getting to the back first, at positive angles of attack? (Besides "so that it satisfies Mr. Such-n-Such equations".)