Monty Roberts

I don't plan to make mine that fast. I can't afford the fuel burn:sad: .....but was thinking more of people doing things like straping jets and rockets on these aircraft. Monty

So what would be the better solution to the mach tuck issue? 1.) Straight canard with a new airfoil with a thinner section (probably would have a lower CL so would need more area to keep stall speed the same) 2.) sweep the canard with the existing airfoil. I guess it would depend on how fast you wanted to go in the end. Monty

looks like a constipated slug got into the jalepenos.: Monty

Thanks for the replies everybody. I agree with Mark on the foam on top of the spars. The proper way to do this would be to taper the spars so that the spar caps are farther apart. Then make sure the strake skins are bonded to the spar caps. This would not be that difficult to do and would result in spar that is stronger in bending and torsion than the original due to the increased separation of the caps and strake skins. The other option is to use a 30 deg or less pan - down to the standard spar and put the foam filler on TOP of the skin with a cosmetic lay-up over that. This is of course the heavier, weaker, and less elegant solution. Aerodynamically speaking if you do this you will then have to deal with a more abrupt contraction aft of the strake where it joins the cowl. This could create problems with separation which is right in front of the prop.......already a problem area now made worse. Robert and Valerie obviously don't have this problem to deal with Monty

Rather than hijack existing threads with similar themes running through them I thought it best to start a new one. I am not advocating or suggesting anybody do this, but I am trying to hash through the issues associated with increasing strake volume by making the top and bottom of the strake more curved and less flat. I’m not suggesting anything as extreme as the King Cozy but more along the lines of what Robert and Valerie are doing. The issues I think are most significant are Aero, CG location, and construction difficulty. Aero: I really don't think that making a slightly curved top or bottom will change much. My reasoning is that the strakes are essentially a low aspect ratio delta wing with a rounded leading edge. The lift curve slope for this type of wing is shallower than a high aspect ratio wing (main and canard). The high aspect ratio main wings should stall long before the strakes do. It is possible that the center of lift of the strake relative to AOA could move some. My only concern is that it could affect the CG range adversely. I don't think it would, but I don't know for sure. Deep stall: I have often wondered if putting a sharp leading edge on the strakes would help this problem. It would allow the strakes to move into the vortex region of lift generation at a lower angle of attack thus shifting the CL aft and helping to push the nose down......Don't have a wind tunnel in my back yard to try it out. Since the leading edge is already rounded, I don't think rounding the top and bottom a little would make much difference in this area. Drag: probably a slight increase to no different. More wetted area, possibly a more efficient shape who knows. CG: Anybody contemplating this would need to make sure that the center of volume of the tank is somewhere near the CG of the airplane. A WB analysis would need to be made to make sure you were not causing problems here. There is also the more difficult fabrication issue, but I am going to make that go away with a lot of arm waving. Any other thoughts? Thanks, Monty

Captains Log for NCC-17010 Took heavy damage from an encounter with a Clingon bird of prey. Lost most of the outer skin panels....will attempt refit on orbit.......If I can get these green alien chicks to leave me alone. Sorry I couldn't resist. Chris you have certainly had your share of setbacks...you are showing remarkable resilience and dedication. NEVER give up!! Monty