Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao02.cox.net ([68.230.241.37] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.1) with ESMTP id 410919 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:44:55 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.37; envelope-from=ALVentures@cox.net Received: from BigAl ([68.107.116.221]) by fed1rmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP id <20040914204125.JLWG8241.fed1rmmtao02.cox.net@BigAl> for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:41:25 -0400 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: NACA vs. P51 Scoop Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 13:41:44 -0700 Message-ID: <000001c49a9b$3f535210$6400a8c0@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C49A60.92F47A10" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C49A60.92F47A10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: NACA vs. P51 Scoop > As far as scoops are concerned, a NACA scoop may work fine if everything else is right, > but will never have the pressure recovery efficiency of a well designed ram scoop. Nor will it have the high drag 2 more c. John Acutally, the drag will depend upon the entire path, intake, ducting, rad, and exit. For the same amount of air taken on board, the improved efficiency of the ram scoop allows better acceleration of exit air, and therefore could theoretically have overall lower drag, depending on blah, blah, . . . . ah-h-h; I think I have something else to do. The pennies are adding up. Al ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C49A60.92F47A10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: NACA vs. P51 Scoop

 

> = As far as scoops are concerned, a NACA scoop may work fine = if everything else is right,  

> = but will never have the pressure recovery efficiency of a = well designed ram scoop. 

Nor will it have = the high drag 

 

2 more c.

John

 

Acutally, the drag will depend = upon the entire path, intake, ducting, rad, and exit.  For the same amount = of air taken on board, the improved efficiency of the ram scoop allows better acceleration of exit air, and therefore could theoretically have overall = lower drag, depending on blah, blah, . . . .   ah-h-h; I think I = have something else to do.

 

The pennies are adding = up.

 

Al

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C49A60.92F47A10--