Return-Path: Received: from [65.173.216.73] (HELO picker.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.1) with ESMTP id 1882167 for lml@lancair.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:12:49 -0500 Received: from [144.54.52.3] (HELO Philips.com) by picker.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3b1) with ESMTP id 15935013 for lml@lancair.net; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:12:47 -0500 Sender: rob Message-ID: <3DDAA85D.ABC681CA@Philips.com> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:08:45 -0500 From: Rob Logan Reply-To: Rob@CT.Picker.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en, pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lml@lancair.net Subject: Re: .... Wing Airfoil [stall strips ; LE tape] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > bug buildup on [Martin Hollmann's blended 64212 airfoil ; > 30% laminar flow on top and 70% laminar flow] resulted in > an increased stall speed of about 15 knots. I'm confused, if vortex generators make a turbulent layer that stays attached to the wing longer, there by *lowering* ones stall speed, how is the above true? I do know the slightest frost on the leading edge of a LNC4 results in 7kts loss of cruse speed and very thin electric ice boots [or LE tape] eats 5kts on the same plane. Having never flown without at least one of the above, I had always assumed my stalls were lower than a clean wing. I'm confused.. -- Utopian Maturity: Eternity, Liberty, Equality and now Fraternity & Altruism.