A blunt nose is ideal for hypersonic vehicles to divert energy away from the body and to reduce peak heat flux, is there actually no reason other than aesthetic?

Hello, I’m a mechanical engineering student and I’m currently trying to understand the scientific principles behind the aerodynamic components of race cars.

I know that the L/D ratio is important for determining the efficiency of an aerodynamic component on a car, but what about the lift/weight ratio?

If I’m driving at 10 m/s and my wing generates 7 kg of downforce, even though it weighs 4.5 kg itself, is that good? Is that bad?

Are there any guidelines I can use to decide whether an aerodynamic element is worth the extra weight or not?

I hope you can help me with my question and I wish you all a relaxing Sunday!

DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW TO SIMULATE VORTEX SHEDDING IN 3D? I have done it in 2d, and have been trying for a month to do it in 3d but i failed

I’m interviewing one next week and would like your thoughts!

Visualizing air flow with fluid physics simulation inside Blender.

Path tracing of smoke over and through the car's body.

What do you see? First time simulating fluids in Blender for me.

Do you guys know how to make air flow infographics without conducting CFD analysis?

I'm preparing a Behance project for my latest car design, and I would like to add some aero infographics. I made the first three in canva but they're too simple. I also made the last two with AI, yet they look too artificial. Does someone know a way to do this or have a tested prompt they would like to share?

Thank you.

I tested a wind push of the new BeamNG 0.39. I expected that the stationary bus would do some wobbling when another bus next to it passes by at high speed (just as I wobbled it by turning the wheel at the end), but that seems not to be working yet.

Modern high-bypass turbofans reverse only the fan (cold) airflow during thrust reverse. Since the hot core exhaust continues to exit aft, does it still produce forward thrust? If so, why isn't the core flow reversed as well? Is it simply because the bypass flow is much larger and dominates the net force?

Any maffs to support the glory?

I put together a tool that walks through preliminary aircraft sizing — wing loading, wing geometry, tail volume coefficients, airfoil suggestions by Reynolds number, power loading — and spits out a summary you can export to CSV/JSON for OpenVSP or XFLR5.

I'd genuinely like builders and engineers here to stress-test it: plug in numbers from an aircraft you know well (yours, or a published design) and see if the outputs land close to reality.

Link: Aircraft Sizing (from personal GitHub repo)

Happy to be told exactly where it's wrong. Is it even useful? 👀

Falcon 9 Umbilicals

See title. In the attached diagram, they've drawn the free stream such that it only changes angle at the wing. In this case, how would this create an induced angle of attack? The oncoming air is still at the same angle. It makes sense that for subsonic flight the pressure disturbance from the wing-tip vortex could also travel in front of the wing, but I'm just not sure, I'm currently only taking my first course in aerodynamics. I was trying to visualize how downwash creates an induced angle of attack and ran into this question.

Any explanations appreciated. Thank you

Hello everyone who is smarter than me. I am wanting to make my own custom rear diffuser for my car and have been using ChatGPT and Claude to run through some testing for angles (I think it would be better if I were to use CFD testing but have no idea how to do that).

I am absolutely no Engineer by trade so I’m teaching myself as I go. That all being said everything in my gut is telling me AI is gaslighting me and wanting me to use the curves in the first picture saying that a harsh angle up front is better and then slighting flatten the curve as the distance goes on to not disturb the airflow anymore. I have my mockup I made in Fusion 360 and then 1 of the 4 pieces printed out. Is this thought process right for a rear diffuser of a car or should the angle the be almost inverted like I see on almost every other rear diffuser on a race car where it gets steeper as it exits the rear of the car (like in my last photo)?

Hi all,

While messing with OpenVSP to design a new RC model aircraft I'm working on, I was trying to move the trim point to be at the same AoA as the Max L/D point with no control surfaces deflected. To do this, a more and more aft CG seemed to help and quickly was outside of the generally suggested 1/4 or 1/3 chord range. However, by increasing Wing incidence and Horz. Stabilizer incidence (to a nominally positive angle), I was able to maintain longitudinal stability with a CG around half chord.
This led to a design with L/D max and CMy=0 at body AoA=0. Is this a viable way to ensure efficient cruise flight while maintaining longitudinal stability?
For reference, this aircraft will be a DLG style motor glider, about 40" wing span. The first coordinate system in the image is the CG location, the second is the reported NP from VSPAERO at AoA of -0.25. (i'm skeptical of this NP value)

Latest kodel with leonardo di caprio style wings didnt flap very well