News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Physics of (Airplane) Flight by nothacking_ on Sunday June 30, 2024 @10:09PM (#40842001)
Almost none of this is intuitive without hundreds of years of hindsight. The more subtle aspects of stability, such as avoiding oscillation mostly had to be determined experimentally. Then there is also the matter of actually constructing a plane, if you want it to be useful, it's going to need to be a lot more then some folded paper.

Thrust was definitely also a problem, a glider is not particularly useful unless it has a huge lift-to-drag ratio, which is only possible with modern materials and a solid understanding of airfoil design, which is a whole other can of worms.

Even things that seem so basic that we don't even think about them, like high were not at all obvious: just look at Sir George Cayley's gliders.

Re:The Physics of (Airplane) Flight by moralestapia on Sunday June 30, 2024 @10:26PM (#40842075)
Paper planes have been a thing for a long while, but I guess no one thought that could scale?

It's like fire, super obvious in retrospective, and yet took thousands of years to become a technology.

Re:The Physics of (Airplane) Flight by mr_toad on Sunday June 30, 2024 @11:46PM (#40842366)
It’s not easy to scale materials and retain the necessary rigidity. Like if you tried to scale up a primitive kite to support a human it would either be too heavy or too bendy. You need better materials and better construction techniques.
Re:The Physics of (Airplane) Flight by NovemberWhiskey on Monday July 01, 2024 @11:24AM (#40846686)
>Paper planes have been a thing for a long while, but I guess no one thought that could scale?

... and they were right, because aerodynamics is not scale-invariant.

Re:The Physics of (Airplane) Flight by moralestapia on Monday July 01, 2024 @02:49PM (#40849048)
Well, airplanes do exist now, so that did definitely scale.