Since your feet are happy, any ideas on a new pair of Tri Shoes. not yellow though. Thoughts on Sidi Shoes?

To tight on my toes...I have been in Time shoes for no less than 10 years...I loved the TVT sole, and now the new one. I do miss the old red and white ones...I need them and some pink socks...I can be like Frenchie (only not so tan)

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

"i just don't like it when people tell others what to spend money on, benefit or not."

with the exception of $1,200 aerobars I agree with that!

I don't know where to draw the line on that--but $1,200 are so far over that line that I'm still complaining about it!

 
Gotta laugh, anyone who's ever bothered to read Fecks posts would sure get the general idea he actually does know what he's taking about, but then someone who believes he knows everything may not read his posts.

Year after year just about every major race is won on frames that are so called 'non aero' and nothing is ever said about it yet when someone wins a race on say a Cervelo or a Kuota all you here is that it was the bike that made the difference, BS!

"good UAV program"

isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?

Huh??????

Not sure what you mean, but there is a big emphasis on them right now. The predator program for example is used widely in Iraq to track militants and I also remember that they used one to launch a missile that took out some terrorists in Yemen. It is certainly a lot better to replace a UAV than to lose a pilot. Just dont expect anything like that pathetic movie "Stealth" to come out for a while.

Nope, but I've had a chance to see a Predator being put together and my senior class projects revolved around UAVs and for the most part, the current stuff out there is little more than a step up from RC plane kits. Sure there's a big emphasis on them, but there's really no innovating going on in that part of the field. Yes, it is a lot better to replace a UAV than a pilot, but is it a lot better to replace a UAV than a Cruise missile? Which is the direction UAVs are headed in.

erm, I don't suppose we could get back to bike frame testing could we ?

That is the stuff my brother is working on, refining the UAV to make it more self autonomous. He was telling me last week that they now can make them take off, fly a search pattern and land on their own. They are also working on AI programming so the drone itself can look for suspicious activity and ask for instructions.

I would love to try and persuade him to help design me an aero TT frame, but I think BAE systems might get pissed off about someone using their multimillion dollar aerodynamics program to design bike frames. I also lack the technological expertise to make one in any case.

Hey Bryce

With all the new computer software and finite analysis I don’t think they need to go to the wind tunnel anymore, they can put the frame through any wind direction or yah they want to on there computer.

Dan…

CFD (computational fluid dynamics) is what Trek were using for Lance's TTX for last years tour. I wonder what Gerards take on CFD is ?

In reference to the Scott Plasma LTD, and others like it, how the hell do you put on the seat post a profil design aqua rack or similar? The bottle holders on the down tube and seat tube are not exactly air profile effecient!!!

Anyways, it's the "machine" riding the bike that makes the difference...

JRC

CFD is a good tool to check one's predictions about certain shapes, but it's hardly something one should use to actually design something. You can model something totally in CFD and then take it to the windtunnel where the results will be completely different. Plus, if you put everything into making the frame aerodynamic, what happens if you end up with a noodle-ly bike?

Plane and car manufacturers usually make a number of models and test them to see how they compare. I think it would be interesting to know how many manufacturers actually try a bunch of shapes to see what works best. Of course when you put a rider on the bike that changes things dramatically. I have heard about some riders doing better with bottles on the seat or downtubes, some doing better with a camelback or a different kind of skinsuit. I wonder it the Trek TTX, as good as a frame as it undoubtedly is, is going to benefit you as much as if you are exactly the same height and size as Lance and riding in the same position as I am sure they built it specifically for his requirements.

[reply]CFD (computational fluid dynamics) is what Trek were using for Lance's TTX for last years tour. I wonder what Gerards take on CFD is ?[/reply]

My brother (the rocket scientist) uses CFD programs in daily work on turbine blades. His comment on it when I asked him sometime last year was that CFD programs are great when properly applied. It's easy to hose things pretty substantially if you don't set boundaries correctly, etc. His take on bike-specific stuff is that it's fine for tuning edges and radii of tubes and joints and things, but it's extraordinarily difficult to properly model a *person* on top of the bike with rotating legs, etc. This part of it can cause bizarre effects in the real world that are not easily modeled. Just look at the huge argument about bladed vs round seatposts. Depending on chord depth, thickness, position versus the thighs, etc. you could get different answers as to what was best.

In summary, it's a useful tool but can't eliminate real world tunnel testing. Granted an additional 0.02lb of drag isn't quite the same as destroying a blade on a turbojet or shredding a nozzle on a SCRAMJET at mach 10...but you get the idea. If NASA can't get this sorta stuff right on a regular basis don't expect a mechie getting paid $100k a year to get it right on a bike frame.

---

---