Comments on: Scientists Glean Secrets of Flight From Birds, Bats, and Bugs http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/ 80beats is DISCOVER's news aggregator, weaving together the choicest tidbits from the best articles covering the day\'s most compelling topics. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:16:34 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: John Mitchell http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-45039 John Mitchell Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:12:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-45039 Nature has a rotating wing in the form of the Maple Key or Sycamore Seed and what's interesting about that is that if a Maple Key is overlaid on a Fly's wing they are fundamentally the same in profile and in design. Nature has a rotating wing in the form of the Maple Key or Sycamore Seed and what’s interesting about that is that if a Maple Key is overlaid on a Fly’s wing they are fundamentally the same in profile and in design.

]]> By: kiflom http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23608 kiflom Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:33:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23608 this website is helpful for engineers this website is helpful for engineers

]]> By: R http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23483 R Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:13:04 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23483 The bacterial flagellum and its rotary propulsion comes to mind (although it's obviously not used for flight). http://www.nature.com/nrmicro/journal/v4/n10/box/nrmicro1493_BX1.html I hope they continue pursuing rotary flight, it may someday enable human flight... The bacterial flagellum and its rotary propulsion comes to mind (although it’s obviously not used for flight). http://www.nature.com/nrmicro/journal/v4/n10/box/nrmicro1493_BX1.html

I hope they continue pursuing rotary flight, it may someday enable human flight…

]]> By: FILTHpig http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23461 FILTHpig Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:29:34 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23461 I wish I evolved a rotery blade on my back. It'd make my commute so much easier. I wish I evolved a rotery blade on my back. It’d make my commute so much easier.

]]> By: Matt Tarditti http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23458 Matt Tarditti Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:13:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23458 Amphiox, I wondered the same thing. However, to exploit your logic, think about the analogous wheel vs. walking. Nature never created a wheeled animal, but obviously a wheeled robot (Roomba) is much easier to control than a walking one (Asimo). Nature doesn't seem to go for easier to control - I would think energy conservation would be the guiding principle. As such, a FW is much more efficient (I think?) than a RW. But the trade off in control scheme for a mechanical FW is a tough hurdle. Amphiox, I wondered the same thing. However, to exploit your logic, think about the analogous wheel vs. walking. Nature never created a wheeled animal, but obviously a wheeled robot (Roomba) is much easier to control than a walking one (Asimo).
Nature doesn’t seem to go for easier to control – I would think energy conservation would be the guiding principle. As such, a FW is much more efficient (I think?) than a RW. But the trade off in control scheme for a mechanical FW is a tough hurdle.

]]> By: Kin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23448 Kin Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:57:51 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23448 Amphiox. It's called an axle. Hard to make of flesh. Especially, because it has to be a useful apendenge for millions of years before it becomes more and more rotar like. Plus, the very system of muscles would be different. Perhaps you could have the standard muscle contraction that would give it, the independent axis of the rotary blade, a push along the side, but I don't see it being efficient. Amphiox. It’s called an axle. Hard to make of flesh. Especially, because it has to be a useful apendenge for millions of years before it becomes more and more rotar like.

Plus, the very system of muscles would be different. Perhaps you could have the standard muscle contraction that would give it, the independent axis of the rotary blade, a push along the side, but I don’t see it being efficient.

]]> By: amphiox http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23441 amphiox Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:16:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23441 It is interesting, I think, to speculate as to why there are no rotary wing organisms in nature. Four times, powered flight evolved independently and all four times flapping wing systems evolved. If RW aircraft are easier to control than FW aircraft, then why wasn't this advantage ever exploited in nature? What were the contingencies that prevented the evolution of rotating wings? It is interesting, I think, to speculate as to why there are no rotary wing organisms in nature. Four times, powered flight evolved independently and all four times flapping wing systems evolved. If RW aircraft are easier to control than FW aircraft, then why wasn’t this advantage ever exploited in nature? What were the contingencies that prevented the evolution of rotating wings?

]]> By: Nick http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23372 Nick Fri, 10 Apr 2009 06:12:02 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23372 Pffft. Dune-style ornithopters, here we come! Pffft.

Dune-style ornithopters, here we come!

]]> By: Matt Tarditti http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/comment-page-1/#comment-23256 Matt Tarditti Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:48:26 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/04/09/scientists-glean-secrets-of-flight-from-birds-bats-and-bugs/#comment-23256 A more appropriate comparison would be a rotary wing aircraft (helicopter) vs. a flapping-wing aircraft. A flapping wing is used for lift, manuvering, and propulsion, just like a rotary wing. A fixed wing has no propulsive properties. Comparing a rotary wing (RW) and a flapping wing (FW): BOTH can operate in small areas. And (here's my main contention with the article above) an RW aircraft would be MUCH easier to control than an FW aircraft. The dynamics of a flapping wing are much harder to model than a helicopter blade, which means the control system must be more sophisticated. In short: don't hold your breath for flapping wing aircraft A more appropriate comparison would be a rotary wing aircraft (helicopter) vs. a flapping-wing aircraft. A flapping wing is used for lift, manuvering, and propulsion, just like a rotary wing. A fixed wing has no propulsive properties.

Comparing a rotary wing (RW) and a flapping wing (FW): BOTH can operate in small areas. And (here’s my main contention with the article above) an RW aircraft would be MUCH easier to control than an FW aircraft. The dynamics of a flapping wing are much harder to model than a helicopter blade, which means the control system must be more sophisticated.

In short: don’t hold your breath for flapping wing aircraft

]]>