Snow in Rancho Cucamonga? (Innova Blizzard Technology)

[JHern]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

 

[steve a]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

^Post that on dgcr^

 

[JHern]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

^Post that on dgcr^

Why? It would only be lost in a virtual sea of posts spouting total BS and nonsense, more banter than substance. Who has the time to read through all that garbage to find the nuggets?

 

[rehder]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

and you would think that its also easier to accelerate a disc with lower mass, since the energy required to accelerate it to X speed is lower when compared to a heavier disc.
(Im no physics buff, but as far as I remember from long ago, this should hold true)

 

[jubuttib]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

and you would think that its also easier to accelerate a disc with lower mass, since the energy required to accelerate it to X speed is lower when compared to a heavier disc.
(Im no physics buff, but as far as I remember from long ago, this should hold true)

Yep, and air resistance/wind will also slow it down and affect it more.

 

[JHern]

Light discs are just easier to get up to cruising speed and as someone said usually mold up differently (lpl)

The force that the air exerts on a disc in flight depends only on its shape (plus speed and angle of attack), not its mass. This is a fundamental theorem of aerodynamics.

However, the rate of turn (either direction) will be faster for a lighter disc, since it has a smaller moment of inertia.

and you would think that its also easier to accelerate a disc with lower mass, since the energy required to accelerate it to X speed is lower when compared to a heavier disc.
(Im no physics buff, but as far as I remember from long ago, this should hold true)

Yep, and air resistance/wind will also slow it down and affect it more.

FYI, I wasn't disagreeing with what Jesse said...just adding onto it.

As Jesse said, since it's lighter, it is easier to get moving faster than a heavier disc. This is because it has less mass, and hence less inertia. But there are limits to this statement. For example, speed saturates as the disc reaches the zero mass limit. Reducing mass cannot help increase your arm/wrist speed more than having no disc at all. So the degree to which changes in mass help you throw faster also depends on the mass (i.e., non-linear).

What Jesse said about lighter weights having different shapes (molding up differently) is also true for many mold-plastic combinations. And I've seen lighter discs turn out more over-stable in some mold-plastic combinations (e.g., Star Classic Roc), so the manner of change in flight properties is not necessarily the same in each case.

 

[JR]

Erm being not even a diletant in physics i have a question on that. I read through wikipedia result for parasitic drag and all the hyperlinks in all the resulting pages and man things get complicated, when you move beyond basic Bernoulli principle, which does not seem to work for gases, more accurate for liquids. And yes the old mantra of liquids and gases being both the same in fluid dynamics does not hold true in aerodynamics. thoughts? I am wondering it the bubbles change the shape of the disc and the surface. If there are changes i wonder about parasitic drag changes and real world inplications. I guess nobody knows before we get flight time on these.

 

[JHern]

Erm being not even a diletant in physics i have a question on that. I read through wikipedia result for parasitic drag and all the hyperlinks in all the resulting pages and man things get complicated, when you move beyond basic Bernoulli principle, which does not seem to work for gases, more accurate for liquids. And yes the old mantra of liquids and gases being both the same in fluid dynamics does not hold true in aerodynamics. thoughts? I am wondering it the bubbles change the shape of the disc and the surface. If there are changes i wonder about parasitic drag changes and real world inplications. I guess nobody knows before we get flight time on these.

"Parasitic drag" is exactly what I mean when I say that the forces acting on a disc in flight depend only on its shape, both at large (form drag) and small (skin friction drag) scales.

Air vs water is a question of which dynamical regime you're talking about. Bernoulli's principle works for incompressible fluids with negligible viscosity. In air, in this condition is satisfied only at speeds much less than the speed of sound. Once you approach the speed of sound, the compressibility of air becomes important, and since air is vastly more compressible than water, differences arise. Above the speed of sound the dominant forces are in the shock wave. In water, on the other hand, under extreme flow conditions you can get different effects such as cavitation.

But the hand-thrown disc flies much slower than the speed of sound, and the assumption of incompressibility works fine. And air has a very small viscosity, you can only feel the resistance of the inertia of air, not the viscosity of it. In which case, everything works fine.

 

[Codester1011]

Any word on how these fly?

 

[booter]

i threw my buddy's destroyer he had. that thing was a damn soup bowl,soooo domey. anywho,i threw it a few times and it basically had some extra turn to it thrown with a touch of hyzer. it was seriously easy to bomb out 400+ without even trying. the glide from the uber dome is definitely noticeable. id say these things fly like a seasoned star destroyer. i wouldnt call it flippy but definitely more understable than your standard current production destroyer. its just easier to get up to speed with it being light weight. one thing i noticed is that the fade is still there in the lower end of the flight so its still got LSS. i havent thrown any other molds in the light weights but the destroyer is nice and i might have to get one.

 

[JHern]

Does this mean that people will start throwing the Destroyer for distance records, instead of light DX Valkyries?

It makes sense, since the Destroyer has insane glide, but the only thing keeping if from winning in big tail-wind throws is the weight of the wing...and distance records are broken with 163-164 g discs, not 170-175 g discs.

 

[jubuttib]

Does this mean that people will start throwing the Destroyer for distance records, instead of light DX Valkyries?

It makes sense, since the Destroyer has insane glide, but the only thing keeping if from winning in big tail-wind throws is the weight of the wing...and distance records are broken with 163-164 g discs, not 170-175 g discs.

There are already many guys who throw max d with ~165g Pro and DX Destroyers, including Avery Jenkins and Jussi Meresmaa.

 

[JHern]

Does this mean that people will start throwing the Destroyer for distance records, instead of light DX Valkyries?

It makes sense, since the Destroyer has insane glide, but the only thing keeping if from winning in big tail-wind throws is the weight of the wing...and distance records are broken with 163-164 g discs, not 170-175 g discs.

There are already many guys who throw max d with ~165g Pro and DX Destroyers, including Avery Jenkins and Jussi Meresmaa.

Yes, I know those guys throw Destroyers, but the DX Valkyrie has still been the most popular. I think the right Destroyer should be able to top the Valkyrie, and getting more variety in lightweight should help.

 

[jubuttib]

Yes, I know those guys throw Destroyers, but the DX Valkyrie has still been the most popular. I think the right Destroyer should be able to top the Valkyrie, and getting more variety in lightweight should help.

Really? Looking at the stuff I can find on Big D in the Desert, only Sandström is throwing the Valkyrie, no-one else. The most used Innova discs seem to be Wraiths and Destroyers, with the occasional Roadrunner (Erin). Don't know for other competitions.

 

[Jeronimo]

It makes sense, since the Destroyer has insane glide...

Is this a quantitative or qualitative hypothesis?


edit: well wtf Ray, how do they fly?

 

[JHern]

It makes sense, since the Destroyer has insane glide...

Is this a quantitative or qualitative hypothesis?


edit: well wtf Ray, how do they fly?

Quantitative, based on my own experiments with them. In fact, I've lost 3 poppy top Pro Destroyers owing to their insane glide...they got turned over with the wind over my left shoulder, and just kept going, and going, and going, never to be seen again.

 

[Frank Delicious]

destroyers have some crazy glide.

 

[JR]

Destroyers don't glide so well even in less than max weight pro Destroyers, which are way better than the rest of the Destroyers. There are more than one newer more gliding max D disc molds out there now. Nukes, Kings, Bolts to name a few. I haven't gotten my mitts on Legacy discs, but the Rampage has received good reviews. Innova themselves make Bosses that at least in R-Pro outglide Destroyers. Vulcan is very well gliding and oh so touchy in lighter weights and not so much better at max weight either. But with insane max D line potential. They love to be thrown super high thanks to the low HSS and have reasonably little LSS. They are so fast that on high lines they are better suited to players with more power than me, but are also good for golf shots for sub 250' crowd and usable for the 300' crowd as an understable disc. Archon is slower and less gliding than the Vulcan but not bad either in glide compared to the Destroyer. Archon is like a used destroyer with less LSS.

 

[dgdave]

You're fucking crazy, JR

 

[booter]

lol the vulcan,archon and teedevil all have less glide than destroyers, wtf JR