Slashdot Mirror


First Human-Powered Ornithopter

spasm writes "A University of Toronto engineering graduate student has made and successfully flown a human-powered flapping-wing aircraft. From the article: 'Todd Reichert, a PhD candidate at the university's Institute of Aerospace Studies, piloted the wing-flapping aircraft, sustaining both altitude and airspeed for 19.3 seconds and covering a distance of 145 metres at an average speed of 25.6 kilometres per hour.'"

2 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why Still Pursuing This? by GraZZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    Speaking as this guy's former roommate, one of the draws for him was that the aerodynamics and mechanics of flapping wing flight was not fully understood.

    The science here is understanding aerodynamics to the point that a human-scaled device can be built.

  2. Re:Why Still Pursuing This? by ebuck · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dude, stop propagating an urban legend originated in 1934. Nobody said that bees can't fly, they said that an airplane wing traveling at the speed of a bee can't fly. Airplane wings needed more laminar air flow to generate lift according to Bernoulli's principle, and that means more forward speed to generate the minimal air flow than a bee displays in it's forward flight.

    Then the anti-science crowd then created a misinterpretation of this famous statement to read that "according to Science, bees can't fly" so it must be "God's work." Later it was softened to "According to science, bees can't fly so we don't know everything."

    It doesn't take a lot of insight to imagine how flapping a wing can sustain slower air speeds than a fixed wing aircraft could sustain. But the original findings have been so misused, that using the quote is paramount to spreading anti-Science propaganda.