steve auvache

OH- wrote
>
>"Harvey" <contact@genesplice.nomailremove.org> wrote in
>news:1aqk60h8h387964ej5qctj99q3jodi5pbn@4ax.com.. .
>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:09:35 +0100, steve auvache
>> <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >Pete Melbourne wrote
>> >>On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:52:20 +0100, Champ <neal@champ.org.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>I'd say so, yes. Wind resistance increases as the square of speed, so
>> >>>to double speed you need quadruple the horsepower. Someone who can be
>> >>>bothered to do the sums will work out the %age power increase required
>> >>>to go from 206 to 216mph.
>>
>> No... wind resistance varies with square of speed, but power required
>> to maintain that speed is a product of wind resistance and drag, so
>> that varies with the cube of speed.
>
>I don't really get that. Drag is, as far as I know, usually another name for
>wind resistance. As this is obviously not what is meant above, I guess
>that it stands for rolling resistance.
>
>If so, total resistance would (grossly oversimplified)(1) be the sum, not
>the product, of these. Something like a*V^2 + b*V. With even more
>errors, one can assume that the a*V^2 part (wind resistance) is
>dominant at 200 km/h and that power at these speeds is proportional
>to the square of speed. Any way, not a V^3 in sight. Or ?

do the sums roughly like and add a bit for luck.


--
steve auvache