Bugs and flight was Re: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale

> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:13:45 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:

The Bumble bee supposedly was 'proven' by an engineer to be incapable of
flight until another (smarter) Engineer examined the Bumble bee not as an
airplane but a 'helicopter' model. At least that is the urban myth I was
taught... <grin>

Gracias,

> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 11:14:49PM -0500, Glenn M Wilson wrote:

Pretty much - if you try to analyse it as a fixed-wing vehicle, it
doesn't work. Then again, anyone who's _seen_ a bumblebee could tell you
it isn't a fixed-wing vehicle...

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:54:45 +0000 Roger Burton West
> <roger@firedrake.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 11:14:49PM -0500, Glenn M Wilson wrote:

> Pretty much - if you try to analyse it as a fixed-wing vehicle, it

References, citations, etc., please! I want to see the "proof" of this.
Frankly, after years of fruitless searching, I'm of the opinion that there
never was such an analysis, and the whole thing was thought up by
neo-Luddites to discredit "scientists" (Glenn's mention of engineers
is the first time I've heard of the profession being involved in this).

Phil
----

> Glenn M Wilson wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:13:45 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:

The bumblebee cannot fly if it has two pairs of wings (which it does), but
could fly if it only had one pair of wings with the combined area of its two
pairs of wings. Close examination of the bumblebee's wings shows that the
leading edge of the rear pair has a zipperlike set of structures that mates to
a similar set of structures on the trailing edge of the forward wings. Voila!
Bumblebees knew all along that they could never fly if they were as