Replies

I will differ with you: I am a Mechanical Engineer and I have worked on aircraft testing: the L-1011 Airliner and the S-3A Viking. With both aircaft, 1/10 scale precision models were used for detailed aerodynamic testing in the wind tunnels. Since then, computer modeling gives better defined parameters but there is no substitute for flying to get accurate test results.

The Canadians used a reduced scale model of their CF-105 Arrow and fired it into the upper atmosphere on a rocket to get their supersonic flight data (and they're still searching for it at the bottom of the lake it fell into, since it is one of the only remaining bits of their beloved Arrow program).

The Grumman X-29 was built to test the concept of using a forward-swept wing for high maneuverability and relied on three redundant computers to keep it within its flight envelope (i.e., not crash) it was reasonably successful, but only the Russian Sukhoi Su-47 seem to have used that design.

A reduced scale model will refine and develop the initial concept and allow them to go to the next steps before building a full-scale version. Any idiot that wants to go to a full-scale passenger-carrying prototype without several testing steps in between is asking for disaster.