ORIGINAL: Bundubasher
Maybe it is a question of efficiency in certain speed ranges.
Howard Hughes had an obsession with breaking the world airspeed record in the 1930's and he had his team developing fast planes. Finlly he had them to make the rivets of the H1 Racer flush with the surface and polish it to a mirror finish.
In the 1940's they were desperate to improve the performance of fighter planes and the opposite experiment was carried out in Britain on a Spitfire where they went and actually glued peas in patterns on the plane to see what difference in speed it would make. The plane was slower.
So this whole issue is not new and certainly, if there were any merit in dimples or bumps, somebody would have included it in their designs for cars and planes long time ago.
Judging by the bad share performance, all the major companies in both industries are in dire financial straights and is looking at anything to give them the cutting edge....even if it is only to mke ''green friendly '' products. Just a thought.
Bundubasher,
It's more a question of the shape. Airplanes can be shaped in such a way that they don't suffer from flow separation under most conditions. This essentially means that they aren't "blunt" on the back, as a golf ball is. Dimples, or other methods for forcing flow to turn turbulent, will generally only reduce drag if they can prevent flow from separating when it otherwise would have. Since well-designed airplanes don't have that problem, forcing turbulent transition is not helpful, at least for drag reduction. Such devices are sometimes used for other reasons on aircraft.
banktoturn