Question from the uneducated peanut gallery: For boat propulsion, what would drive the preference toward either a (or two opposing) stiff high aspect wing, or a flexing unit like a diver's monofin? I was thinking that some of the efficiency gain from a monofin over two fins (used as a monofin) might be due to the longer span that it enables - so why has it not evolved to even higher AR (looks like the high performance models are approx square or atleast very low AR) - and would it be feasible to try and construct a diving fin with a rigid, high AR foil section like a NACA 0010 or whatever?
Kjell mentioned that humans can't kick fast enough to benefit from it - but I don't understand why. The slower crafts (planes, boats) usually benefits from a large span.
Another thing I don't quite get, is that the propulsive area of slow fish are usually bigger than on the very fast fish, in opposite to diving fins. As was mentioned, maybe acceleration and agility has something to do with slow fishes' preference for a large area, but acceleration is not a high priority in many of the watersports where large high speed fins are used.
I have read about the mirage drive that it is less exhausting to use at cruising speed than a kayak oar (it utilises bigger muscles so this isn't a surprise), but that the top speed is less. So why is that? Too large area? Too much flex? Is lack of torsional stiffness in the wings the only thing that sets the AoA in the mirage?
Is the turning point of fins a large loss source, so that amplitude is preferrable to frequency for efficiency? I have read something about insect flying, and there seems to be all sorts of odd, complicated things going on, one of them being the utilisation of vortices to increase lift if I remember correctly - especially the smallest insects I think. Is this relevant to any fish, or manmade oscillating propulsion?