"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:bWkUe.743$626.107@trndny08...
No. In a spin, at least one wing is at least partially stalled. According
to Jepp, this "results in a loss of lift in the area of the wing where it
is
taking place."

That still does not contradict Roger's post.

IMHO, by "lift" Roger clearly meant "the force acting against gravity".
This is a fairly common (though not aerodynamically correct) definition of
"lift", and in fact is the one the Jepp training book uses (assuming it
hasn't changed much in the 15 years since I used it). That is, they have
the classic "lift, weight, thrust, drag" picture with the two pairs of
opposing arrows.

If Roger had meant by "lift", the "aerodynamic force created by the wing as
a result of relative wind" (or something similar), then he would have been
incorrect. But given that that definition makes his post incorrect, and
given that there's another widely accepted definition that does not, it
seems fair to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was using the
definition that's consistent with his post.

Now, granted, this *is* Usenet after all, and everyone seems to think it's
their job to point out why everyone else is wrong. So maybe I'm all wet in
my thinking. But that's my thinking, nonetheless.

Pete