High Wing Planes are Better Than Low Wing Planes

On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:01:17 +1200, george152 wrote:

On 5/26/2018 12:00 PM, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!


High wing is best because you can get through gates at airstrips

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
High wing planes are better if you want to look down
Low wing planes are better if you want to look up.
High wing planes are better if you need to land in scrub. - or land
on skis or floats.

Low wing planes are easier to fill wing tanks.

On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:00:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!

My initial point is that high-wing designs are inherently more stable
when moving through a dynamic atmosphere, and evolution proves it. We see
this in insects and bats as well. It's as simple as *not being top heavy*.
It's a gravitational factor.

---

wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:00:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!

My initial point is that high-wing designs are inherently more stable
when moving through a dynamic atmosphere, and evolution proves it. We see
this in insects and bats as well. It's as simple as *not being top heavy*.
It's a gravitational factor.

---

Babbling nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 1:01:04 PM UTC-4, wrote:
wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:00:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!

My initial point is that high-wing designs are inherently more stable
when moving through a dynamic atmosphere, and evolution proves it. We see
this in insects and bats as well. It's as simple as *not being top heavy*.
It's a gravitational factor.

---

Babbling nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

Says you, the anal retentive dope who debates everything and
anything with non sequitur deflections and then finally after
trolling with a litany of insults, broken chains of thought
sequences, and non-deductive deductions, eventually just results
to lying, repeating misinformation ad nauseam, and packaging
the entire mess laden with grammatical errors that a fifth
grader wouldn't make.

Stay out of airplanes asshole.

---

wrote:
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 1:01:04 PM UTC-4, wrote:
wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:00:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!

My initial point is that high-wing designs are inherently more stable
when moving through a dynamic atmosphere, and evolution proves it. We see
this in insects and bats as well. It's as simple as *not being top heavy*.
It's a gravitational factor.

---

Babbling nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

Says you, the anal retentive dope who debates everything and
anything with non sequitur deflections and then finally after
trolling with a litany of insults, broken chains of thought
sequences, and non-deductive deductions, eventually just results
to lying, repeating misinformation ad nauseam, and packaging
the entire mess laden with grammatical errors that a fifth
grader wouldn't make.

Stay out of airplanes asshole.

---

**** off and die idiot.


--
Jim Pennino

Well thank goodness commercial airlines dont use low wing planes. I wouldnt want to travel in an inherently unstable death trap. Did I mention I fly Pipers because I like them much better than Cessnas?