Airplane Pilot's As Physicists

Le Chaud Lapin wrote in
ups.com:

On Oct 9, 4:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
I don't understand the subject of the post. "Airplane Pilot's" what?
Why are you using a possessive noun here?

-Robert

Typo.


idiot.


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Le Chaud Lapin writes:

Even though this (new) thread is not about what causes a wing to lift,
I just wanted to say for the record that I agree with this answer,
that it is both AoA and curvature of the wing.

It's just AOA.

Nope.

There goes my Lapin = MX theory. Apologies to Chaud are probably in order.
(I probably apologize?)

-c

Mxsmanic wrote:
Le Chaud Lapin writes:

If you read carefully, the premise of what they are saying is that, if
you have, for example, a sealed jar with air in it, you are permitted
to consider the air on the _inside_ of the jar, pushing up on the lid
as contributing to a force to lift the jar off the ground, but you are
not allowed to consider the air on the _inside_ of the jar, pushing
down on the jar un the upper surface of the bottom of the jar.

The atmosphere is not a sealed jar. The source of air pressure in the
atmosphere is gravity, not confinement and kinetic energy.

I feel as though I am in the presence of
genius.....

"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote in message
ups.com...

My initial assertion was that the experts were not in agreement about
causes lift. Many posters said that I was wrong, that there was total
agreement, that I was mistaken.

Who said there was "total agreement"? Try to be scientifically exact here.
Can you?

...in a pilots' forum. What in hell kind of response did you possibly
expect?

A little bit more focus on the physics, a loss less focus on the poster.

If you expect pilots and aircraft professionals to take time to indulge your
theories, you will learn to treat them with respect or you will take your
lumps. Nobody's obligated whatsoever to focus on your physics or to treat
you whatever manner you prefer regarldess of how you present yourself.

And with regard to the demonstration I presented in my original post, I
was expecting at least one pilot to give a correct explanation why the
lower paper is lifted off the ground, and not only has anyone given a
correct explanation, but no one has given any explanation at
all.

Imagine that. Even the flight instructors are ignoring you. See my
previous statement.

-c

"Gatt" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Le Chaud Lapin writes:

Even though this (new) thread is not about what causes a wing to
lift, I just wanted to say for the record that I agree with this
answer, that it is both AoA and curvature of the wing.

It's just AOA.

Nope.

There goes my Lapin = MX theory. Apologies to Chaud are probably in
order. (I probably apologize?)

-c



Why, cuz they're adopting different arguments?


nah, standard sock tactic. If his creation looked too much like himself
it'd be too obvious.


Bertie

Jim Stewart wrote in news:4-
:

Mxsmanic wrote:
Le Chaud Lapin writes:

If you read carefully, the premise of what they are saying is that, if
you have, for example, a sealed jar with air in it, you are permitted
to consider the air on the _inside_ of the jar, pushing up on the lid
as contributing to a force to lift the jar off the ground, but you are
not allowed to consider the air on the _inside_ of the jar, pushing
down on the jar un the upper surface of the bottom of the jar.

The atmosphere is not a sealed jar. The source of air pressure in the
atmosphere is gravity, not confinement and kinetic energy.

I feel as though I am in the presence of
genius.....


Take a tums, it'll get better


Bertie

Jim Logajan writes:

Then why does lift increase even though the AOA is fixed as a plane nears
the ground? (a.k.a. Ground effect.)

Ground effect, as the name implies, is a consequence of the interaction
between an airfoil and a moving ground plane, and not of the airfoil alone.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
I don't understand the subject of the post. "Airplane Pilot's" what?
Why are you using a possessive noun here?

....but not "physicists" which ends with the same two letters.

Science and engineering require precision and attention to detail. I was a
little surprised too. When you're defending the accuracy of your statements
it helps if you look like you have your poop in a group.

-c

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Jim Logajan writes:

Then why does lift increase even though the AOA is fixed as a plane
nears the ground? (a.k.a. Ground effect.)

Ground effect, as the name implies, is a consequence of the
interaction between an airfoil and a moving ground plane, and not of
the airfoil alone.


Awe inspiring.



Fjukkwit.


Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Gatt" wrote in

There goes my Lapin = MX theory. Apologies to Chaud are probably in
order. (I probably apologize?)

nah, standard sock tactic. If his creation looked too much like himself
it'd be too obvious.

Ah, unfortunately I'm not up on sock tactics.

-c