Airplane Pilot's As Physicists

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The essential feature of an airfoil is that it twists the flow of air as
it
passes (or as the airfoil passes through still air, which is equivalent,
and
that's how it works in airplanes). The air is accelerated downward, and
this
engenders an equal and opposite force that is lift.

Nope. That wouldn't explain how wing sections for tailless planes work. The
sections for those curve up towards the trailing edge. The leading edge
produces lift but the trailing edge produces a _downward_ force to counter
the pitching moment. Example section...

http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedae...image13_43.gif

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Gatt writes:

The day the physics guys were passing out good wing designs, the
aerospace
designers were all out drinking beer, which is why every airplane since
the
Wright flyer has camber when they could have just used flat plywood.

Some wings do not have camber. Anyway, the purpose of the curve is to
reduce
drag and increase the stall angle, not to produce lift.

That's simply not correct. Explain why sections for tailless aircraft curve
both ways then.

http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedae...image13_43.gif

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
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.

How come most wing sections still produce lift at ZERO degrees AOA?..

Why do slow flying aircraft such as gliders have wing sections with more
camber than fast jets?

Thank the lord that most of the lists I follow are moderated, and
unlike this one do not have this endless baloney going on...

"CWatters" wrote in
:


"Le Chaud Lapin" wrote in message
ps.com...
I am trying to convince them that, if there is air on the inside of
the wing, it pushes against all sides of the inside of the wing,
including both top underside and bottom overside, and thereby
nullifying any effect it would have on the wing.

Correct.

Except that he is not trying to convince "them" of anything.

One guy used the air inthe ing thing as an analogy and wannabe troll boi
here is trying to make hay of it.



Bertie

"CWatters" wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The essential feature of an airfoil is that it twists the flow of
air as
it
passes (or as the airfoil passes through still air, which is
equivalent,
and
that's how it works in airplanes). The air is accelerated downward,
and
this
engenders an equal and opposite force that is lift.

Nope. That wouldn't explain how wing sections for tailless planes
work. The sections for those curve up towards the trailing edge. The
leading edge produces lift but the trailing edge produces a _downward_
force to counter the pitching moment. Example section...

http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedae...mages/image13_
43.
gif





Good point.

The porblem with this guy is (and it's just one guy with a handful of
sockpuppets) is that he ses some discrepencies in how bernoulli is
explained and has concluded that it must be incorrect since there is
"disagreement amongst the experts"

A good analogy here would be the eeedjit creationists who grasp at the
straws presented by the minor scuffles occuring within the evolutionary
sciences.


Bertie

"CWatters" wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
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.

How come most wing sections still produce lift at ZERO degrees AOA?..

that is a fact..



Why do slow flying aircraft such as gliders have wing sections with
more
camber than fast jets?




Ooooh oooh! let me try.

It's because they have to have thicker wings because their spars are
longer and need more stregth,

or it's because the fast ones are made out of meta and are stronger and
their wings don't have to be as thick.

OR

The lift gremlins that hold up gliders don't get as much exercise and
therefore are fatter and need more room.



Or they just fodo it to make 'em look faster. Same reason they sweep the
wings and tail, cuz it makes 'em look kewl!


Bertie

Denny, this newsgroup is pretty effectively moderated by Bertie. The
Dudley man does a good job too.

For some of us, even like me mostly trained in the soft sciences, it's
amusing to listen to the wannabe pilots and alleged engineers offer
theories of flight, fluid dynamics, and so on.

It would appear they wouldn't recognize a partial differential
equation if one bit them on the ankle.

Over in the alt.physics group the same class of posters like to
discuss relativity and the message content indicates the relativity
most often at play is inbreeding between family members.

There's a pathology at work with them. It used to be said, with
tongue only partially in cheek, that if you wanted to learn of a
person's character play a round of golf with him (or her). I wish
potential employers would have access to the unsernet postings of
candidates: what a way to screen! Employee turnover would be greatly
reduced. Said differently, if an employer knew of Anthony's postings
and read a little that he wrote, he'd conclude the chances are Anthony
is not likely to be effective in working with others.

Le Chaud presents himself as having a sophmore like mentality -- a
wise fool. Think of a know it all teenager, with little experience,
knowing everything. Those are people who are bad risks as employees,
but whose postings are sometimes fun to read.

And then there are most of us, who go out to our airplane, and
actually fly. That's our reality. Mx needs a gallon's value of avgas
to buy his next meal, and our airplane (it just gets pulled around by
an IO360) uses his weekly food allowance in 90 minutes if we lean it
correctly.

It would seem some dogs like to get kicked.

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"CWatters" wrote in
:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The essential feature of an airfoil is that it twists the flow of
air as
it
passes (or as the airfoil passes through still air, which is
equivalent,
and
that's how it works in airplanes). The air is accelerated downward,
and
this
engenders an equal and opposite force that is lift.
Nope. That wouldn't explain how wing sections for tailless planes
work. The sections for those curve up towards the trailing edge. The
leading edge produces lift but the trailing edge produces a _downward_
force to counter the pitching moment. Example section...

http://www.desktopaero.com/appliedae...mages/image13_
43.
gif





Good point.

The porblem with this guy is (and it's just one guy with a handful of
sockpuppets) is that he ses some discrepencies in how bernoulli is
explained and has concluded that it must be incorrect since there is
"disagreement amongst the experts"

A good analogy here would be the eeedjit creationists who grasp at the
straws presented by the minor scuffles occuring within the evolutionary
sciences.


Bertie

This is exactly how I see this as well. This character and his puppets
are playing out a conversation with themselves (one person) designed to
capitalize on the few simple misconceptions concerning Bernoulli that
are common knowledge among the professional aviation community and have
been "corrected" years ago.
Unfortunately for this forum, there are still a few old textbooks
hanging around out there reflecting these misconceptions. This, coupled
with the fact that there are individual pilots out here (from the GA
community mostly) who apparently lack the formal physics knowledge to
take on someone whose sole intent is to discredit them by cleverly using
the remaining confusion in the community concerning Bernoulli against them.
The REAL rub in this situation is that the idiot doing this, from what I
have seen in his posting, has very little knowledge HIMSELF about the
lift issue and is totally wrong in critical areas of his argument.
It's an unfortunate situation designed by a person who seems to pleasure
himself by what he's doing.
Personally I wouldn't give this idiot the time of day. His understanding
of Bernoulli is much worse than those with whom he has engaged. Those
who are on to him he avoids, only taking glancing shots at them knowing
he won't be answered directly.
It's a shame really....but what the hell, it's Usenet!!
:-)))

--
Dudley Henriques

wrote in news:1192021318.554579.287500
@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

Denny, this newsgroup is pretty effectively moderated by Bertie. The
Dudley man does a good job too.

For some of us, even like me mostly trained in the soft sciences, it's
amusing to listen to the wannabe pilots and alleged engineers offer
theories of flight, fluid dynamics, and so on.

It would appear they wouldn't recognize a partial differential
equation if one bit them on the ankle.

Over in the alt.physics group the same class of posters like to
discuss relativity and the message content indicates the relativity
most often at play is inbreeding between family members.

There's a pathology at work with them. It used to be said, with
tongue only partially in cheek, that if you wanted to learn of a
person's character play a round of golf with him (or her). I wish
potential employers would have access to the unsernet postings of
candidates: what a way to screen! Employee turnover would be greatly
reduced. Said differently, if an employer knew of Anthony's postings
and read a little that he wrote, he'd conclude the chances are Anthony
is not likely to be effective in working with others.


I don't think that that would be much of a sruprise to them.



Le Chaud presents himself as having a sophmore like mentality -- a
wise fool. Think of a know it all teenager, with little experience,
knowing everything. Those are people who are bad risks as employees,
but whose postings are sometimes fun to read.


He's a sockpuppet. A creation.

And then there are most of us, who go out to our airplane, and
actually fly. That's our reality. Mx needs a gallon's value of avgas
to buy his next meal, and our airplane (it just gets pulled around by
an IO360) uses his weekly food allowance in 90 minutes if we lean it
correctly.

It would seem some dogs like to get kicked.



It's what i live for.


Bertie