On Apr 26, 11:18 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Apr 27, 3:31 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

WingFlaps wrote :

On Apr 26, 12:58 pm, Michael Ash wrote:

Actually, though I'm too lazy to go look it up, in your original post I
also got the impression that you were talking about having to accelerate
with the wind.. Much as I hate to agree with the clockwork ****. ( Stefan)

Yes, I was and that was the point. You do have to accelerate and it
does cost some energy -but the cost is not due to the change in ground
speed (I never mentioned the change in ground speed you will note).
What is interesting is how quickly people grabbed the idea
incorrectly, and how willling they were to strut their limited
understanding without giving some careful thought as to what might be
going on.

Lots of people had the impression you were talking about the
dreaded downwind turn, with all the talk about the energy required to
accelerate to maintain airspeed. The energy required, as pointed out
in a much earlier post with several very good references, is so tiny
that it's not worth fooling with at all. Other factors, such as the
increase in stall speed that comes with a turn, along with the
increased drag that costs altitude if the speed is kept up, along with
the lack of practice, along with the sweaty-palms fear that make
accurate judgement all but impossible, along with the normal desire to
avoid breaking the airplane at *any* cost hence the reason for turning
around even when there's nothing but small trees ahead, are going to
end up in disaster in many cases.

Dan