Ya know what, CJ? I kinda, sorta, agree with you - somewhat! That powered
parachute discussion made my brain hurt, though.

Cheers!


"CJ" wrote in message
...
Thanks for pointing out the flaw in my example Dan! You're right in that
the example I gave stated lift acting rearwards which in sustained flight
is incorrect. Whilst the aerodynamic force acts rearwards, the resolved
component of lift does indeed angle slightly forward, effectively, at the
glide angle. Where we seem to disagree (after agreeing that weight always
acts towards the centre of the earth) is that weight can be resolved into
two components. The component that opposes lift and the 'forwards
component' that opposes drag.

Figure 2-15 at http://avstop.com/ac/power_parachute/chapter2_7.html
refers.
Where "WD" is the "forward component of weight" that I'm speaking of.
Not being able to draw here, I'm stuck using the works others - sorry!


CJ
B3

**reader not quoting properly; text below for context**
Sorry, CJ, but when pitched nose up with the lift vector aft, you can't
maintain a constant speed (without an engine) since the horizontal
component of your lift vector is directed aft hence the glider slows down.
That is accelerated flight, though a negative acceleration (rate of change
of velocity with respect to time = acceleration). Keep this up and you
will
stall.
The 'forward point force' in your example is rearward and amounts to drag
rather than thrust. The weight vector is always towards the center of the
earth.

"CJ" wrote in message
...

Waveguru wrote:
A rock has air and gravity when you drop it, but does not move forward
through the air. Our wings provide our thrust to move us horizontally.
Boggs

A rock doesn't fall in equilibrium (until terminal velocity at least) and
it's forces operate in only one plane - the vertical. Can we compare
apples
with apples please?

If you have sound reasoning to offer and preferably, a vector diagram, I'm
all ears.

CJ
B3