On 2/28/2015 4:48 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 22:02:08 -0800, mmartin46 wrote:

I've been flying airplanes professionally for close to forty years and
sailplanes for fun. I spend a lot of time looking at the wing trying to
understand how it works. In the end, I conclude it's all magic. I
kinda like that.

I've never forgotten one cloudy day with a low overcast. I was in a car,
driving away from Heathrow toward Chobham Common, which put us directly
under the approach to Heathrow, when a 747 dropped out of the overcast on
finals. For a few seconds it was heading for us, grabbing the bottom of
the cloud and flinging it at the ground: it was like watching a waterfall
beneath its wing.

That sight made me realise two things: that a 747 really does weigh a
couple hundred tons and that the reaction from deflecting that huge mass
of air downward has more than a little to do with keeping it in the air.


Agreed...and for the sake of pub discussions, I think it's entirely
sufficient. Where the explanation quickly becomes complex is when we attempt
to mathematically analyze lift, because so far no single approach numerically
addresses lift creation's entire problem. Bernoulli and Coanda are probably
the most commonly known "incomplete applications" among the pub set; both are
concisely eviscerated (more accurately, bounded) by Dr. McLean in his
conceptual assessment of each's ability to address the physical situation.
Anyhow, fun to contemplate for those so afflicted...

Bob W.