Question to Mxmanic

"Rip" wrote in message
et...
Judah, one of his problems is that he fixates on insufficient information,
and then gets frustrated when his assumptions are incorrect. Obviously, MX
can only concieve of downwash generated by the wings as they create lift.
Apparently, he can't concieve of the UPWASH created by the tail surfaces
pushing DOWN, nor the potential for interaction between the two, or other
turbulence that may be created in the air mass merely because a large
object is plowing through it at a high rate of speed.

Rip

Or that the wake of a Cessna 150 might not sink as fast as the wake of a
fully loaded 747...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Rip wrote in news:AIvUh.10078$YL5.3718
@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

Judah, one of his problems is that he fixates on insufficient
information, and then gets frustrated when his assumptions are
incorrect.

He doesn't get frustrated. He simply denies the possibility that he is wrong
by changing the scope of the original question so he can claim he was right
all along. His ego simply won't allow him to be wrong.

It's like a disease.

Obviously, MX can only concieve of downwash generated by the
wings as they create lift. Apparently, he can't concieve of the UPWASH
created by the tail surfaces pushing DOWN, nor the potential for
interaction between the two, or other turbulence that may be created in
the air mass merely because a large object is plowing through it at a
high rate of speed.

I didn't think of this myself, but it certainly makes sense to me. I suspect
it will make sense to MX too, and then he will try to convince us all that
this doesn't qualify as Wake Turbulence or that he was only referring to
downwash from the wings to begin with or some other change in the scope of
his comments to make him right (at least in his own mind).

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in message
news:WvWdnUKzmpUiF7_bnZ2dnUVZ_rOqnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
"Rip" wrote in message
et...
Judah, one of his problems is that he fixates on insufficient
information,
and then gets frustrated when his assumptions are incorrect. Obviously,
MX
can only concieve of downwash generated by the wings as they create
lift.
Apparently, he can't concieve of the UPWASH created by the tail surfaces
pushing DOWN, nor the potential for interaction between the two, or
other
turbulence that may be created in the air mass merely because a large
object is plowing through it at a high rate of speed.

Rip

Or that the wake of a Cessna 150 might not sink as fast as the wake of a
fully loaded 747...

--
Or that the tip vortices might be called that for a reason, or the effects
that might have, etc. ad infinitum.

Peter

On 4/15/2007 1:35 PM Judah jumped down, turned around, and wrote:

It's like a disease.

A disease ... or a syndrome?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome
http://www.aspergers.com/

It's a puzzlement.
--
dgs

"d.g.s." wrote in news:58fm5hF2fkop4U1
@mid.individual.net:

On 4/15/2007 1:35 PM Judah jumped down, turned around, and wrote:

It's like a disease.

A disease ... or a syndrome?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome
http://www.aspergers.com/

It's a puzzlement.

Tough to say. I think he's closer to Schizophrenia than Aspergers, but I'm
not a doctor.

For one thing, Aspergers subjects focus on a specific activity to the
exclusion of other activities. Manic, on the other hand, has demonstrated
that he can haunt several differently themed newsgroups besides just Aviation
- including Travel, Photography, and Technology newsgroups.

No, I don't think he's got Aspergers.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Judah writes:

What is the wingspan of the aircraft?

The wingspan shouldn't matter.

Altimeters make this less likely than you might believe. Perhaps you are the
one that doesn't realize something. As you admit below, you didn't put much
thought into your determination.

To convince me, I need an explanation of why wakes descend universally except
by some magic exception when someone is doing a 360-degree turn.

Perhaps you are not considering all the causes of turbulence that follow
an aircraft (in it's wake)?

Cheers MarkC

Rip wrote:
Judah, one of his problems is that he fixates on insufficient
information, and then gets frustrated when his assumptions are
incorrect. Obviously, MX can only concieve of downwash generated by the
wings as they create lift. Apparently, he can't concieve of the UPWASH
created by the tail surfaces pushing DOWN, nor the potential for
interaction between the two, or other turbulence that may be created in
the air mass merely because a large object is plowing through it at a
high rate of speed.

Rip
BINGO!

Cheers MarkC

DR writes:

Perhaps you are not considering all the causes of turbulence that follow
an aircraft (in it's wake)?

Perhaps others are not considering all the causes of turbulence besides
aircraft wakes.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
DR writes:

Perhaps you are not considering all the causes of turbulence that follow
an aircraft (in it's wake)?

Perhaps others are not considering all the causes of turbulence besides
aircraft wakes.

You do a 360 and run into a bump when, and only when, you complete
the 360.

Invisible UFO's crossing at your exact starting point?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

You do a 360 and run into a bump when, and only when, you complete
the 360.

Or you run into bumps but only notice the one that you hit when you complete
the 360.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.