![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Neil Gould" wrote in message
... [...] So, in context, how is your theoretically available lift relevant? It is relevant only to your false claim that a stalled wing provides no lift. Had you not made that false claim, I would have had no reason to bring up that element of the discussion. [...] To be a scalar, it would have to lack motion, ergo no "attack". Wrong. "To be a scalar" it needs to be a single value. And it is. Angle-of-attack is just an angle. A single value. Every angle requires two reference lines in order to define that angle. That doesn't change the fact that the angle itself is a single value, without any direction component. Likewise, the fact that two reference lines (one defined by a direction of travel) are used to define angle-of-attack DOES NOT MAKE ANGLE-OF-ATTACK ITSELF A VECTOR. It's still just an angle. [...] I responded to that. In the context of landing, if one flies slowly enough to stall, one can stall "flat" relative to the ground because the decrease in forward "relative wind" increases the AOA. That is what my remark addresses. Your claim is incorrect. As long as the airplane is flying just above the ground, the relative wind is parallel to the ground. No change in the angle-of-attack will occur from any decrease in speed, not directly. My claim is that if the aircraft is flying parallel to the ground just before touch-down, it isn't stalled. That's a new claim. Your previous claim (quoted above) was that you COULD stall while flying parallel to the ground. That is, one could "stall 'flat'". In any case, other than the issue with the geometry of the airplane, there is absolutely no justification in claiming that flight parallel to the ground precludes a stall. [...] It is simply impossible to do what you suggest one might do. If one "flies slowly enough to stall", the angle-of-attack is at the stalling angle-of-attack, period. And all I'm saying is that this is independent of the pitch angle relative to the ground. It is NOT independent of the pitch angle relative to the ground if the airplane is being flown in a flight path parallel to the ground. [...] What WILL happen is that as the aircraft slows, the pitch angle of the aircraft will need to be increased, so as to continually increase the angle-of-attack of the wing. We are describing the same phenomena from two perspectives. I am fairly certain we're not. In the context of my usage, if one maintains the pitch angle as the aircraft slows, the AOA will continually increase (normally, the pitch angle changes as the aircraft slows). You cannot "maintain the pitch angle as the aircraft slows" without touching the runway. If the aircraft slows and the pitch angle is not changed, lift is reduced and the airplane will descend onto the runway. I'll say it again: the scenario you propose is an impossibility. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RAF Blind/Beam Approach Training flights | Geoffrey Sinclair | Military Aviation | 3 | September 4th 09 06:31 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Flight Simulator 2004 pro 4CDs, Eurowings 2004, Sea Plane Adventures, Concorde, HONG KONG 2004, World Airlines, other Addons, Sky Ranch, Jumbo 747, Greece 2000 [include El.Venizelos], Polynesia 2000, Real Airports, Private Wings, FLITESTAR V8.5 - JEP | vvcd | Piloting | 0 | September 22nd 04 07:13 PM |
WINGS: When do the clocks start ticking? | Andrew Gideon | Piloting | 6 | February 3rd 04 03:01 PM |
Flight instructors as Charter Pilots | C J Campbell | Piloting | 6 | January 24th 04 07:51 AM |