A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old February 25th 06, 08:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.student
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Very long boring technical discussion of Lift Faries adn Thrust

I am now constructing a push up outfit with feathers on top in the proper ratio
and down on the bottom. Hmmm sounds like that's just where down should be "on
the bottom".


You see, this is why science should be left to the professionals. Such
simple sounding theories are usually wrong, and in this case you have
neglected forward motion, which provides many secondary effects. This
is why the down part of an airplane is at the BACK, not the BOTTOM. The
airplane is travelling through the air, and the first thing the air gets
is the up, and the last thing it gets is the down. Of course, as far as
the air is concerned, it's backwards (plane goes up, air goes down, at
least for a while). That's what makes the vortex.

Money is needed primarily to achieve forward motion. While an airplane
on the ground will consume a certain amount of money, flying it consumes
far more. You put some in at the beginning, and the bills come =after=
the flight. This is what causes the money vortex, which is exactly
analogous to the air vortex that holds the wing up. It is impossible to
put all the money in one place and have the airplane fly.

It is just as impossible to put the up and the down where it seems they
"should" go and get the plane to fly. Only a rocketship can do that,
and there is a =lot= of down coming out of the bottom, and a lot of up
where the top is. But there's no sideways motion (at least there
shouldn't be!)

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder John Doe Piloting 145 March 31st 06 06:58 PM
GAO: Electronic Warfa Comprehensive Strategy Needed for Suppressing Enemy Mike Naval Aviation 0 December 27th 05 06:23 PM
Washington DC airspace closing for good? tony roberts Piloting 153 August 11th 05 12:56 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.