![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jose wrote: I think you are refering to Newton's third law, often stated as: "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." Yes. For an aircraft in level flight, the upwards acceleration due to lift is counterbalanced by the downward acceleration due to gravity. This satisfies Newton's third law. Yes. For a wing in level flight, the vertical component of momentum is zero. No. Please show us your arithmetic. Suppose a 1500 lb airplane is flying horizontally at 120 mph at 5000 feet above MSL. What are the vertical and horizontal components of the momentum of that aircraft? That is, on a microscopic scale, no. The wing is constantly freefalling, then being bounced back up by impact with air molecules. Averaged over all the molecules, yes, the net is zero (the wing flies) but on a microscopic scale, the wing is in constant brownian motion. This implies momentum transfer, and following the momentum on a microscopic scale is instructive. OK, show us your arithmetic. The wing imparts as much upward momentum to the air as it does downward momentum. This is where I disagree. Upward momentum gets imparted, but not (directly) by the wing. Rather, it is imparted by the ground, mediated through other air molecules. The ground is stationary. How does the stationary ground impart momentum to anything? Of course this wouldn't happen if the wing didn't pass through and throw the air down to begin with, but the ground is what ultimately imparts the upwards momentum. The pressure differential through the wing, from bottom to top, integrated over the wing area, provides an upward force for a wing in level flight. That's the shortcut. Where does this pressure differential come from - Bernouli effect. that is the question. The downwash behind the aircraft, which is counterbalanced by a more diffuse upwash around it, is real but not relevent to the issue of lift. I disagree here too. It's important in seeing the entire picture. Well, yes it is part of the entire picture. Its just not relevent to the issue of lift, which is only part of the picture. -- FF |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |
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 |
Sport Pilot pilots not insurable? | Blueskies | Piloting | 14 | July 12th 05 05:45 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |