[Fwd: What happened to Jay?]

On Nov 18, 7:14*am, Franklin see_REPLY-TO_header wrote:
On Mon 17 Nov08 23:30, Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

On Nov 17, 10:23*am, Payton Byrd
wrote:
[...]

You missed the term "increasing" I'm afraid. 5.5 squared is 30.5,
which is fine for pure math, but not fine for a turning F14 with a
linear expanding g profile.
The 25 figure as stated in the assumption is correct within the
problem.

Fun isn't it?

Sir, please sir. The Ps value is far too low.

Good try but no cigar I'm afraid. No Ps value is possible for ANY
aircraft without the inclusion of altitude in the equation.
Ps can be positive or negative anywhere in the envelope not on the Ps=
0 line for the aircraft, BUT establishing that Ps value in any turn is
directly related to the altitude where the turn parameters are in
play.

I have no idea who you're trying to impress here, but you
unfortunately picked the wrong guy :-) The purpose of my work with the
Turkey was related to EM :-))
If you want to talk energy maneuverability be my guest.
Dudley Henriques