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

A Level 1 AOA clarification



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 1st 05, 06:48 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...
"As seen in this example, for steady climbing flight, L (hence Cl) is
smaller, and thus induced drag is smaller. Consequently, total drag
for climbing flight is smaller than for level flight at the same
velocity."


I'm not questioning whether thrust contributes to lift, and thus reduces the
total lift requirement. It is patently obvious to me that a force directed
at least partially downward contributes to lift. That quote says nothing
more than that. What I am questioning is whether for a given performance
scenario there are multiple drag scenarios.

That is, he's proposing that at the same speed, there are multiple
steady states that produce different amounts of drag.

There are precedents. A banked aircraft at a given airspeed will have
a larger AOA than a non-banked one, and thus incur larger amounts of
induced drag.


It's clear that I continue to fail to state my objection properly. Let me
try again...

David's post implies that for a given performance scenario (straight and
level flight, for example) you can nudge the airplane into a "new steady
state" where drag is lower. Your examples of climbing and turning don't
address that issue; they are entirely different performance scenarios (that
is, the airplane is doing something different) than the scenario to which
drag is being compared.

According to David's original post (if I read it correctly), there are
multiple drag scenarios for a given path of flight. Each time you come up
with an example, it starts out by assuming a new path of flight compared to
the "base case".

I envision that a climbing airplane is essentially a lighter one,
since thrust will support a small amount of weight.


Seems reasonable to me. But what if you don't want to climb? And in
particular, if we're talking about comparing one airplane in straight and
level flight to another in straight and level flight, introducing a climb to
the discussion doesn't help much.

Pete


  #2  
Old January 2nd 05, 03:09 AM
Greg Esres
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

According to David's original post (if I read it correctly), there
are multiple drag scenarios for a given path of flight.

I didn't pick up on that, but if so, I agree with you. That scenario
seems unlikely.






 




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
PIREP--CO Experts low level carbon monoxide detector Jay Honeck Piloting 10 December 3rd 04 11:21 AM
What's minimum safe O2 level? PaulH Piloting 29 November 9th 04 07:35 PM
Altimeter setting != Sea Level Pressure - Why? JT Wright Piloting 5 April 5th 04 01:04 AM
The Internet public meeting on National Air Tour Standards begins Feb. 23 at 9 a.m. Larry Dighera Piloting 0 February 22nd 04 03:58 PM
flight level in Flight simulator Robert Piloting 3 August 20th 03 07:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 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.