![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |