![]() |
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 |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
![]() N2310D wrote: "Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Newps writes: Think trim, dumbass. All the trim does is move the yoke for you. The same problem still exists. You have to push forward more and more, and eventually you run out of travel. NOT in an airplane, ignoramus. Do you deliberately hold yourself out for abuse? To you and the others that keep responding to Mx: I'm on your side, but don't you see that he's just pulling your chain, enjoying the act of aggravating you? IMHO, take a deep breath and let him rant on solo. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
![]() THIS : Yes, through momentum. But this momentum is eroded by irreversible effects such as friction with the ground and air. Eventually none is left, and the bicycle stops. PLUS THIS: The cyclist balances it, assisted by the gyroscopic stabilizing effect of the turning wheel (the heavier it is and the faster it turns, the better). EQUALS THIS : "Yes, I was completely wrong, and everything I wrote was complete bull****, based on a complete lack of understanding of the facts. . ." Signed : Mad Max You stated that power to the rear wheel and "traction" were the two requisite conditions for stability. You specifically and obstinantly discounted momentum and ANY effet induced by the cyclist. The giants' shoulders are abraded, and becoming prurient through this abuse. How much longer do we have to endure it? When will you send us a benediction and say you have simply decided to give up on us, because we're all too stupid to deserve your attention, and you have decided to focus your efforts on alt.medicine.insanity. . . |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Dave Stadt writes: As a matter of fact for some landings I do exactly that. From what altitude? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. What altitude would you like? |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
N2310D writes:
NOT in an airplane, ignoramus. An airplane is the specific case in which it won't work. Do you deliberately hold yourself out for abuse? No, but I do allow others to dig their own holes. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Stadt writes:
What altitude would you like? Straight and level flight at 10,000 feet to an airfield at 1800 feet MSL. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
N2310D writes:
With either the throttle or the spoilers when on final approach to land. Why do you use these if pushing the yoke forward is sufficient? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Newps writes: Ridiculous assertion. Try it and see. You mean perform an actual "real world" experiment? Why not simulate it? Al G |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Al G writes:
You mean perform an actual "real world" experiment? Yes. Why not simulate it? Simulation is of no use if you're not willing to trust the simulation. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | RomeoMike | Piloting | 6 | December 2nd 06 01:47 AM |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | Newps | Piloting | 0 | November 30th 06 07:40 PM |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | Greg Farris | Piloting | 0 | November 30th 06 07:25 PM |
HOW MANY GLIDER PILOTS DOES IT TAKE TO CHANGE A LIGHT BULB | Mal | Soaring | 59 | October 4th 05 05:39 AM |
The light bulb | Greasy Rider | Military Aviation | 6 | March 2nd 04 12:07 PM |