Backwash Causes Lift?

On Oct 6, 2:09 pm, wrote:
I believe it should be possible to explain a venturi tube, Bernoulli's
principle, and a decent part of why a wing has lift, in about 2-3
pages of written text, with pictures, using no formulas, not even
grade-school mathematics.

Commonly done in many texts. You just haven't read them yet.

Which texts are those?

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.
2. Rod Machado got it wrong.
3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in this
thread got it wrong.
4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.

Plus I watched 3 CFI's at my ground school, the one I paid money to
teach me the theory of flying, get it wrong at the whiteboard.

And of course, if the NASA paper is true, then there are even people
in this group who got it wrong.

Until 3 days ago, the number of people who had gotten (partially)
right was 1. The number of stories I had heard from people who got it
wrong was probably about 60-70.

After reading the link that Jim Logajan posted, the number of people
who are saying it's one way is 2. The number of people who are saying
it is the exact opposite is still 60-70.

Which textbooks would you believe if you had read 1 saying one thing,
and more than 10 others saying the exact opposite?

-Le Chaud Lapin-

Le Chaud Lapin wrote in
ps.com:

On Oct 6, 2:09 pm, wrote:
I believe it should be possible to explain a venturi tube,
Bernoulli's
principle, and a decent part of why a wing has lift, in about 2-3
pages of written text, with pictures, using no formulas, not even
grade-school mathematics.

Commonly done in many texts. You just haven't read them yet.

Which texts are those?

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.

No they didn't




2. Rod Machado got it wrong.


Don't know who he is but if you thnk he's wrong he can't be.


3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in this
thread got it wrong.


Nope.

4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.


Nope.



Plus I watched 3 CFI's at my ground school, the one I paid money to
teach me the theory of flying, get it wrong at the whiteboard.


There's too many things wrong with this sentence to even start on.

And of course, if the NASA paper is true, then there are even people
in this group who got it wrong.


Well, you did , as botht yourself and your sockpuppet.


Until 3 days ago, the number of people who had gotten (partially)
right was 1.


Oha, and who was that?

Bertie

On Oct 6, 1:32 pm, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
On Oct 6, 2:09 pm, wrote:

I believe it should be possible to explain a venturi tube, Bernoulli's
principle, and a decent part of why a wing has lift, in about 2-3
pages of written text, with pictures, using no formulas, not even
grade-school mathematics.

Commonly done in many texts. You just haven't read them yet.

Which texts are those?

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.
2. Rod Machado got it wrong.
3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in this
thread got it wrong.
4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.

All wrong, according to you. There's no point pointing out
any others. They'll be wrong, too.


Plus I watched 3 CFI's at my ground school, the one I paid money to
teach me the theory of flying, get it wrong at the whiteboard.

Rather common, distressingly. However, he may have had it
right; you have just determined that EVERYONE but you is wrong.

And of course, if the NASA paper is true, then there are even people
in this group who got it wrong.

Until 3 days ago, the number of people who had gotten (partially)
right was 1. The number of stories I had heard from people who got it
wrong was probably about 60-70.

After reading the link that Jim Logajan posted, the number of people
who are saying it's one way is 2. The number of people who are saying
it is the exact opposite is still 60-70.

Which textbooks would you believe if you had read 1 saying one thing,
and more than 10 others saying the exact opposite?

Does truth in physics depend on a democratic vote?

Dan

On Oct 6, 2:51 pm, wrote:
On Oct 6, 1:32 pm, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.
2. Rod Machado got it wrong.
3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in this
thread got it wrong.
4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.

All wrong, according to you. There's no point pointing out
any others. They'll be wrong, too.

Plus I watched 3 CFI's at my ground school, the one I paid money to
teach me the theory of flying, get it wrong at the whiteboard.

Rather common, distressingly. However, he may have had it
right; you have just determined that EVERYONE but you is wrong.

It wasn't just one. It was 3. My instructor, plus 2 others. They said
the thing that the NASA paper is calling "a myth". Who is right? The
NASA author or the CFI's?

And of course, if the NASA paper is true, then there are even people
in this group who got it wrong.

Until 3 days ago, the number of people who had gotten (partially)
right was 1. The number of stories I had heard from people who got it
wrong was probably about 60-70.

After reading the link that Jim Logajan posted, the number of people
who are saying it's one way is 2. The number of people who are saying
it is the exact opposite is still 60-70.

Which textbooks would you believe if you had read 1 saying one thing,
and more than 10 others saying the exact opposite?

Does truth in physics depend on a democratic vote?

That's what I am asking...

After reading 60-70 that says one thing, and seeing 2 others that says
the exact opposite, and it just happen to be that the 2 are the ones
that you personally agree with, which would you believe? The 60-70?
The 2? Flip a coin?

-Le Chaud Lapin-

Le Chaud Lapin wrote in
ups.com:

On Oct 6, 2:51 pm, wrote:
On Oct 6, 1:32 pm, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.
2. Rod Machado got it wrong.
3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in
this
thread got it wrong.
4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.

All wrong, according to you. There's no point pointing out
any others. They'll be wrong, too.

Plus I watched 3 CFI's at my ground school, the one I paid money to
teach me the theory of flying, get it wrong at the whiteboard.

Rather common, distressingly. However, he may have had it
right; you have just determined that EVERYONE but you is wrong.

It wasn't just one. It was 3. My instructor, plus 2 others. They said
the thing that the NASA paper is calling "a myth". Who is right? The
NASA author or the CFI's?

And of course, if the NASA paper is true, then there are even
people
in this group who got it wrong.

Until 3 days ago, the number of people who had gotten (partially)
right was 1. The number of stories I had heard from people who got
it
wrong was probably about 60-70.

After reading the link that Jim Logajan posted, the number of
people
who are saying it's one way is 2. The number of people who are
saying
it is the exact opposite is still 60-70.

Which textbooks would you believe if you had read 1 saying one
thing,
and more than 10 others saying the exact opposite?

Does truth in physics depend on a democratic vote?

That's what I am asking...

After reading 60-70 that says one thing, and seeing 2 others that says
the exact opposite, and it just happen to be that the 2 are the ones
that you personally agree with, which would you believe? The 60-70?
The 2? Flip a coin?



You don't fly and you never wil, therefore it doesn't matter.



Bertie

Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
On Oct 6, 2:09 pm, wrote:
I believe it should be possible to explain a venturi tube, Bernoulli's
principle, and a decent part of why a wing has lift, in about 2-3
pages of written text, with pictures, using no formulas, not even
grade-school mathematics.
Commonly done in many texts. You just haven't read them yet.

Which texts are those?

I have read some texts:

1. Jeppesen got it wrong.
2. Rod Machado got it wrong.
3. That link that with the funny color lines that was posted in this
thread got it wrong.
4. If you do search in Google for "Bernoulli" + "faster" + wing +
lift, you will see 1000's of pages that got it wrong.

I just added you to my kill file so I don't have to read your drivel any
longer so I'd say I'm the only one so far to get it right! :-)