Backwash Causes Lift?

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.

WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a glider.


Bertie

Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves his
point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those l'll ole'
thermals right over there now shouldn't it
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.

WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a glider.


Bertie

Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves his
point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those l'll ole'
thermals right over there now shouldn't it


God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.
WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a glider.


Bertie
Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves his
point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those l'll ole'
thermals right over there now shouldn't it


God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie

Some of the stuff he posts would simply be hilarious were it not for
those taking him on in vain attempts to straighten him out. The threads
involving all these elaborate counter explanations to the drivel he
posts just amaze me.
You're right; "nope" is absolutely the way to go with him and those like
him.
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension. I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on a
serious flying forum.
The complete information about lift including all the corrections for
the misuse of Bernoulli in some of the texts are so readily available a
5 year old child could both find and understand them. Yet it goes
on....and on......and on!
Anyway, it's entertaining if nothing else!
Yup.........definitely....."Nope" is the way to go.
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.
WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a
glider.


Bertie
Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves
his point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those l'll
ole' thermals right over there now shouldn't it


God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie

Some of the stuff he posts would simply be hilarious were it not for
those taking him on in vain attempts to straighten him out. The
threads involving all these elaborate counter explanations to the
drivel he posts just amaze me.
You're right; "nope" is absolutely the way to go with him and those
like him.
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time
to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension. I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on a
serious flying forum.
The complete information about lift including all the corrections for
the misuse of Bernoulli in some of the texts are so readily available
a 5 year old child could both find and understand them. Yet it goes
on....and on......and on!
Anyway, it's entertaining if nothing else!
Yup.........definitely....."Nope" is the way to go.
:-))

Zactly Why waste your breath telling them?

OTOH if he wants to pay me for my time...


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.
WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a
glider.


Bertie
Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves
his point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those l'll
ole' thermals right over there now shouldn't it

God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie
Some of the stuff he posts would simply be hilarious were it not for
those taking him on in vain attempts to straighten him out. The
threads involving all these elaborate counter explanations to the
drivel he posts just amaze me.
You're right; "nope" is absolutely the way to go with him and those
like him.
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time
to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension. I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on a
serious flying forum.
The complete information about lift including all the corrections for
the misuse of Bernoulli in some of the texts are so readily available
a 5 year old child could both find and understand them. Yet it goes
on....and on......and on!
Anyway, it's entertaining if nothing else!
Yup.........definitely....."Nope" is the way to go.
:-))

Zactly Why waste your breath telling them?

OTOH if he wants to pay me for my time...


Bertie


More fun this way!


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.
WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a
glider.


Bertie
Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves
his point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up
there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those
l'll
ole' thermals right over there now shouldn't it

God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie
Some of the stuff he posts would simply be hilarious were it not for
those taking him on in vain attempts to straighten him out. The
threads involving all these elaborate counter explanations to the
drivel he posts just amaze me.
You're right; "nope" is absolutely the way to go with him and those
like him.
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the
physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time
to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension. I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on
a
serious flying forum.
The complete information about lift including all the corrections
for
the misuse of Bernoulli in some of the texts are so readily
available
a 5 year old child could both find and understand them. Yet it goes
on....and on......and on!
Anyway, it's entertaining if nothing else!
Yup.........definitely....."Nope" is the way to go.
:-))

Zactly Why waste your breath telling them?

OTOH if he wants to pay me for my time...


Bertie


More fun this way!



Exactly,. His latest bud or sockpuppet, as the case may be,. is a bit of
fun as well.



Have you looked at free.usenet?

Weird.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Nope. The lift/drag vectors are different as the AOA
changes.
Powered aircraft are gliders when the engines are off.
WEll, your engine has been off for some time and you're not a
glider.


Bertie
Well......I guess ole' Mx could perform an experiment that proves
his point here.
If what he says has merit (God help us :-) that big ole 747 up
there
with all 4 shut down should actually be able to CLIMB in those
l'll
ole' thermals right over there now shouldn't it
God I hope he starts on gliders.

I got as thousand nopes in my pocket waiting.

Bertie
Some of the stuff he posts would simply be hilarious were it not for
those taking him on in vain attempts to straighten him out. The
threads involving all these elaborate counter explanations to the
drivel he posts just amaze me.
You're right; "nope" is absolutely the way to go with him and those
like him.
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the
physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time
to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension. I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on
a
serious flying forum.
The complete information about lift including all the corrections
for
the misuse of Bernoulli in some of the texts are so readily
available
a 5 year old child could both find and understand them. Yet it goes
on....and on......and on!
Anyway, it's entertaining if nothing else!
Yup.........definitely....."Nope" is the way to go.
:-))
Zactly Why waste your breath telling them?

OTOH if he wants to pay me for my time...


Bertie

More fun this way!



Exactly,. His latest bud or sockpuppet, as the case may be,. is a bit of
fun as well.



Have you looked at free.usenet?

Weird.


Bertie

Things here have been a bit busy lately with some health issues. Haven't
had much time other than dealing with my usual Usenet haunts.
I use RCN on an Intel IMac with Thunderbird as my News and Mail program.
Works fine so far with 0 issues for me.


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension.

I obviously can only speak for myself, but I post under the expectation
that the reading audience is more than just the person whose post I'm
replying to. For example, when I posted references to some of the material
on NASA web pages at least one person said they appreciated the references
and said they came away with a better understanding of lift because of that
material. And unlike the OP, left it at that.

Just because the OP of this or any other thread refuses to budge doesn't
mean followups are entirely futile. At least that is what I'd like to
believe. (But I do sometimes make the mistake that I should try to budge
the OP and then I post more than I should. Say one's say and try to leave
it at that - that's my modest goal.)

I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on a
serious flying forum.

This is a serious flying forum? Shirley you're joking.

Jim Logajan wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:
I've been watching some of these folks who are right on in the physics
department taking on this hot rabbit character on the lift issue.
Why the living hell anyone in their right mind would take the time to
deal with this from a serious standpoint is beyond my level of
comprehension.

I obviously can only speak for myself, but I post under the expectation
that the reading audience is more than just the person whose post I'm
replying to. For example, when I posted references to some of the material
on NASA web pages at least one person said they appreciated the references
and said they came away with a better understanding of lift because of that
material. And unlike the OP, left it at that.

Just because the OP of this or any other thread refuses to budge doesn't
mean followups are entirely futile. At least that is what I'd like to
believe. (But I do sometimes make the mistake that I should try to budge
the OP and then I post more than I should. Say one's say and try to leave
it at that - that's my modest goal.)

I've never seen so much utter bull**** in my life on a
serious flying forum.

This is a serious flying forum? Shirley you're joking.

Jim, if you think that dealing with this nutcase is beneficial to the
rest of the group then I'd be the last guy in hell to tell you to stop
doing it. All I'm saying to you and to others having serious science
knowledge is that the answers to this moron's constant repetition of
utter crap can be found in a single publication; that publication is
"Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators". A simple link to this book is all
that's necessary for anyone to post to steer this creep in the right
direction.
Pardon me for saying this, but I've been teaching aerodynamics for 50
years and from my point of view, what you are doing in sparring with
this character is useless on the educational line as his entire purpose
in posting to the forum is to push himself as a "cut above" the people
answering him.
If it pleases you to take this bait, as I said, I'm not the internet
police. Go get um!
Just be advised, most of the people who post on these forums are fairly
well versed on the issues surrounding lift and don't require additional
tutoring on the issue.
Assuming you find a few who do need this tutoring, I suggest you
consider simply pointing them to the source I have mentioned as a more
bandwidth friendly way of "helping educate them".
All this having been said, I realize that you are not me and have a mind
of your own fully capable of dealing with things like this and the final
decision as to whether or not you're being used as cannon fodder by this
idiot will of course be yours.
Personally, I like Bertie's method the best; "Nope!" :-)))
DH

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques dhenriques rcn.com wrote:

Assuming you find a few who do need this tutoring, I suggest you
consider simply pointing them to the source I have mentioned as a
more bandwidth friendly way of "helping educate them".

Personally, I like Bertie's method the best; "Nope!" :-)))

Bertie is anything but bandwidth (or anything else) friendly. If you
were concerned about bandwidth and noise, Dudley Henriques, you
would correct Bertie instead of praise him.












DH

--
Dudley Henriques


Path: newssvr25.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!b order1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!loc al01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.rcn.net!news.rcn.n et.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:33:38 -0500
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:33:37 -0400
From: Dudley Henriques dhenriques rcn.com
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: OK, IF Backwash Causes Lift then...
References: TsKNi.201$2n4.15900 news1.epix.net 1191685992.884239.318350 50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com p2ukt4-hrk.ln1 mail.specsol.com 1191694545.462771.143250 d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com 13gkirmlp7mnk25 news.supernews.com Xns99C3A8A7DE5F9****upropeeh 207.14.116.130 kd5qt4-m62.ln1 mail.specsol.com Xns99C3B8EDF5ED3****upropeeh 207.14.116.130 6v9lg3dblpdb19moek4kcu67gf1dahe3dn 4ax.com 1191938547.569257.8860 o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com 6nbng312p9ohpr7kcq81kg8k2gr89hak09 4ax.com Xns99C4B4C3BFD58****upropeeh 207.14.116.130 l4Odnb1QIOsiUZbanZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d rcn.net Xns99C4C7086D55D****upropeeh 207.14.116.130 Q7WdnWctH4ZzSpbanZ2dnUVZ_oSnnZ2d rcn.net Xns99C48AD799047JamesLLugojcom 216.168.3.30
In-Reply-To: Xns99C48AD799047JamesLLugojcom 216.168.3.30
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: kJSdnfgDTqgvbpbanZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d rcn.net
Lines: 56
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.172.126.29
X-Trace: sv3-XmX07olO4dkIdR0xopsdgG3lf1iQkQV0DsTfvmsNBJuyFpL8yx ZeLLpjeR9SPjdNhvsTn6aJY6EYkPb!/IvbWifa2CYqPyFpOiYFFR0TSQpjtWxTOWT3TxqdIE6hGYFkl+K KNDfPbhgeg1KXy5cG8HkSNlJm!AEM=
X-Complaints-To: abuse rcn.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse rcn.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.35
Xref: prodigy.net rec.aviation.piloting:603738