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

Airplane Pilot's As Physicists



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 10th 07, 06:38 PM posted to sci.physics,rec.aviation.piloting
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Airplane Pilot's As Physicists

On Oct 9, 6:15 pm, Ray Vickson wrote:
Heh. I know the argument. I think it's broken out here (sci.physics)
many times.


(a) It's the Bernoulli effect due to the shape of the
wing cross-section, the way we were all taught as kids.


(b) No, it's just the angle of attack.


Probably true, in large part anyway. Just consider that aerobatics
pilots can fly their planes upside-down over considerable distances.
If Bernoulli were the sole factor this couldn't happen.

R.G. Vickson


It doesn't have to be either-or. Both Bernoulli and angle of attack
are at work in generating lift. Both the top and bottom surfaces of
the wing contribute. The fact that aerobatic planes can be flown
upside down shows that if you take a normal airfoil and fly it upside
down at the right angle of attack, it will still generate lift. But
unless it has a symmetric airfoil, it will be a lot less efficient
when it is operated upside down. This is because the when it is
upside down, the top surface of the wing is flat rather than curved,
and hence you lose a lot of the lift which this surface generates when
it is rightside up. This is why many aerobatic planes have symmetric
airfoils. A symmetric airfoil works well upside down because it still
has a curved surface on top to help generate lift.

  #2  
Old October 10th 07, 06:48 PM posted to sci.physics,rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,851
Default Airplane Pilot's As Physicists

Phil wrote in news:1192037923.115677.275220
@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

On Oct 9, 6:15 pm, Ray Vickson wrote:
Heh. I know the argument. I think it's broken out here (sci.physics)
many times.


(a) It's the Bernoulli effect due to the shape of the
wing cross-section, the way we were all taught as kids.


(b) No, it's just the angle of attack.


Probably true, in large part anyway. Just consider that aerobatics
pilots can fly their planes upside-down over considerable distances.
If Bernoulli were the sole factor this couldn't happen.

R.G. Vickson


It doesn't have to be either-or. Both Bernoulli and angle of attack
are at work in generating lift.



That's right, but what's more is that Bernoulli is strengthened by angle of
attack and it's that which provides most of the increase n lift at higher
angles.
Even with a flat bottom wing being flown inverted, most of the lift is
still coming from Bernoulli.



Bertie
 




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
Pilot's Assistant V1.6.7 released AirToob Simulators 2 July 7th 07 10:43 AM
A GA pilot's worst nightmare? Kingfish Piloting 49 February 1st 07 02:51 PM
Pilot's Political Orientation Chicken Bone Piloting 533 June 29th 04 12:47 AM
Update on pilot's condition? Stewart Kissel Soaring 11 April 13th 04 09:25 PM
Pilot's Funeral/Memorial TEW Piloting 6 March 17th 04 03:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:06 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.