Opinions on NASA lift theory?

That article appears to be a reasonable effort.

Doug McLean in his book, "Understanding Aerodynamics", spends 37 pages to describe the various means used to define lift, along with the shortcomings of most of them. These pages then finish with his thoughts on how to define lift. This highlights the sheer number of ways that his has been explained.

This book is quite good, but I only suggest it to a serious aerodynamicist.

On a more serious note, the folks who design and build gliders probably
have a good idea of what creates lift.Â* Why not ask them? Or do you
suppose that they know "how" but not necessarily "why"?

On 7/3/2018 12:38 AM, wrote:
That article appears to be a reasonable effort.

Doug McLean in his book, "Understanding Aerodynamics", spends 37 pages to describe the various means used to define lift, along with the shortcomings of most of them. These pages then finish with his thoughts on how to define lift. This highlights the sheer number of ways that his has been explained.

This book is quite good, but I only suggest it to a serious aerodynamicist.



--
Dan, 5J

Push forward and the trees get bigger, pull back and the trees get smaller, pull WAY back and they get bigger again. Anything beyond that from a pilot is mental masturbation. I'm going flying.

I'm dumb as a post about this stuff. Fortunately it seems I do not have to know HOW lift is created as long as I know that lift IS created - and how to manage it.

I am satisfied that it is differential pressure between the upper surface and lower surface of a wing - and the resulting down-deflecting of a mass of air - that results in the creation of lift. Newton seems to describe the process clearly.

What I have yet to come across is an explanation I can understand of why there is relatively lower pressure across the top of a wing. Maybe it actually is described in the calculus. Unfortunately I can barely balance my checking account so calculus is not accessible to me.

On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 11:38:24 PM UTC-7, wrote:
That article appears to be a reasonable effort.

Doug McLean in his book, "Understanding Aerodynamics", spends 37 pages to describe the various means used to define lift, along with the shortcomings of most of them. These pages then finish with his thoughts on how to define lift. This highlights the sheer number of ways that his has been explained.

This book is quite good, but I only suggest it to a serious aerodynamicist.