![]() |
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 |
#321
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . net,
Richard Lamb wrote: This has all been very interesting, but there is a basic assumption that seems to be glossed over. I was thinking, that to really get anything out of all this, shut the engine off! Everybody has been _assumin'_ straight and level flight. I suppose that's ok for academic discussion, but for learnin' aerodynamics, let's just assume the engine quit and take it from there. L / D Just a thought... Richard It doesn't really make any difference. In a constant glide, the aircraft now does have momentum with respect to the earth, but it is *still* incurring the same forces. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." |
#322
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan Baker wrote:
In article . net, Richard Lamb wrote: This has all been very interesting, but there is a basic assumption that seems to be glossed over. I was thinking, that to really get anything out of all this, shut the engine off! Everybody has been _assumin'_ straight and level flight. I suppose that's ok for academic discussion, but for learnin' aerodynamics, let's just assume the engine quit and take it from there. L / D Just a thought... Richard It doesn't really make any difference. In a constant glide, the aircraft now does have momentum with respect to the earth, but it is *still* incurring the same forces. Right. But now we might actually get something from the discussion. Like how much power is actually required for S&L? Effects of speed on glide angle? And, what happens when you get a wee bit too slow? Or, if that's too boring... What happens to the boundary layer? Is it ticklish? And what about those long and short bubbles? |
#323
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote Because the wing is not of infinite weight. The upper atmosphere in fact =is= deprived of air while the airplane is in flight... that air is squeezed down below the wing, increasing the pressure on the surface of the earth, in an amount exactly equal to the weight of the airplane (divided by the area of the earth). I think that the downflow dispaces other air which flows up to replace it--conserving momentum and mass. I think I will create a new award. I'm not sure what the prize or trophy will be yet. I'm calling it "Rec.Aviation Geek of the Decade", or perhaps of "The Century." I am in total awe and amazement, that you and Jose have tied for this award, based on how long you two have kept this amazingly boring subject alive. I just CAN'T believe it !!! Now, continue on, or not. Please, use your restraint, and common sense. Use the "or not." g -- Jim in NC (mostly, using his right to use the "ignore thread" button! g |
#324
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
let's just assume the engine quit and take it
from there. L / D What is L? What is D? That's the fundamental question being discussed. The engine (or the earth's gravity) merely supplies the force. But once you introduce the idea of gliding, you also need to address the things that gliders address - ridge lift, thermals, messy stuff like that, which are all ways of getting free energy from the sun. Calm air, flat ambient earth, no engine, the airplane will descend. Now explain to me how autogyros work. ![]() Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#325
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Morgans wrote: ... Now, continue on, or not. Please, use your restraint, and common sense. Use the "or not." g Well I'm really hoping that Jose tries the card thumbtack soda straw thing. -- FF |
#326
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am in total awe and amazement, that you and Jose have tied for this award,
based on how long you two have kept this amazingly boring subject alive. Great discoveries are often made in the seventh decimal place. ![]() Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#327
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well I'm really hoping that Jose tries the card thumbtack soda straw
thing. Actually, I did try it and it didn't "work" (that is, the card didn't float, which is what I think you expect to happen). I'm probably doing it wrong so I'll keep at it. When I get it to work, I'll report what happened and why (in newtonian terms) I think it did. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#328
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#329
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 at 15:21:11 in message
, "00:00:00Hg" wrote: On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 01:27:46 +0000, David CL Francis wrote: Above Mach one the air does not detect the approaching aircraft! :-) If it did, what would happen? The whole point is that disturbances in the air are propagated at or near the velocity of sound. It follows that at supersonic speeds nothing happens to the air until it reaches the supersonic aircraft, or vice versa. -- David CL Francis |
#330
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 at 02:27:02 in message
. net, Richard Lamb wrote: I hate to be a spoil sport (or dullard?), but... the (stationary) air does WHAT (as the wing passes by)??? The nature of things is such that the situation does not change if you change the frame of reference. It is normal in doing calculations to start with a frame of reference based on the aircraft. If you follow the aircraft then the air is going past it. The presence of the wing changes the air flowing past the aircraft in the same way as if you consider the aircraft passing through the air. The 'stationary' air as you call it has its local velocity and direction changed by the aircraft. -- David CL Francis |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
GAO: Electronic Warfa Comprehensive Strategy Needed for Suppressing Enemy | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 27th 05 06:23 PM |
Washington DC airspace closing for good? | tony roberts | Piloting | 153 | August 11th 05 12:56 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |