Wake Turbulence behind an A-380

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
"will descend further
and be significantly stronger" than those from other large jets,
potentially even affecting jets traveling in the opposite direction
some 2,000 feet below.

Who's authors haven't heard about RVSM- ICAO's or WSJ's?

D.

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 at 08:56:56 in message
, Ron Garret
wrote:

That's actually what keeps the plane in the air.

See http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils...ation-vortices

rg

That is a good article. I would partially disagree in that he minimises
viscosity of the air as a factor. True it is small, however if the air
had no viscosity then there would be no circulation and hence no lift.
He actually shows diagrams without circulation which produce no lift.

The necessity of viscosity was demonstrated by Jean le Rond d'Alembert.
In fact he did painstaking mathematics, without recognising viscosity,
and failed to be able to show why there should be any forces on a body
in an airflow at all. He went to his grave a puzzled and dissatisfied
man.

That is d'Alembert's Paradox.
--
David CL Francis

I know the jet you're referring to but can't remember it... however, I
do also remember that Herb Baker's T-28 has exactly the same system and
you can see a video of it he

http://herb-ditto.com/Herb.wmv

It makes for a very cool display.

In article .com,
wrote:

http://herb-ditto.com/Herb.wmv

Nice promo video.