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 |
#701
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
On May 28, 12:07*pm, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
I believe that, eventually, this group could be a forum for genuine discussion about thinks like backwash and lift. You're just a few years late for that. That time came and went. Michael |
#702
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
I believe that, eventually, this group could be a forum for genuine
discussion about thinks like backwash and lift. You're just a few years late for that. That time came and went. A few well-designed killfiles has returned this group to functionality, more or less. Unfortunately the trolls have driven off so many of the real pilots who once posted here that serious responses are still in short supply. I'd recommend starting a serious topic and seeing where it leads. The price is certainly right...and you might be surprised. :-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#703
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years. Jay is still a fjukkwit.
"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:IPy%j.185274$yE1.72669@attbi_s21: I believe that, eventually, this group could be a forum for genuine discussion about thinks like backwash and lift. You're just a few years late for that. That time came and went. A few well-designed killfiles has returned this group to functionality, more or less. Unfortunately the trolls have driven off so many of the real pilots who once posted here that serious responses are still in short supply. I'd recommend starting a serious topic and seeing where it leads. The price is certainly right...and you might be surprised. OK. Bertie |
#704
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
On May 29, 10:00*am, Kevin Horner wrote:
On May 28, 11:07 am, Le Chaud Lapin wrote: But as I stated, while I was not sure that I was right, the others were sure that I was wrong. No, but are certain that the others are wrong when they say you are wrong. Your certainty about that implies that you (subconsciously) think you are right. I don't believe you when you say "I was not sure I was right" because you argue from a position of certainty, not uncertainty. If you were uncertain, you would be *much* more open-minded and willing to listen. This is the real reason you cannot get into a deep discussion: you won't listen to people who don't agree with your assertions. I was more than willing to read explanations of how backwash causes lift (and I still am). The problem is that most of the responses were lacking in explanations based on scientific foundations. Saying "It's true because it has always been true" does not count, IMO. You play the "I'm an electrical engineer and I know calculus" card well, but it is not enough to disprove the theory of lift. Agreed, 100%. Many of the conflicting theories of lift were put forth by people much skilled in these areas. I only say that to say that I am readying and willing to hear details. One person, I think Tina, gave a very vague explanation...too vague to serve as an exposition. I was hoping for an explanation that would at least past the standards of high school physics. Where are the forces on the wing, and what elements generate those forces, in detail. The explanation does not have to be complete, meaning, I do not expect a full CFD exposition. A high school student who only knows basic Newtonian physics and nothing about CFD, assuming s/he understands how the lift is being generated, would be able to say where the particles (air), the material (wing), and how the particles impart force on the wing, and vice versa. Saying that there is lift because something moves downward and therefore something must move upward is not an example of Newton's theory of reciprocity. It's far too vague. Discussion about backwash and lift? To what end? Has anyone made you aware that flying machines have successfully been invented already? Well, two reasons: 1. It is problably the centerpiece of any theory involving flight, making it interesting in its own right. 2. If backwash does _not_ cause lift, then there might be something else, and if there is something else (a bit if), there might be opportunity for new types of aircraft, the kind that FAA has been begging for for last 10 years. You want to discuss how the experts in lift theory must be wrong because lift is inconsistently explained by different sources. To get a discussion going, you will need to find a newsgroup filled with people who are also non-experts that want to talk about how the experts must be wrong. Good luck in finding it. My suspicion derives from my own basic knowledge of physics. Again, if someone decided to explain, I would be all ears. As for the experts, if two experts conflict each other, who am I to say which of them is wrong? And if there is conflict, they cannot both be right. -Le Chaud Lapin- |
#705
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
Steve Foley writes:
I'm curious to know how you have determined what 'most private pilots know'. Private pilots are no different from the average person when it comes to higher mathematics, physics, and gas theory, and the average person doesn't know much of anything about these things. Therefore most pilots don't know much of anything about these things, either. Simple logic. I suspect you don't even know a significant sample. Not necessary. See above. |
#706
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
terry writes:
So whats your point then? That someone who knows about these subjects is in a better position to discuss them than someone who does not (the latter group including the average pilot). |
#707
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
Gig 601Xl Builder writes:
Well if you knew the answer why did you ask the question, Anthony? I can exclude certain answers as obviously wrong without necessarily knowing the correct answer. For example, while I do not know the square root of ten to fifteen decimal places off the top of my head, I do know that it is not four. There's your problem right there. Aviation is NOT a discussion. You're entitled to your opinion. Perhaps you prefer a social club. I prefer a science. |
#708
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
terry writes:
Its not a bad thing at all, as long as you are sure the other person is indeed wrong. Why do I have to be sure? (Although I typically am.) But where you have gone wrong on this group is too many times you have told people incorrectly that they were wrong, that will really **** a lot of people off. Why would I care about that? People who react in that way are reliably stupid, and I'm not interested in talking to stupid people. And then to make it worse, there have been people who would still take the time to explain to you why you were wrong, and you would refuse to accept it or acknowledge you were wrong. Examples? Come to think of it I cant recall a single time you admitted you were wrong. That's because I'm not often wrong, but I admit it when it is the case. Example? would you like to tell us again why we cant apply the ideal gas law to calculate the air density of a parcel of air we want to fly in. You cannot use the combined laws (note the nuance) because the volume of the atmosphere is not constrained. |
#709
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
... Therefore most pilots don't know much of anything about these things, either. Simple logic. Sorry, that's faulty logic. |
#710
|
|||
|
|||
I give up, after many, many years!
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
... That's because I'm not often wrong, but I admit it when it is the case. I have seen quite a few examples where you were wrong. I have also pointed these out. You have NEVER admitted to being wrong in rec.aviation.piloting. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DC-3 parts to give away | Robert Little | Restoration | 2 | November 23rd 06 03:30 AM |
Who can give a checkout? | Mark S Conway | General Aviation | 2 | May 9th 05 12:15 AM |
Winch give-away | KP | Soaring | 6 | January 11th 05 08:04 PM |
Did you ever give up on an IR? | No Such User | Piloting | 24 | November 26th 03 02:45 PM |
FS 2004 give away | Ozzie M | Simulators | 0 | November 23rd 03 03:50 PM |