![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The current theory of flight is based upon the Bernoulli's Principal, the
pressure of a fluid (liquid or gas) decreases at points where the speed of the fluid increases. The airfoil is designed to increase the velocity of the airflow above its surface, thereby decreasing pressure above the airfoil. Simultaneously, the impact of the air on the lower surface of the airfoil increases the pressure below. This combination of pressure decrease above and increase below produces lift. Pressure is reduced due to the smaller space the air has above the wing than below. Air cannot go through the wing, so it must push around it. The surface air molecules push between the wing and outer layers of air. Due to the bump of the airfoil, the space is smaller and the molecules must go faster. THIS HAS A MAJOR PROBLEM - specifically inverted flight. The current theory of flight utilizing the Bernoulli's Principal is only applicable to normal level flight. However, we know and observe that inverted flight is possible. Thus, the Bernoulli's Principal is no longer applicable to inverted flight, so there must be another theory that supports flight, be it level or inverted. The new theory of flight is based upon the new theory of Gravitational Vector Force (released Sept 2004). Utilizing Newton's laws that equal opposite force is generated at right angles, be it applied at once or successively, and if the angle is oblique (slanted) a new force is generated. Then inverted flight is possible as force is always generated at right angles, and this is towards the ground in all cases. The net difference between the initial velocity and resistance force generated at the leading edge at right angles (downwards) creates a new force called Gravitational Vector Force, and it travels in the opposite direction (upwards) to maintain balance, impacting the bottom of the wing. The wing becomes less efficient in inverted flight due to the design of the airfoil, however it is still possible. This new theory of flight also supports the following; 1) the new force manifests at a faster rate than initial velocity, hence the wing becomes more efficient at faster speeds 2) As you extend spoilers and flaps at the leading and trailing edges, the bottom of the wing now becomes "cupped" like a satellite dish, and able to capture more Gravitational Vector Force, creating more lift You may read more about this new theory at www.threexd.com Mark Oliver |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark Oliver wrote:
THIS HAS A MAJOR PROBLEM - specifically inverted flight. The current theory of flight utilizing the Bernoulli's Principal is only applicable to normal level flight. Really? I think you're mistaken. It's also applicable in inverted flight as far as I can see. Orientation of, in this case, an airframe does not change the laws of physics. As long as the airfoil produces lift equal to the mass of the aircraft it'll keep level. didn't you notice that inverted flight with a positive profile requires a higher AOA to counter the 'excess lift' pointed downwards... possible. Thus, the Bernoulli's Principal is no longer applicable to inverted flight, so there must be another theory that supports flight, be it level or inverted. Wow... slow down a bit. Where and how do you come up with a conclusion like this? See my reply above. The new theory of flight is based upon the new theory of Gravitational Vector Force (released Sept 2004). Utilizing Newton's laws that equal opposite force is generated at right angles, I'm not a physics major but... "Newton's laws that equal opposite force is generated at right angles.." is false. How can an opposite force be at right angles? It is "opposite and equal". I think you need to read up on some of your high-school physics books.... You may read more about this new theory at www.threexd.com No thanks... I'll take a backseat on this one. Gravitational Vector Force sounds sexy but I think it's bu****it... ummm... flawed. I'll stick with the Bernoulli's Principal for now. :-) |
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 03:26 PM |