Aerodynamics?

[Brett_Henderson]

Sorry.. I spent the day helping a friend install a water heater..

I didn't answer the question directly,

[OTTOL]

Sorry.. I spent the day helping a friend install a water heater..

no problem.....the only reason I've been able to keep this up for so long myself is that the airplane has been broken for the past two weeks!!!


[quote]I didn't answer the question directly,

[Brett_Henderson]

Ok.. I think I'm seeing your point more clearly, and it makes me wanna make mine more clear.

Here's why I had a problem grasping it..

[quote]You are maintaining that an overwhelming amount of the lift that a wing produces occurs as a result of pressure differential and that while "action/reaction" does effect a wing, the effects are mimimal due to force cancellation.

[OTTOL]

[quote]

See why I can't answer this question

[Brett_Henderson]

I'm not trying to dodge the question.. You yourself are pointing out the "near identical" performance and then asking we to say otherwise

[Brett_Henderson]

You're posing the question like I'll not agree that different wings will have different L/D curves.. OF COURSE I agree ..

[OTTOL]

You're posing the question like I'll not agree that different wings will have different L/D curves.. OF COURSE I agree ..

Actually....No

[beaky]

Still at it, eh?



Later....

[beefhole]

Still at it, eh?



Later....

Yes, I think us measly private pilots should stay out of this one  :D

[Brett_Henderson]

I can't keep restating that the bulk of the lift does NOT come from the airfoil redirecting the air.

I can't come up with any other way to say that it's AoA that's responsible for the net redirection.

I'd be boring you more than I'm boring myself if I tried to re-word how Bernoulli's pressure differential makes the difference between a control surface and a wing.

And I don't think any of that flies in the face of NASA's stance..  I'll go search out the "settlement" to this debate (that was in (or linked to) a NASA site) that pretty much concedes that you can't have one without the other (redirection lift without pressure differential)..  In fact.. I believe Rotty posted something along those lines.

Ok.. I'm done too  

[OTTOL]

Still at it, eh?



Later....

Yes, I think us measly private pilots should stay out of this one

[OTTOL]

[quote]

[Brett_Henderson]

Quote from Brett_Henderson on Yesterday at 8:34pm:

I'd be boring you more than I'm boring myself if I tried to re-word how Bernoulli's pressure differential makes the difference between a control surface and a wing.

From Ottol:

Whoah!! You might want to re-think that statement.    

No.. I might want to re-word it, but I won't.. we're both weary of this  :)

[beaky]

Still at it, eh?



Later....

Yes, I think us measly private pilots should stay out of this one  :D

.....on the contrary....I think one of the most crucial attributes any aviator should possess, is modesty.

I'd be a fool to think that I know everything.  :)

I'm rarely modest, but as a pilot I'm pretty humble...

Just lost interest in the discussion (if not my endless fascination with the fact that airplanes fly with "no visible means of support")...

[flaminghotsauce]

Good discussion. It took a while to read, and I skimmed in a few places, but here I am on page 9 of a months long discussion.

While there were discussions of flat planes, and barn doors, NOBODY mentioned the barn roof. This alone proves Bernoulli's force will provide all the lift, if necessary. A high wind will lift the roof off of a barn, with no lift provided from underneath, i.e. no Newton. It's all Bernoulli force acting on the top, like blowing across the top of the dollar bill example. Once it's lifted, however, Newton gets underneath it and moves it along. But the initial lift is all Bernoulli. There is no down wash.

In a normal wing, there are both forces in play, but I fall into Brett's camp. Bernoulli is the difference.