completeaerogeek

Yes your calculations are correct. I joined the RAAF in 1981. Now on to business- Not that this is the point - I was demonstrating that a conventionally cambered wing is a lot less common than people think) Which modern airliners do not have supercritical wings? The entire Airbus family does (unless you can find otherwise) and most certainly The A380 does. IN fact it is an SC(2) -0606 Airfoil (see attached) All modern airliners use SC wings or MCrit would be lower than it is.. SC reduces the standing shock wave as the upper surface air flow approaches M1.0. The M.1.0 issue is related to the density drop and the air 'turns the corner of the upper surface. Lower density, lower speed of sound. Attached Files: a" data-thumb-height="50"> A380 NASA wing profile.JPG

Hi all, it is amazing to me that there are still people out there teaching silly ideas about how lift works. Even CASA is still pushing things that aero professionals laugh at despite being told so many times that what they say is fiction. As a 33 year aviation professional and University lecturer with an MSc in this stuff, it drives me nuts! Here are several references that may embarrass your flying instructor (and a lot of professional pilots) A clue: One if from NASA the other from Cambridge University so we can be pretty confident in what they say. In reality there is NO DEBATE or 'alternate theories' about how lift works amongst aerodynamics specialists. At the fringes in tiny percentages there is some weird stuff but for 99% of what is relevant this is the story... If your flying instructor or aero guru tries to argue-tell them to write to NASA and explain themselves. Should get a laugh from the team at the Glenn Research Centre! http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/wrong1.html http://www.219sqn.aafc.org.au/Flight/Simple%20Aerodynamics-How%20planes%20fly.pdf Read/watch and enjoy. In summary: Lift IS NOT caused by two air particles racing eachother over the upper and lower surfaces. They never even get close. (watch the streamlines in the video) A wing IS NOT A VENTURI. Once you take the top of a venturi is is not longer a closed system so that goes out the window. Lift is caused by bending the air just like a ceiling fan. Both surfaces bend the air downwards causing a reaction force. The pressure differentials ARE NOT caused by wing shape. They are caused because the wing is pushing and pulling the air in different directions. If wing shape was the reason then how would a hang glider, kite,or sailboat work? They have single surface aerofoils with the same distance top and bottom. They use exactly the same physics and formulas. Also paper planes have flat wings, so to missiles and some aircraft like the F-104. Most military aircraft for a long time have had symmetrical wings (equal camber) And here's the kicker: Every airliner flying today has a supercritical wing that is curved on the bottom and flatter on top... How's them apples? Please don't assume your flying instructor has any special knowledge that can refute the laws of physics. A good pilot will always question things that sound dodgy. Oh and "You don't have to understand - it you just have to believe it" is nonsense. This works fine for religions where there is no proof or evidence but not in physics... Have fun! The Completeaerogeek...

G'day all and Harro, Yes you can explain lift very well without knowing anything about Bernoulli. Bernoulli's theorems were base on Newton's Second Law. Lift is caused by turning flow or 'bending the air' if you like. Google NASA Incorrect Lift Theories. The wing does not act like a venturi that to is a myth. The simplest wing is a flat plate and it works very well as up to about 8 degrees AOA. Lift quite simply is caused by AOA and wing camber (if any) which cause the air to be bent downwards invoking Newtons 2nd and 3rd laws. Any pressure differentials are a result of the wing physically moving teh air. The air DOES NOT EVER meet up at the trailing edge if you are talking about the same 'particles' this is a myth called Equal transit time. On YouTube search how wings work Babinsky and watch the streamlines blow up this ridiculous myth. The Kutta condition is a starting vortex flow at the trailing edge that detaches at about 3okts and is never seen again so it not relevant nor is Coanda which is in dispute as to whether it exists at all or is simply viscosity..