another stupid question

Just plain ol' brute force, and a lot of elevator?

I dunno!
They do it though, don't they!

Ask a silly question..............Lift is only really required for take off and landing, neither of which should be attempted upsidedown (or sideways)

Ever seen a Mig 29 flying upside down & Backwards? AMAZING!
Pete

QUOTE: Lift is only really required for take off and landing

Wrong! Lift is necesary at all times. When an airplane is inverted the nose is kept high enough to use the entire wing as an "elevator". This forces enough air down, creating an artifical "lift", to counteract the lift of the airfoil which would be trying to pull the airplane down. As foreward speed increases the angle can be decreased.

Simply put:

QUOTE: Just plain ol' brute force, and a lot of elevator?

Take a look at a cross-section of a wing sometime. You'll notice that most aerobatic and military fighter aircraft (capable of inverted flight) have what is called 'symmetrical airfoils." Simply put, this means that the curve of the wing will be the same on the top as it is on the bottom of the wing, thus producing lift whether inverted or in normal configuration. And yes, in order to fly, airplanes need lift (not just during take-off!) Without it, they wouldn't get off the ground!

Wow, you mean I was right?

I figured it had to be somethng like that.

What about sideways (that is, aircraft on its side) flight? Is that all brute force and rudder? I reckon the fuselage wouldn't give you much help at all in that configuration.

Yes, the airfoil is designed as the most efficient way of producing lift, but just as your arm is lifted when you stick your hand out in the wind during a car ride, lift is being produced the same way on the upper surface of the wings, fuselage, horizontal stabilizer during inverted flight.... Brute Force, yes.

Also, you stated that the only time lift is needed is during take-off's & landings.... that isn't accurate I'm afraid, as "Lift" is one of the four factors that make Flight possible; "Lift", "Thrust", "Weight", "Drag".

An F-104's wing choard is basically that of a tapered edged sheet of plywood, but it could fly however the pilot requested it to.
(check out an F-117's wing choard (airfoil)

Oh yeah... and I recall watching a fellow in a modified Pitts S-1 (accessory landing gear on top wing/tail gear on top of verticle stabilizer) land, taxi around the ramp, then take-off while riding upside down.

"For those who have tasted flight, forever more walk the earth with their eyes turned skyward, for there they have been, and there they long to return"

Frank

QUOTE: Originally posted by oldhooker Yes, the airfoil is designed as the most efficient way of producing lift, but just as your arm is lifted when you stick your hand out in the wind during a car ride, lift is being produced the same way on the upper surface of the wings, fuselage, horizontal stabilizer during inverted flight.... Brute Force, yes. Also, you stated that the only time lift is needed is during take-off's & landings.... that isn't accurate I'm afraid, as "Lift" is one of the four factors that make Flight possible; "Lift", "Thrust", "Weight", "Drag". I thought lift and thrust were necessary for flight and had to be sufficient to overcome weight and drag. An F-104's wing choard is basically that of a tapered edged sheet of plywood, but it could fly however the pilot requested it to. (check out an F-117's wing choard (airfoil) Oh yeah... and I recall watching a fellow in a modified Pitts S-1 (accessory landing gear on top wing/tail gear on top of verticle stabilizer) land, taxi around the ramp, then take-off while riding upside down. "For those who have tasted flight, forever more walk the earth with their eyes turned skyward, for there they have been, and there they long to return" Frank

Letting the Fuselage be the means of lift!



"A great many pilots are no longer with us because they neglect the precision".... "Bob" Hoover

Frank

QUOTE: Originally posted by oldhooker Yes, the airfoil is designed as the most efficient way of producing lift, but just as your arm is lifted when you stick your hand out in the wind during a car ride, lift is being produced the same way on the upper surface of the wings, fuselage, horizontal stabilizer during inverted flight.... Brute Force, yes. Also, you stated that the only time lift is needed is during take-off's & landings.... that isn't accurate I'm afraid, as "Lift" is one of the four factors that make Flight possible; "Lift", "Thrust", "Weight", "Drag". An F-104's wing choard is basically that of a tapered edged sheet of plywood, but it could fly however the pilot requested it to. (check out an F-117's wing choard (airfoil) Oh yeah... and I recall watching a fellow in a modified Pitts S-1 (accessory landing gear on top wing/tail gear on top of verticle stabilizer) land, taxi around the ramp, then take-off while riding upside down. "For those who have tasted flight, forever more walk the earth with their eyes turned skyward, for there they have been, and there they long to return" Frank

I thought lift and thrust were necessary for flight and had to be sufficient to overcome weight and drag. (sorry about the double post)

QUOTE: I thought lift and thrust were necessary for flight and had to be sufficient to overcome weight and drag. (sorry about the double post)

Yes, you're correct. What Frank meant to say was that lift, weight, thrust and drag are the 4 factors acting on an aircraft in flight, not the factors that make flight possible.

You'll notice that lift is an opposite of weight, and thrust is an opposite of drag. While lift keeps an airplane in the air, the weight of the plane wants to bring it back to earth. While thrust keeps and airplane moving forward, drag wants to slow it down. The amount of lift generated must be greater than the weight pulling it down, and the thrust generated must be greater than the airplane's drag slowing it down. Inverted flight is no different than "normal" flight, the four factors are still acting on the aircraft and everything's cool...except your flight suit which now is coated in light green puke!

>>...factors that make Flight possible; "Lift", "Thrust", "Weight", "Drag".<<

>I thought lift and thrust were necessary for flight and had to be sufficient to overcome weight and drag.<

This is true, but that isn't what you said initially... you said Lift was only needed for take-off's & landings. While in a turn, for instance, these factors determine how much G Load the wings can stand and how long it will take to complete a 360 degree turn.

Go to the library and see if you can find one of the Sanderson Ground School text books.... the whole thing is well explained and documented in there..... Pitch, Roll & Yaw.... Thrust, Lift, Weight & Drag.... Weight & Balance.... and how they EACH must work in harmony at the touch of the Pilot.


"Universally speaking, we're straight & Level"
Frank

Not a stupid question at all.
Sorry folks, this became a bit lenghty in context, but I was trying to be as helpful as possible.
All of the previous comments are correct. The missing component is the degree of speed vs. drag, and of equal importance, the angle of attack. They are all inter-related. As stated earlier, an aerobatic aircraft such as a Pitts Special, has a more symmetric airfoil, meaning that it's airfoil's bottom is curved in the same manner as the upper surface, but usually not quite as much. A perfectly symmetric airfoil will fly equally well whether inverted or upright. It's only the angle of attack that gives it lift. If you took an airfoil with a curvature on the top, and a basically flat bottom (such as a Clark "Y" airfoil) you could still fly it inverted, but the required angle of attack (AOA) would be much greater than that required in normal flight. This increased AOA causes much more drag, and so then more thrust (brute force) is required to keep it lifting. Airfoils in modern fighters are designed for not only lift, but penetration through the air (not to mention the effects of shock waves at + Mach speeds), and so the difference in curvature between upper and lower surfaces is not as extreme. Given the power and speed provided by the powerplant of these fighters, they can fly inverted, but just not as efficiently as upright because being inverted, the wing still has a greater AOA, and more drag. As for sideways flight, or "knife edge", on some aircraft, the fuselage and the empennage (tail feathers) do provide enough surface area to provide lift, but again at the expense of thrust to overcome drag. Keep in mind that most fighters (and aerobatic) aircraft can stand on their tails, because they have enough power to weight ratio to go straight up. The only thing limiting them from continuing up is the loss of atmosphere which is not only necessary for thrust, but for aerodynamic control. So, if you lose one or the other, or eventually both, you're gonna fall back to earth. On the other extreme, look at an airfoil that is designed for the slowest speed, and the most lift, that being of a glider. These airfoils are not only flat on the bottom, but have a reverse curve, or camber, to them, much like a birds wing (ever see a bird fly upside down?). The only way a glider can fly inverted is to be constantly pulling positve G's, such as in a loop. (The same goes for birds I would assume, but since I am Aviarilally illiterate I don't know for sure). Thanks for reading this far. Anyone else out there an aeronautical engineer, please correct me.
Hope this helps, Stinger

Hey Frank -that looks like a shot from the window of a Gemini flight, right?

Originally posted by oldhooker Letting the Fuselage be the means of lift! I'd be full throttle with right rudder at that point (with maybe just a bit of left aileron), but then again I wasn't flying, thankfully! May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply lpolpo22 Member since December 2002 Posted by lpolpo22 on Sunday, August 24, 2003 4:25 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by oldhooker >>...factors that make Flight possible; "Lift", "Thrust", "Weight", "Drag".<< >I thought lift and thrust were necessary for flight and had to be sufficient to overcome weight and drag.< This is true, but that isn't what you said initially... you said Lift was only needed for take-off's & landings. While in a turn, for instance, these factors determine how much G Load the wings can stand and how long it will take to complete a 360 degree turn. Go to the library and see if you can find one of the Sanderson Ground School text books.... the whole thing is well explained and documented in there..... Pitch, Roll & Yaw.... Thrust, Lift, Weight & Drag.... Weight & Balance.... and how they EACH must work in harmony at the touch of the Pilot. "Universally speaking, we're straight & Level" Frank Thanks a lot for your input Oldhooker but I think the statement you're referring to was posted by another member. Reply lpolpo22 Member since December 2002 Posted by lpolpo22 on Sunday, August 24, 2003 4:36 PM I feel enlightened, I have puzzled over this since I was a kid and I was hoping someone would say that it was not a stuppid question - thanks for letting me off easy. Reply DrewH Member since May 2003 From: Abbotsford, B.C. Canada Posted by DrewH on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:03 PM It is good to feel enlightened, but keep in mind that this is just a small and simple explanation of how an aircraft really stays aloft. If you wish to find out the reallity of the theory of flight, go to your local chapters or large book store and look at the book "From the ground up". It is a book to which all pilots will study for their first taste at flight. It is mandatory to study this book for 200 hours before writing a private pilot licence exam. Take a peek and you will probably pick it up to understand all of the basics a pilot HAS to know. This is a very easy to understand book, I know. I studied it for 6 months to get a glider licence, more for a pilot licence, and still refered to it during jet training. Then I taught from it to new pilots. The more you understand about aircraft the better you can make your models come to life. Take this plastic and model it! Reply stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:17 PM Who observes, yet never wonders? Who wonders, yet never questions? Who questions, yet never learns? There is no such thing as a stupid question. Failure to ask is the first measure of stupidity. May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply oldhooker Member since July 2003 From: Piedmont Triad, NC (USA) Posted by oldhooker on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:22 PM lpolpo22: My apologies, Sir, I misread the senders name. (see the trouble you got me in, Migs?) Asking questions about things unknown is not "Stupid".... not asking is. Stinger: Hehehe... you know, when I look at it, it does look like it's taken out the front of a Gemini capsulr, but if it's that, he's WAY too low! That picture was actually made from the left seat of a 1976 Cessna 152 while at the top of a "Wing Over", at around 4,500 ft. ______ Frank Reply Anonymous Member since November 2005 Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:27 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by stinger There is no such thing as a stupid question. I used to believe that until I once saw a post where a guy asked Shermanfreak why his name was Robert............That made me start to wonder.........never mind, I'm in enuff trouble. Reply Edit stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:30 PM Frank - You got me on that one! It was the "Universal" part that made me think that way. At 4500 ft. it's even funnier! Thanks for the laugh! Dennis (stinger). May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:38 PM Merlin - LOL Wish I could have seen that post. Amazing what we see here in the forum, but then again, I've said some stuff that I would have retracted. Fank - Nice shades Dude!! What were you flying here? May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply lpolpo22 Member since December 2002 Posted by lpolpo22 on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:48 PM Is it stupid to mispell "stuppid" Reply Anonymous Member since November 2005 Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:50 PM ................................. i noh jo h77!s moy ....................................... quote: Ever seen a Mig 29 flying upside down & Backwards? .................................6.............................................6 .................................Z.............................................Z .................................9...............6Z 9 I W..................9 .................................I...............................................I ................................W............................................W ...... i 9 N I 2 V W V Reply Edit stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 6:40 PM lpolpo22 - Not now that you recognized it. Your're a smart guy, you go back and look again at your work. it shows that you care. Nothing stupid about that. Good job on checkin' your six. May have to give you a call sign. PS - Look around at some of the other typos we've made on other threads. You're just part of the group, guy. May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 6:42 PM Migs - Is that an image from a HUD? Which I guess upside down would be a DUH! May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply oldhooker Member since July 2003 From: Piedmont Triad, NC (USA) Posted by oldhooker on Sunday, August 24, 2003 7:04 PM Dennis, I guess I was thinking, universal in the scheme of things... like flying around the side of the planet.... but you know, the more I look at it, the more it DOES look like the view out the left window of a Gemini.... maybe we could say it was one of the Gemini's they tested that glided under a ragalo sail..... In the picture, I am in the front seat of my Uncle's J-3, holding my camera out of the open door/window, while crusing over the countryside just west of Winston Salem, NC back in '88. That picture was made the summer I crashed, which effectively ended my days of flying. That love never quite goes away, and I guess a lot of that energy is diverted into my models and art. This has sure been an active post... I guess we can all remember the time when we were asking exactly the same questions, and not knowing until someone told us. Now, there's even enrichment just getting to talk "Flying" again with people.... like the old Airport Gang always did! Hey, speaking of the "Old Airports", ya'll just got to check out this website: http://members.tripod.com/airfields_freeman/index.htm, which catalogs old and abanodoned airports all over the United States, and if you don't find the one you know about, contact: Paul Freeman, he'd be happy to include it in his archives. (on his site, check out the "Swope Farm" airport at "Fan Rock, WV"!!!!!!) Speaking of wing designs and how air works as it travels accross a wing surface, lets get a list of your favorite airplane that COULD get in & out of there with little or no difficulty..... My choice would be the "PZL Wilga"! (or an AN-2!) Seven thirty three romeo tango's rolling two six in Richlands" Frank Reply stinger Member since January 2003 From: Everywhere Posted by stinger on Sunday, August 24, 2003 7:28 PM To all members, I know this is getting ot, sorry. Frank - Your'e the first I've met since I was a kid to remember the Regallo wing on a Gemini. When I was a kid I had a kit of the Mercury and Gemini capsules. The Gemini actually had the landing skids and gear doors as part of the assembly. I have now a reissue of that kit. It has the separate gear doors, but no landing skids. I always wanted to display it hanging from that Regallo wing (scratch built wing, obviously) with those skids sticking out (damn you, now that's ANOTHER thing I have to find on ebay). Maybe that is what got me on this kick of building aircraft concepts that never quite made it. Check out www.luft46.com . That's my current craze. Thanks for the lead on old airports. As a kid growing up around Denver's Stapleton airport in the late 50's and early 60's, I noticed a lot of windsocks that just didn't seem to have a reason to really be where they were. I've been looking for a source of old maps that might show those old rural airstrips. Haven't checked out your links yet, but will soon. Thanks for the heads up. PS - Re: Gemini photos. You can always say it was from project "Gambit". Wait...... there's a knock on my door.........it's the CIA........gotta go. May an Angel be your wingman, and the Sun be always at your six Reply 12 JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login Register SEARCH FORUMS FREE NEWSLETTER SIGN UP By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy. FORUMS PRODUCT REVIEWS READER GALLERY HOW TO VIDEOS SHOP ABOUT US FREE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SIGN UP By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy. More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy