05-17-2006, 07:29 PM
|
|
|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,513
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WarChild
So you're disputing the Ground Effect then? It's your theory that a wing within a wing's length of the ground is less effecient and therefor generates less lift? Strangely enough, pilots of the world disagree.
Again, a wing within a wing's length of the ground is MORE effecient, and generates MORE lift.
If you can't even get basic scientific principles straight, what makes you so qualified to debunk 9/11?
|
Why is such ultra-low-level flight aerodynamically impossible? Because the reactive force of the hugely powerful downwash sheet, coupled with the compressibility effects of the tip vortices, simply will not allow the aircraft to get any lower to the ground than approximately one half the distance of its wingspan?until speed is drastically reduced, which, of course, is what happens during normal landings.
In other words, if this were a Boeing 757 as reported, the plane could not have been flown below about 60 feet above ground at 400 MPH. (Such a maneuver is entirely within the performance envelope of aircraft with high wing-loadings, such as ground-attack fighters, the B1-B bomber, and Cruise missiles?and the Global Hawk.)
Nila Sagadevan, aeronautical engineer, pilot |
|
|