John Wojnaroski wrote: > Andy Ross wrote: > > with an aircraft. An aircraft held in a level sideslip will turn, for > > example, due to the side forces caused by the slip, no wing lift need > > be involved. > > Define 'level', if the wings are level, REALLY level, the rudder will > produce a torgue to turn the nose until the counter-acting moment > produced by beta is equal and there she'll stay, in a skid, but no > turning. In fact, as Dave noted, you have to cross control with the > ailerons to keep the aircraft from banking and turning if you step on > a rudder.
Everything you say is true. But none of it means that the aircraft won't turn, which is all I said. You can make an aircraft "turn" with forces that aren't produced by the wings (which should be obvious, since some aircraft don't have "wings" yet can still turn). I tried to be precise, but if you interpreted something else from my text then I offer my apologies. > > Aphorisms like "lift causes turns" or "the rudder doesn't turn the > > aircraft" are training and educations tools; they're true as > > metaphors, but aren't physical laws. > > so what you're saying is ignore the math and EOMs which the last > time I checked seem to be what aero engineers use to design, build, > and test based on kinematics and physical forces. Um, no. That's certainly not what I said. In fact, that's almost exactly the opposite of what I said: simple English statements and real world physics are different things, and not always 100% compatible. Andy _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
