Lee Elliott wrote:
> On Friday 11 Nov 2005 02:47, Josh Babcock wrote:
>
>>Lee Elliott wrote:
>>
>>>On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
>>>
After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
yesterday tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in
the Citation.
On Friday 11 Nov 2005 02:47, Josh Babcock wrote:
> Lee Elliott wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
> >>After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
> >>yesterday tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in
> >> the Citation.
> >>
> >>Well, I didn't find a di
Josh Babcock
>
> Lee Elliott wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
> >
> >>After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
> >>yesterday tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in the
> >>Citation.
> >>
> >>Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph
Lee Elliott wrote:
> On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
>
>>After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
>>yesterday tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in the
>>Citation.
>>
>>Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift
>>curve from a Surface
On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
> After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
> yesterday tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in the
> Citation.
>
> Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift
> curve from a Surface (a real one, part of the
After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours yesterday
tracking down the "pitch down" discontinuity in the Citation.
Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift curve
from a Surface (a real one, part of the real aircraft, not an isolated
test instance) and verify t
