Date: 31 Mar 2001 16:43:21 From: email@example.com Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC References: 1 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
BBarksdl <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > In the April issue of Discover magazine, Robert Kunzig challanges the textbook > explanation of the principles of flight. Personally I found the article less explicit (and more confusing) than this. It seemed to suggest that the mass of an aircraft must be supported by displacing an equal mass of air downward (at least, if the aircraft is gliding without engine power). But the article did acknowledge that a classic airfoil section does result in lower density air above the wing; and therefore I conclude from this that it's another way of saying that air mass has been displaced downward. The article was more explicit in renouncing the idea that lower density air pulls the aircraft upward. Fair enough; a vacuum, or partial vacuum, doesn't pull anything anywhere unless there is a higher density pushing on the opposite side.