Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

All ATP flight school=Joke

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
cforst513 said:
i actually got that from google :D here's the link:

http://mb-soft.com/public2/lift.html

i wanted to sound smart first before i 'fessed up to copyright infringement. and i'm with flyinscotsman, by the way :)

Interestingly (at least to me) that explanation at the web site is wrong. Not really wrong, but they use that silly phrase.

QUOTE: "The air that meets the front edge of a wing must get past it, to meet up again after the wing has gone by"

This, to me is idiocy.

The reason Bernoulli lift occurs on the wing is because the top of the wing (curved) creates "half" of a "bernoulli tube". The air is accelerated, not in relation to the air on the bottom of the wing, but because there is a boundary layer that acts as a poor upper half of the Bournoulli tube.

So all of the lift happens on the top of the wing (well, some reaction lift from the angled part on the bottom too, but it's not super material).
 
Lift This

You come to the majors interview board and ask how lift is created!!! You know what I work for a major and I don't give a rats ass... 80 years ago this might have been a fun conversation...BUT NOT NOW,,, anybody ever heard this???????????????????????

PFM

What else do you really need to know, except how to fix it when it breaks...


I think some CFI has nothing else to do except show us how little he/she knows.......

If you have not heard PFM before it won't be Long...

Waiting no more
 
I actually had a passenger on a deadhead last week ask me how lift was created. I started drawing a scale model of an underwire bra and told him to simply reference a Victoria's Secret catalog. He laughed his arse off and I didn't have to sound like a dork.
 
Hair-on-Fire said:
The FAA only gives out the questions. Gleim and the others give you what they think the answers are. The way I understand it, someone sued the FAA under the Freedom of Information Act and the courts ruled they had to release the questions.

Probably part of the reason us U.S. aviators don't get much respect outside the U.S.

Not that we get much here either...................:)

I am not sure we deserve much either. When it comes time to discuss pay we want to be compared to Medical Doctors. Here we have professional pilots who are unsure of the definition of lift. I think that is probably on page 1 of any private pilot manual. How much would you pay a MD who did not have basic knowledge of the body?

Maybe this is why our generation of pilots is willing to work for so much less. We have invested very little effort into obtaining our certificates and ratings.
 
sleeves said:
Here we have professional pilots who are unsure of the definition of lift. I think that is probably on page 1 of any private pilot manual..

Yeah, but my point was that the explanation found on page one is usually incorrect or at least woefully inadequate.

I was still a primary student and I kept scratching my head about why air just simply "had" to accelerate to "meet back up" when it hit a curved surface. I think it was finally a CFI advanced book (I can't remember the author but all the CFIs used it to study) that finally had a diagram that made sense and didn't talk about air doing all of this "meeting up".

On the other hand, I've given flight training to Dutch guys that could perform all sorts of physics calculations (since it's cheaper to talk about flying in Europe than to actualy do it) but they could barely keep an airplane upright.

Although our SAAB F.O. is correct that we don't really have to understand lift to do our jobs, I've always wondered at the lack of curiousity about basic phenomena that some exibit. But a lack of curiosity often comes out in interviews, which is probably why SAAB guy is comfortable flying a turboprop for a "major", it's the Peter Principal at work.
 
Lift is entirely created due to the shape of the wing. The upper surface of the wing is always bulged out more than the lower surface is.

Not correct. Ever hear of Newton? or a Symetric Airfoil?
 
sleeves...false analogy. An MD's basic knowledge of the human body is required to ply his craft on a daily basis.
Whether you know how to explain lift or myriad other topics that some pilots use as an inferiority complex step-ladder is mostly irrelevant to your proficiency as a pilot. Should we learn it? Absolutely. But just because you can't spit out definitions (because of their paltry utility) doesn't mean you aren't a professional.
Speak for yourself as to what you've put into obtaining your certificates and ratings. I put in plenty and bet many others have as well.
 
Last edited:
sleeves said:
I am not sure we deserve much either. When it comes time to discuss pay we want to be compared to Medical Doctors. Here we have professional pilots who are unsure of the definition of lift. I think that is probably on page 1 of any private pilot manual. How much would you pay a MD who did not have basic knowledge of the body?

Maybe this is why our generation of pilots is willing to work for so much less. We have invested very little effort into obtaining our certificates and ratings.


What did you expect when the advertisment says 0 hours to an airline job in 6 months. Heck, a friend of mine is going to school to become a pastry chef, she has to put in 1.5 years and earn as AS to be titled chef. All you need here is some money, and cool pilot uniform.Six months later, presto! One pilot ready for the regionals.

AA
 

Latest resources

Back
Top