Electronics-Related.com
Forums

A letter to President Biden

Started by Mike Monett VE3BTI October 19, 2022
On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote:
> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you >>>> fool. >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim >>> exist. >>> >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does >>> depend on how far they are apart. >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA >> >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and >> gliders don't have it to add. > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo.
He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again.
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:23:24 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 5:12:40 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 11:23:34 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 3:59:07 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:50:19 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 8:05:46 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:03:25 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 4:49:04 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 2:58:07 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:18:21 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, November 3, 2022 at 12:04:47 PM UTC-7, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/3/22 08:28, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 6:30:52 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:15:51 PM UTC+11, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On 11/1/22 15:14, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> corvid <b...@ckb.ird> wrote in news:tjn2j0$7te$1...@gioia.aioe.org: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On 10/30/22 12:11, Flyspeck wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 11:38:36 AM UTC-7, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On 10/30/22 09:32, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > > A tail gust certainly CAN and sometimes DOES stall a glider. Being flown close to stall speed to being with, a tail gust effectively reduces the airspeed to below the stall speed. Really, this involves the critical angle of attack, which is over the head of the readers of this newsgroup, so I won't discuss it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What's complicated about the critical angle of attack? I learned about it as a kid when I was making and flying model aircraft. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_attack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Answer: there is NOTHING complicated about angle of attack, fool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you didn't feel able to talk about it any kind of detail, which makes you the fool here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hardly. I know my audience, unlike you, which non-pilots, just like you. > > > > > > > > > > Gantguy does enjoy his self-servng delusions. > > > > > > > > Clearly, you DO NOT know your audience, EVEN YOURSELF! > > > > > > More complacent delusions. I've been posting here for more than twenty years. > > > > > > > > > You can't see angle of attack, but people understand speed, or the lack of it. ALL wings stall when the critical AOA is exceeded, which can occur at any airspeed. Probably something you haven't thought about. > > > > > > > > > Of course you can see angle of attack. It would help if you could see the boundary layer separating from the top of the airfoil, which does happen when the angle of attack gets too high, but any respectable mental model of what's going on will include that. > > > > > > > > No, the FUCK YOU CAN'T!!! The ONLY way of visualizing it is in a wind tunnel with smoke streams - then it is clearly visible. When I am flying it is NOT in a wind tunnel and there are NO smoke streams. Honestly, Bozo, your IGNORANCE knows NO BOUNDS!! > > > > > > Gnatguy can't visualise anything without his helpful smokes streams. I worked a vortex-shedding flow meter for a while, and didn't any visual aids to recognise a > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_vortex_street > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > A thermal bubble is actually a vortex ring, so you are talking nonsense, as you make clear by admitting that any bank angle makes your sink rate worse. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thermal bubbles are NOT usable lift, being so transitory. But you would have no way of knowing that, not being a glider pilot. > > > > > > > > > > A thermal bubble is one of stream of vortices being shed by an area of hot ground. > > > > > > > > You don't know WTF you are talking about - you have NEVER been in a glider and have NEVER thermalled. You are just a stream of IGNORANCE!! > > > > > > This is what you are writing off as a stream of ignorance. > > > > > > https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/glider_handbook/media/gfh_ch09.pdf > > > > > > I did post it earlier in this thread, but presumably you were much too self-confident to pay any attention. > > > > > > > > > In fact, they can be distracting, making you think that they are a real thermal and trick you into making a circle or two before you realize that it is a bubble. > > > > > > > > > > There's as bubble - vortex ring - above you, and another one below you, and you are in between. If you were dumb enough not to know that you'd miss out. > > > > > > > > No, it is YOU that are TOO DUMB to know how ignorant you are!!!! > > > > > > Gnatguy does like making that kind of claim. He doesn't realise quite how funny they are. > > > > > > > > > A real thermal is EXACTLY as I described because the conservation of momentum requires an equal amount of descending air that occurs immediately outside of the thermal. > > > > > > > > > Gantguy tells us half the story, and thinks that he's demonstrated that he knows what going on. > > > > > > > > You just continue EMBARASSING yourself with such IGNORANT statements! Do you think ANYBODY (excepting, perhaps, Decadent Linux User Numero Uno) gives you an ounce of credibility? > > > > > > Gantguy's extreme ignorance is coupled with a matching level of over-confidence. > > > > > > > > >The interface between them slows down the ascending air mass, making the interior of the thermal rise faster. So, Bozo, it is YOU that is talking nonsense, which is understandable because you know NOTHING about the topic. I, on the other hand, have been flying gliders for over forty years. > > > > > > > > > > And learned very little, most of which you seem to have forgotten. > > > > > > > > I have FORGOTTEN more than you will EVER KNOW. > > > > > > I'm sure that you like to think that. You certainly don't seem to know much now. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/glider_handbook/media/gfh_ch09.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > puts the typical diameter of a thermal at about 1000 feet, which doesn't sound all that tight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As said by a non-glider pilot. To circle with a diameter less than 1000 feet requires a 45 degree bank angle close to stall speed. Try looking up turn radius vs speed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why bother. You can't do quantitative argument,and you ignore detailed numbers when they are thrown at you. How much less than my 1000 foot diameter circle requires a 45 degree bank angle? > > > > > > > > > > > > Certainly in the range of 700 to 800 feet. You can see it for yourself on the Youtube video I provided. > > > > > > > > > > A Youtube video is an quantitative argument? > > > > > > > > You haven't even watched it. > > > > > > I rarely do. Even when recommended by people who know what they are talking about, they provide very little information per unit time spent watching them. > > > > > > > > > And there ARE formulas for calculating turn radius vs airspeed. There is one thing they don't take into account, however, and I wonder if you can figure out what that is. > > > > > The wingspan of the aircraft would seem to be part of the question. I can imagine that dihedral angle would come into it too. > > > > > > > > NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you fool. > > > > > > So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim exist. > > > > > > It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does depend on how far they are apart. > > > > > > > > If you'd posted a link to the formulas, that kind of detail would probably have been mentioned. > > > > > > > > I already did, but you were too stupid to notice. > > > > > > So post the link again. > > > > No Bozo, the link IS in my previous post - go review it. > You may think so. You make that kind of claim at regular intervals. and most of them are mistaken. I'm to going to waste my time/\ > > > > > https://skybrary.aero/articles/radius-turn > > > > > > > > > > is probably what you had in mind, but it doesn't include any formula and is - in fact - a diabolically poor exposition. > > > > > > > > Your reference says NOTHING quantitatively - try again. You are the one demanding quantities! > > > > > > And you aren't producing them. > > > > YOU are the one that want's it - YOU produce it. > And if I did you'd tell me that they weren't the quantities you had in mind. Not that anybody here thinks that you have a mind.
Get SERIOUS, Bozo - YOU are the one that asked for it, the turning radius.
> > -- > Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote:
> On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > >>>> fool. > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > >>> exist. > >>> > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > >> > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again.
Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION.
On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > >>>> fool. > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > >>> exist. > > >>> > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > >> > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius.
Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this.
> But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION.
Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > > >>>> fool. > > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > > >>> exist. > > > >>> > > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > > >> > > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. > Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this. > > But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION. > Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. > > It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). > > -- > Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
Let's summarize; Bozo thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current. 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER. 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time. Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about?
On 11/16/22 20:22, Capt. Flyguy, America's Pilot, wrote:
> > Let's summarize; Bozo thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: > 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. > 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current. > 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER. > 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time. > Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about?
Can't be sure, but you're the bigger Blowhard. Now, time for you to practice spin recovery, over a volcano.
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > > > >>>> fool. > > > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > > > >>> exist. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > > > >> > > > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > > > > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. > > Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this. > > > > But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION. > > > > Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. > > > > It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). > > Let's summarize; Bill thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: > 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. > 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current.
But clearly shouldn't be.
> 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER.
Not strictly true.
> 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time.
Before the senile dementia set in.
> Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about?
Gnatguy delusions about him knowing what he is talking about get exhibited here at regular intervals. The unbiased reader - anybody other that Gnatguy - knows that he is remarkably stupid, and hasn't got a clue what he is talking about. I think I know more about flying gliders that he now does, because he clearly doesn't know much about anything any more. I don't know much, but I'm not a demented idiot. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 11:53:08 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > > > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > > > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > > > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > > > > >>>> fool. > > > > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > > > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > > > > >>> exist. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > > > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > > > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > > > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > > > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > > > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > > > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > > > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > > > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > > > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > > > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > > > > > > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. > > > Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this. > > > > > > But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION. > > > > > > Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. > > > > > > It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). > > > > Let's summarize; Bill thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: > > 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. > > 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current. > But clearly shouldn't be. > > 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER. > Not strictly true. > > 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time. > Before the senile dementia set in. > > Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about? > Gnatguy delusions about him knowing what he is talking about get exhibited here at regular intervals. > > The unbiased reader - anybody other that Gnatguy - knows that he is remarkably stupid, and hasn't got a clue what he is talking about. > > I think I know more about flying gliders that he now does, because he clearly doesn't know much about anything any more. I don't know much, but I'm not a demented idiot. > > -- > Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
Hey Bozo, NOBODY is paying ANY attention to you - don't you GET IT????
On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 4:35:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 11:53:08 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > > > > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > > > > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > > > > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > > > > > >>>> fool. > > > > > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > > > > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > > > > > >>> exist. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > > > > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > > > > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > > > > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > > > > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > > > > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > > > > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > > > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > > > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > > > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > > > > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > > > > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > > > > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > > > > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > > > > > > > > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. > > > > Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this. > > > > > > > > But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION. > > > > > > > > Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. > > > > > > > > It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). > > > > > > Let's summarize; Bill thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: > > > 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. > > > 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current. > > But clearly shouldn't be. > > > 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER. > > Not strictly true. > > > 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time. > > Before the senile dementia set in. > > > Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about? > > Gnatguy delusions about him knowing what he is talking about get exhibited here at regular intervals. > > > > The unbiased reader - anybody other that Gnatguy - knows that he is remarkably stupid, and hasn't got a clue what he is talking about. > > > > I think I know more about flying gliders that he now does, because he clearly doesn't know much about anything any more. I don't know much, but I'm not a demented idiot. > > Hey NOBODY is paying ANY attention to you - don't you GET IT????
You are, for one. I could do with out that. I've been posting here for some twenty years and get enough of the sorts of responses I value - not yours obviously - to keep on doing it. You don't seem to have clue about your abysmal ranking in the local pecking order. You are down there with a a and Skybuck Flying, and lower than Cursitor Doom. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Monday, November 21, 2022 at 11:46:59 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 4:35:24 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 11:53:08 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:22:47 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 9:43:07 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 4:27:08 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 6:17:53 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > On 11/7/22 22:16, Flyguy wrote: > > > > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-8, corvid wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 11/6/22 23:23, Anthony William Sloman wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> NO, the wingspan IS NOT part of the equation - it is pure > > > > > > > >>>> physics. Can you be that STUPID??? And the wing dihedral has > > > > > > > >>>> ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with turn radius, you > > > > > > > >>>> fool. > > > > > > > >>> So you know enough to tell me that you didn't like my response, > > > > > > > >>> but you still can't come up with the formulas that you claim > > > > > > > >>> exist. > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> It seems odd that wing span doesn't come into turn radius. The > > > > > > > >>> difference in air-speed from on end of the wing to the other does > > > > > > > >>> depend on how far they are apart. > > > > > > > >> 4:32 into the video, it explicitly says that wing length is a > > > > > > > >> factor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhoOwKM7pOA > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I don't know what unaccounted-for "thing" Flyspeck doesn't want to > > > > > > > >> reveal. Typically, you'd want to add power in a tight turn, and > > > > > > > >> gliders don't have it to add. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. He was talking about the > > > > > > > > difference in wing tip speeds, NOT the radius of the turn. Pay > > > > > > > > better attention next time. I will give you credit for actually > > > > > > > > WATCHING the video, however, unlike Bozo. > > > > > > > He explained to you that "as the circle becomes smaller, the difference > > > > > > > in the circumference each wing flies becomes larger." He drew a nice > > > > > > > picture of an airplane going around a large circle, then another with a > > > > > > > much smaller circle. Can you see where this is going? Watch it again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, he is talking about difference in wing tip speeds. This has NOTHING to do with the actual turning radius. > > > > > Actually, it does, but Gnatguy is too far gone to realise this. > > > > > > > > > > But he DOES give information on how to calculate the turning radius, if you PAY ATTENTION. > > > > > > > > > > Gantguy doesn't understand what he sees - and posts links to - and think that everybody else is intellectually crippled in the same way that he is. > > > > > > > > > > It would be funny if he didn't so viciously upset when people point out that he has got stuff wrong (as he frequently does). > > > > > > > > Let's summarize; Bill thinks he knows MORE about flying gliders than I do based on: > > > > 1. He DOES NOT have a pilot's license, or even tried to get one. > > > > 2. I DO have a glider and powered pilot's license, and am current. > > > But clearly shouldn't be. > > > > 3. He has NO flight time WHATSOEVER. > > > Not strictly true. > > > > 4. I DO have FIVE THOUSAND HOURS of REAL flight time. > > > Before the senile dementia set in. > > > > Now, WHO do you think knows what he is talking about? > > > Gnatguy delusions about him knowing what he is talking about get exhibited here at regular intervals. > > > > > > The unbiased reader - anybody other that Gnatguy - knows that he is remarkably stupid, and hasn't got a clue what he is talking about. > > > > > > I think I know more about flying gliders that he now does, because he clearly doesn't know much about anything any more. I don't know much, but I'm not a demented idiot. > > > > Hey NOBODY is paying ANY attention to you - don't you GET IT???? > > You are, for one. I could do with out that. I've been posting here for some twenty years and get enough of the sorts of responses I value - not yours obviously - to keep on doing it. You don't seem to have clue about your abysmal ranking in the local pecking order. You are down there with a a and Skybuck Flying, and lower than Cursitor Doom. > > -- > Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
The Bottom Line Bozo, is that you don't know ANYTHING about flying. You can't even REMOTELY state how the turn radius of an airplane is calculated, let alone apply it to flying gliders. BTW, HOW much flight time DO you have, Bozo???