揚力を生むのは翼形上の気圧の分布であり、その分布の生じる理由の説明としてベルヌーイの定理とニュートンの第3法則があるが、まだよくわからない点も多いらしい。
揚力を生むのは翼形上の気圧の分布であり、その分布の生じる理由の説明としてベルヌーイの定理とニュートンの第3法則があるが、まだよくわからない点も多いらしい。
Yes, the critics are largely saying that too much emphasis has historically been placed on the role of the airfoil shape and Bernoulli's Principle in explaining how an aircraft flies, often at the expense of discussing other critical aspects like angle of attack and Newton's Third Law of Motion. Let's explore this in more detail:
Early Explanations:
Simplified Teaching for Lay Audiences:
De-emphasizing Angle of Attack:
Incomplete Understanding:
Misleading for Practical Applications:
Modern Computational and Experimental Insights:
Modern tools like computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and wind tunnel experiments show that lift arises from a combination of:
These tools have demonstrated that focusing solely on airfoil shape and Bernoulli's Principle oversimplifies the phenomenon.
Education and Accessibility:
Visual Appeal of Airfoil Shapes:
Limitations of Early Science:
Today, aerodynamics acknowledges that:
This balanced view corrects the historical overemphasis on the airfoil and provides a more comprehensive understanding of flight.
You're not alone in finding it counterintuitive that the airfoil- and Bernoulli's Principle-based explanation was historically presented as "simple" or "intuitive." Indeed, as you've pointed out, everyday observations like the flight of a paper airplane or the lift generated by flat or symmetric surfaces at an angle of attack suggest that Newton's Third Law—air being deflected downward—provides a much more accessible explanation for lift.
The historical emphasis on Bernoulli and airfoil shapes likely had less to do with simplicity and more to do with theoretical elegance, early scientific priorities, and perhaps a touch of academic pride. Let's explore why scholars might have leaned this way:
Theoretical Elegance:
Focus on Airfoil Design:
Lack of Computational Tools:
Desire to Highlight Intellectual Sophistication:
Overlooking Practical Observations:
Modern Accessibility:
Practical Observations Were Always There:
Simpler, More Direct Explanations Work:
It’s possible, though it’s more likely that:
The historical focus on Bernoulli and airfoils wasn’t necessarily an attempt to overcomplicate things to appear clever, but it did reflect the academic culture and scientific priorities of the time. Today, the integration of Newton’s Third Law into explanations of lift provides a more balanced and practical understanding, aligning better with both intuition and observation—like the flight of a paper airplane.
The ability of an airplane to fly is based on the fundamental principles of aerodynamics. Here's a detailed explanation of how an airplane gains lift and achieves flight:
For an airplane to fly, lift must overcome weight, and thrust must overcome drag.
Lift is primarily generated by the wings of the airplane. The key concepts are:
By balancing these principles, an airplane achieves flight and maintains stability in the air.
The proportion of lift generated by the airfoil shape (aerofoil) versus the angle of attack is not a fixed value, as it depends on several factors, including the design of the wing, the flight conditions, and the speed of the aircraft. However, we can break down the relationship qualitatively:
Low Angle of Attack:
High Angle of Attack:
Wing Design:
Speed:
Flaps and Slats:
The disagreement you're referring to likely stems from a debate in the aviation community about the role of Bernoulli's Principle versus Newton's Third Law in explaining lift. Here's a breakdown of the controversy and what those who challenge the Bernoulli-based explanation might argue:
This explanation emphasizes the pressure differential and often portrays it as the primary reason airplanes fly.
Critics argue that the conventional explanation is incomplete or misleading for several reasons:
Critics are arguing that:
Most modern explanations now combine Bernoulli's Principle and Newton's Laws:
This integrated view avoids oversimplifying the phenomenon and acknowledges that different aspects dominate under different conditions.
The landing gear of the British SE-5 (Scout Experimental 5) fighter plane, a World War I aircraft, was relatively simple yet robust, designed to handle rough airfields typical of the era. Here's an overview of its structure and suspension:
This combination of a simple main undercarriage and a tailskid was practical and reliable for the conditions in which the SE-5 operated. The design reflected the technological constraints and the operational needs of WWI aviation.
The Vintage Aviator's SE.5a Reproduction Project: This project involved meticulous reproductions of the SE.5a, the later variant of the SE-5. Their website offers comprehensive insights into the aircraft's construction, including the landing gear. You can find detailed images and descriptions here:
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum: The museum houses an SE.5a in its collection. Their online catalog provides high-resolution photographs of the aircraft, showcasing various components, including the landing gear. Explore their collection at: Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.
RAF Museum: The Royal Air Force Museum in the UK features an SE.5a in its exhibits. Their online resources include photographs and historical information about the aircraft. Visit their website at: RAF Museum SE.5a.
"SE5/5a Aces of World War 1" by Norman Franks: This book contains detailed illustrations and photographs of the SE-5 and SE.5a, including close-ups of the landing gear. It's available for purchase or through libraries.
These resources should provide you with a comprehensive visual understanding of the SE-5's landing gear structure.
13:42
How a WWI Biplane Works