Ion01

All of your questions have been answered, and the facts have been addressed, multiple times in this thread by billvon, kallend, myself, and others. Please read the whole thing if you haven't yet. I know it's long. You are mistaken in your ideas. A plane does not climb faster into the wind. A plane takes OFF faster in a shorter distance into the wind, because planes take off from the ground. Once you are in the air the ground ceases to exist for all intents and purposes. Quote I will concede that you are correct, a plane will climb just as fast into the wind and downwind. I did confuse visual references in that particular case. PS. Please see post #89 for everything else.

You're confusing me with somebody else, just as you are confusing the air with the ground. My bad, I should have type "he" instead of "you".

Current aerodynamics does when such things like the reynald numbers are used but this was not always the case. Physics did not always have the math and ability to explain it.

Oh my god, we're back to square one...sigh. No it doesn't climb quicker into the wind. Nothing changes turning downwind (excepting visual illusions and the special case of wind shear). No the stall doesn't change with or without wind. I understand the issues with visual references but I beleive that what is happening here is certain effects are so small in most cases that it is left out in all cases where as they can become large enough in some to have an effect. Lets look at a plane flying in a moving car. At this point visual references have no effect as in the car the plane appears to fly in a circle in relation to the car but in a large spiral in relation to the ground the car is moving over. The air in the car is the "wind" as it is moving in relation to the ground. This is where most people stop and is good enough for most all applications such as general aviation and parachuting but not enough for all. In this example inertia is left out. The airplane appears to remain at the same speed and does in relation to the car but not the earth, therefore, when the plane turns down towards the front of the car (downwind) it is accelerating. This is better understood if you remove the earth and replace it with a flat theoretical plane that is not moving at all. Once again, inertia doesn't seem to play any part as the car is only going 60 miles per hour and the plane it probably paper and doesn't have much inertia. Scale all that up and now inertia begins to play a part! Lets also make the turn more extreme. Lets say the control surfaces such as the elevator deflect at say 60 degrees so the turn is extremely sharp. That means it must accelerate even faster. Lets make the plane heavier and the car much faster. Now inertia and its effects start to show. Once again they may not show very much in gerenal aviation or parachuting or hardly at all but lets forget about airspeed versus ground speed and look at real speed in relation to no motion. Now things are different. If I made a turn, and I do, with an aircraft with 45 degree defection on the elevator down wind and even with a thrust to weight ratio of 2:1 I must give myself more altitude on a windy day to give the aircraft enough time to fight inertia and accelerate to the speed of the air mass (wind) for it to start flying again.

I did quote the pilot as since you appealed to authority I figured you would listen to someone with authority.

Lets also remember that according to current physics a bumble bee cant fly and humans aren't capable of lift as much as we do.

Are you trying to clame an aircraft has the same climb rate downwind as upwind? Maybe at some point when I have the time I can produce a video of an aircraft turning downwind with no wind and high wind with the same inputs in both cases. You will see the no wind aircraft fly like normal.....the one dealing with a downwind turn will stall. This is due to inertia. And remember the aircraft has a means of propulsion and parachutes do not.

Quote from a pilot: "An aircraft that can be rotated to face downwind faster than it can accelerate with the wind, will experience an airspeed loss and performance loss." Why don't you answer my questions and address the facts instead of the typical fallacy of appealling to authority?

I am really surprised that people don't understand this concept. Flying in the wind is different than flying without wind due to inertia and airflow issues. Take the ground out of the discussion and this fact doesn't change. Lets look at this example: Flying a remote control aircraft, even with a means of propulsion that a parachute does not have, one must fly very different in wind. If you make a dramatically sharp turn without wind the same turn with wind will cause the aircraft to stall as the inertia of the craft keeps it from moving with the wind during the turn. I have seen numerous crashes due to people making this very mistake! When turning down wind you must turn slower when making down wind turns and turn harding into the wind in really strong winds. When you factor in inertia and airflow over a wing and other surfaces wind plays a big factor! Lets put it this way: What would happen if an aircraft turned down wind on takeoff? Why does an aircraft climb quicker into the wind than when downwind? The same factors effecting the aircraft effect the us in parachutes.

I can't believe 13 people actually said no! Does no one care about freedom anymore. When you aren't even free in your own home and people think that's the way it should be then there is a serious problem!

You may be thinking of the breaked approach: an approach to landing which results in the breaking of bones and/or the body. We may be getting an example of that one soon but the braked approach is a whole different story.

How about a braked approach?

.....flare to hard and collapse the canopy. Do you even know what or how to do a 2 stage flare?

And you would know what I have been following or what I know of science how? Of course, resort to the typical personal attacks instead of evidence or the facts.

The reality: All this debate is meaningless as there is no grant of power, under the constitution, for the government to have any involvement in healthcare. This is such an inescapable fact that proponents of the government involvement have this to say: Judge Napolitano: where in the constitution is the federal government charged with maintaining people's health? Congressman Clyburn: There's nothing in the constitution that says the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do." CNSNEWS.com: "....where specificallly does the consitution grant congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?" Pilosi: "Are you serious? Are you serious?" (she never answered the question.) Reporter: "What part of the constitution do you think gives congress the authority to mandate individuals have to purchase health insurance?" Senator Landrieu: "Well, we're very lucky as memebers of the senate to have constitutional lawyers on our staff, so I'll let them answer that." These people took an oath. They said this: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the constitution of the united states against enemies, foreign and domestic.... So when are they going to start fulfilling thier oath. They won't answer questions about the constitution or they simply state it doesn't give them to power but they do it anyways! Why are people okay with this? If you don't like the constitution go somewhere else! This is not a democracy! Its a republic!

I got another tasty morsel for you! "I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance. I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric was very frightening. It created a climate in which violence took place. I wish that we would all curb our enthusiasm with some of the statements being made, understanding that some of the ears it is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume. Our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe. But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause." - Nancy Pilosi So when the violent people showed up in Copenhagen to demand action be taken to stop global warming and they were throwing bricks and such is she and al gore going to take responsibility for thier talks and fearmongering. What about thier blatent lies like the temperature prediction and such gore made. No. It is only the conservative that we must fear. Does anyone remember the DHS report? It is the people who think government is too big and we should follow the constitution we should free violence from....not the ones who think it needs to be bigger and should be by any means necessary..... not the ones who think things like laws inumerated in the constitution are the only thing standing in the way of what they call "progress". No it is the ones who think we should follow the law that you should fear!

Data shouldn't be inaccessible, but neither should it be available on demand until the researchers have analyzed it, verified it and are ready to present it. Do you make all your firm's working documents available on demand to anyone that wants to see them? So we shouldn't be allowed the freedom of having information until the elitist controlling scientist who must protect thier own interests have "analyzed" (manipulated is the more correct term) first. All that does is allow them to do exactly what has happened with this whole climate gate thing!

This is an interesting point. In my eyes, all the science supports global warming as fact, and even most of the politicians support global warming as fact. So where are the deniers getting their information? From conspiracy theorists? From oil companies? With politicians and scientists behind this measure, who is trying to subvert it? The "deniers" are getting there info from actual data not predictions which the global warming theorist are still relying on. They continue to use the predictions from 10 years ago that have been falsified by actual data.

No, I think global warming exists, and I take it quite seriously. To me, the issue is one of science, and I detest the way it's been politicized. Much of the discussion is carried out in a silly way, rather than in a mature and thoughtful way. These forums are no exception. So you beleive global warming exists despite that the data supposedly proving it was falsified and that even the IPCC has said we have been cooling for the past 10, we have cooled to the point of undoing the warming of the past 30 years and could continue to cool for the next 20 year. Sounds like global warming is happening to me too!

True, all the more reason they should all be held accountable instead of making excuses by saying its okay for them to cheat cause everyone else does (I know thats not what you were saying though).

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Lilley A conservative politician with no science background? Al gore A liberal politician with no science backgroud.

They wouldn't dare report a democrat or progressive cheating. If they did it would excused by saying that they were in a bad marriage and they just work so hard for the people and excuse after excuse... You would think that if someone stole millions of dollars they would be held accountable by the media, dems, and progressives right? Nope! Here is what one media source had to say about a man convicted for just that: all Creamer did was "float checks to keep a great progressive public interest organization alive that he was running at the time." Its the typical "end justifies the means" ideologies! If it helps you its okay to lie, cheat, and steal but if it doesn't help you its bad???? As rediculous as that sounds that is exactly what they are doing. Creamer isn't the first criminal to influence or be a part of the current administration either. There are more than a handful of people who cheated on their taxes including the guy who is now writing the tax codes.....and his excuse is he didn't understand it....but now he is writing it? What?!?!? We had a czar who found how to fight for his agendas in jail! Now we have a man who is was awarded a lifetime achievement award for a book he wrote in jail! A book they say is the blueprint for the progressive agenda.....he wrote it in jail! When are people going to be held responsible for thier actions? When will we stop making excuses? When one of our nations leaders say thier favorite political philosopher is Mao, a man who has murdered millions, its just excuse after excuse! When another says its okay to kill children until they are two yrs old people say "its just an idea.....at least he is thinking out of the box!" What? When government organizatons are deleting and falsifying data, when they say they need to lie and exaggerate or do whatever it takes to get done what they want done, when they maniplute the info and the people, when they break the law.....its okay because they are just trying to save the planet......they are the good ones and everyone who doesn't accept thier lies and false data is a holocaust denier???? What has happened to truth???? Justice???? Accoutability? Responsibility? Murderers are just victims of society, children don't fail they just have defered success, and the fearmongers are the ones who say the world isn't going to turn to acid and this is our last chance to save it! Our political leaders say that men who have murdered millions to get thier power, who are oppressive dictators, control the minds of thier countries people with lies, and take all they can for themselves are the enlightened ones who have brought thier country and its people to a better way of life. They say you don't know how good they have it unless you have been there! Is this what we want here in America? When will we say "enough!" and demand our leaders be held accountable for thier lies, for thier breaking of the laws and the constitution? No we will not become a communist country.....Why? because the people will stand up and fight? No..... because they will just call it unionization and redistribution of wealth, the dictator will be called a savior, and those who ask for freedom will be called a threat to the people and label terrorists and the real terrorist will just be called bringers of man made disasters. When will we stop giving the rights garranteed to only citizens of the United states and stop granting them to enemies of war and mass murderers and terrorist from other countries? When will we stop giving more rights to convicted fellons who are living in jail on our tax dollars that we have as ones who have never broken the law? When will we stop putting our soldiers on trial when the enemy claims torture as the enemy was told to claim whether there is proof or not? When will we be given back the rights garanteed to us under the constitution? We cannot gather without a permit from the government. We cannot say what we wont if some judge thinks its what they call "hate speech! Will we sit by as our leaders make laws they say publicly they don't know if its constitutional or not? When will a murder be a murder? If someone of a certain race or lifestyle is killed then its worse than murder....is a hate crime! When can we just be americans? When can we just be people? No! The government must take from its people to give to those it deems needs it due to race or color. When will we be rewarded for our hard work instead of being punished? When a kid in school moves from a D to a C he is given a reward but when a child is happy about making A's or B's he is repremanded for making the others feel bad! When someone works hard to provide a home for thier family and keeps the promises they made to the banks they are punished by taking thier money and giving it to the people who broke their contracts and live off of others money! The dream of true freedom died long ago in this country. Even the very things "endowed" to us by "our creator" has been ingored and stepped on in this country for a long time. When will America demand its freedom back? When will America be free again.....or will we be content to sit in our cage and be told by the one that put us there that we are free....that its whats best for society. Will we be content to sit in the cage and be told we have freedom of speech when the government outlaws "types of speech" and seeks to silence those who speak out against it by labeling them as threats? When we are told we have the right to bear arms as long as we have permission from the goverment through registering our arms? When we are told we have the right to public assembly but only when they allow us to with a permit? When we are told we still have the power garanteed in the bill of rights but they will make all the decisions and enforce them without or concent? I am sad to say I am not sure I want to know the answer to all these question.

+1 If you nearly missed something that means you didn't miss it which means you hit it! The term should be a near hit.

Okay, so the government got involved and screwed things up so your answer is more government involvement? More of the same? That doesn't make sense. Also, the great depression was mainly caused by the federal reserve (government) not the banks that closed because of the federal reserve. If you actually understood the great depression you would realize that what is being done now is helping to cause a depression. If you look back at the drop in the stock market in the 1920's (which was large than the drop that marked the depression) the market bounced back basically immediately becuase the government stayed out and the free market was allowed to work making market boom after the drop. The government gets involved and we end up with the great depression and what we have now. The obvious solution is to get government out so we, as free individuals, can help ourselves which, in turn, helps the free market (which, btw, we no longer have a free market......instead we have some marxism mixed with corporatism and massive federal regulation).