Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Airplanes Fly?  
User currently offlineDavid From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 66 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1862 times:

MY 10 year old son is doing a science project on " How airplanes fly." Does anybody have any good sources( websites, etc) that would help my son.
Thanks

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1859 times:

I've not checked them for accuracy but you can try . . .
http://www.howstuffworks.com/index.htm

I have found some errors in . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
but a lot of people use it.

If you find something here but still have questions come on back.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineMsl747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

^^
Both of those are good sources, or you could try google. I think most of us on here could help him out with any questions he might have. I did a science project like this when I was younger. Have fun!

-Matt



Commercial Pilot Certificate: Single and Multi-Engine Land; Instrument Airplane
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1816 times:

Quoting Msl747 (Reply 2):
I did a science project like this when I was younger.

I didn't. We built a glider. We had built enough Speedee-Bilt balsa wood model airplanes to know what shape the wing should be and how to build it up. We used redwood "stickers" from the sawmill - like lath. For fabric we had some eighty year old, thoroughly rotted window shades.

For a launch site there was a cliff above the beach and ocean, about 150 feet high, on average. Plenty of vertical for a nice long glide flight.

Fortunately we never got foolhardy enough to get in and launch it. Not only was it too flimsy to support us, we'd completely overlooked primary flight controls.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1809 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting SlamClick (Reply 3):
Not only was it too flimsy to support us, we'd completely overlooked primary flight controls.

Details, details.....  Wink




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1792 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 4):
Details, details.....

Here is the only important detail.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 3):
Fortunately we never got foolhardy enough to get in and launch it.

It looked like a Jenny with only the lower wing and no landing gear. Wheels were to be part of the launch ramp. Oh, and the wing and tail tips were just square. We weren't craftsmen or anything. The spar was a piece of redwood, which is very soft, and was about the thickness of three of your fingers. It was oriented horizontally intstead of vertically so its greatest strength would have been in crashing not in flying. That may have been precognition on our part.

As I said, no one ever had enough guts to try to fly it. I did lean out over the cliff once with a quarter sheet of plywood held in front of me. Leaned way out into the upslope wind. It was an excellent lesson in the practical side of L/D and, being young, I healed quickly.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offline727EMflyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 1):

I have found some errors in . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
but a lot of people use it.

Can't any one go in and edit wikipedia? I suppose you could fix the errors you found, but whoever put them there in the first place might undo your work...


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1697 times:

Simple LINK for kids.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offline727EMflyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

I wondered what errors SlamClick found in wikipedia, so I started reading it.

Quote from the Wikipedia article:

A false explanation for lift has been put forward in mainstream books, and even in scientific exhibitions. Known as the "equal transit-time" explanation, it states that the parcels of air which are divided by an airfoil must rejoin again; because of the greater curvature (and hence longer path) of the upper surface of an aerofoil, the air going over the top must go faster in order to "catch up" with the air flowing around the bottom. Therefore, because of its higher speed the pressure of the air above the airfoil must be lower. Despite the fact that this "explanation" is probably the most common of all, it is false. It has recently been dubbed the "Equal transit-time fallacy." There is no requirement that divided parcels of air rejoin again, and in fact they do not do so. Such an explanation would predict that an aircraft could not fly inverted, which is demonstrably not the case. The explanation also fails to account for aerofoils which are fully symmetrical yet still develop significant lift. Any textbook claiming to be a serious work on the topic will never promote the Equal Transit-time fallacy.

End quote.
I know people have heated discussions about Newton vs. Bernouli but that sounds down-right hostile! Maybe we as Anet should clean up this article???


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

I think it is a factual statement and very much to th point, except for perhaps the part about inverted flight faulting the equal transit time fallacy (a new term I hadn't heard before, but which I like).

Newton or Bernoulli, equal transit time is out the window whichever explanation you decide to adhere to.

Further, while "people" may have heated discussions about Newton or Bernoulli, aerodynamicists do not. In fact, Bernoulli and Newton both apply.

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 8):
Therefore, because of its higher speed the pressure of the air above the airfoil must be lower. Despite the fact that this "explanation" is probably the most common of all, it is false. It has recently been dubbed the "Equal transit-time fallacy." There is no requirement that divided parcels of air rejoin again, and in fact they do not do so.

Wouldn't mass air flow account for symmetrical airfoils and inverted flight? IIRC, the mass air flow theory doesn't require the two parcels of air to rejoin, but states that air parcels above and below the wing must arrive at the trailing edge of the wing at the same time.




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17110 posts, RR: 66
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1619 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 1):
I've not checked them for accuracy but you can try . . .
http://www.howstuffworks.com/index.htm

More specifically http://travel.howstuffworks.com/airplane.htm. The aerodynamics are from 10000 foot perspective but quite clear on the various explanations.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1617 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Just have the kid explain that money makes airplanes fly. Maybe a bit on Chapter 11....


 Wink




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineReidYYZ From Kyrgyzstan, joined Sep 2005, 536 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1594 times:

When I was a kid, I was told it was magic that kept airplanes flying. Also when i was a kid, we wore onions on our belts, because that was the style at the time. As far as Newton vs. Bernouli, a good old fashion knife fight would decide the winner, despite the 57 year age difference.

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17110 posts, RR: 66
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1583 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 12):
Just have the kid explain that money makes airplanes fly. Maybe a bit on Chapter 11....

 Smile Helicopters don't fly at all of course. They're so ugly the ground repels them. Ok it's an old one...

Quoting ReidYYZ (Reply 13):
As far as Newton vs. Bernouli, a good old fashion knife fight would decide the winner, despite the 57 year age difference.

Pistols at 20 paces would be more stylish.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic How Airplanes Fly?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
How To Fly An Airliner If Pressurization Fails? posted Fri Feb 4 2005 18:26:08 by A380900
Circling Approaches, How To Fly? posted Thu Jun 3 2004 21:16:33 by FLY2HMO
How To Fly In UK With FAA Licence posted Fri Nov 28 2003 01:39:01 by WindowSeat
Some Questions About How Planes Fly. posted Tue May 14 2002 11:29:46 by Tomwato
What Makes Airplanes Fly? posted Thu Aug 2 2001 05:00:23 by Ziggy
How High Can A 747 Fly? posted Fri Dec 23 2005 05:38:04 by FLLDTW744
How Are Airplanes "washed" posted Sun Dec 4 2005 15:44:27 by JAGflyer
How Many Times Can A Pilot Fly A Plane In 1 Day? posted Fri Aug 5 2005 08:42:26 by Palladium
How Cellphones Affect Airplanes... posted Thu Jun 2 2005 13:23:01 by AirBerlin
How Many Big Sonic Airplanes Were Built In US? posted Fri Feb 11 2005 22:03:38 by Lehpron

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format