Wings and Configurations for High-Speed Flight
The critical Mach number of a wing is the flight Mach number of the aircraft at which the local Mach number at some point of the wing becomes 1.0. At a Mach number slightly in excess of this critical value, shock waves form on the wing, and further increases in speed cause [249] large changes in the forces, moments, and pressures on the wing. The effects on the lift and drag characteristics of increasing the Mach number beyond the critical value are briefly discussed and illustrated in chapter 5. Subsonic aircraft usually do not cruise at Mach numbers much beyond the critical value. For supersonic flight, however, the aircraft must have sufficient power to overcome the high drag in the transonic speed range and be capable of controlled flight through this capricious Mach number range.
The angle between a Mach line and the direction of movement of undisturbed flow. See Mach wave.
Mach wave (NASA SP-7, 1965) 1. A shock wave theoretically occurring along a common line of intersection of all the pressure disturbances emanating from an infinitesimally small particle moving at supersonic speed through a fluid medium, with such a wave considered to exert no changes in the condition of the fluid passing through it. The concept of the Mach wave is used in defining and studying the realm of certain disturbances in a supersonic field of flow. 2. A very weak shock wave appearing, e.g., at the nose of a very sharp body, where the fluid undergoes no substantial change in direction. link... wave
Quote: in the mainly turn oriented energy regime, (underpowered engine you forgot to quote, H.)
Time to go to your nearest flying school and borrow the books, in aeronautic language this phrases means nothing else than "i dont know what i am writing" but i SURE can flame...
Quote: Since I don't have to hunt for this stuff...
You should LEARN because you cant even comprehend what you copy/paste...
Quote: And for a novice like you: wiki is good enough.
AGAIN you are the novices here...
The sources i am using are the only authorities on the subject, meaning before puting even a begginer on an aircraft youy have to learn your theoprical basics, it helps understanding the complex stuff which is way above your newbbies heads.
And BTW the best example of it is your quest for the Delta wing when the best sources available simply talk about wing sweep.
There is no need for a delta design to obtain a high Critical Mach.
Quote: This just shows that you don't understand what was said or why I chose it.
You did not know what you wre writing dont try to make up you did, the choice of sweep angle had nothing to do with what you said.
>but was actually a designer compromise for angle of attack (lift versus drag) in the mainly turn oriented energy regime,<
This is what you said it means absolutly NOTHING and certainly not what you say not it did.
Quote: It says exactly what I said it says. The lesding edge of the wingplan form determines at what delay the shockj tibe drag exerts maximum effect on the aurframe.
Please learn your basics and stop trying to imply you said something you did not.
Blah-di-blah begginers stuff which basicaly doesnt MEAN anything...
Back to newbies school for you Herald
AGAIN dont take your case for a general rule, ignorance isn't my forte but apparently it is yours...
Quote: It says exactly what I said it says. The lesding edge of the wingplan form determines at what delay the shock tube drag exerts maximum effect on the airframe.
Quote: Lie. Go back and read it again.
Done time and time again, being in a state of denial doesn't make you an educated person in a field you didn't study and dont start to comprehend the basics of.
Quote: It means exactly what I said and the fact that you do not understand it proves you haven't got a clue as to what we discuss.
It means exactly NOTHING according to aerodynamic languages and known rules, you are an ignorant trying to make up that you know something which visibly is way above your knowlege base.
Quote: Its plain English. Obviously you are trying desperately to establish some credibility by trying to say "tain't so". Problem is that simple denial now that you been caught in multiple errors and lies doesn't substitute for KNOWLEDGE in subject."
I DONT need to establish credibility, as opposed to YOU, i know my basics and a lot more advanced stuff which you dont even understand to the point of mystaking everything.
All you wrote would have a begginer glider pilots weting his pants laughing, you speak aerodynamic like a green mokey speaks Chinese and you know as much about it as the same green monkey could learn about quantum mechanics.
= Back to newbies school for you Herald
Quote: And you are still a liar. Want to play games with a fellow six year old? I have a couple of ignoant oines here who are your speed.
Insulting people is all you got you can't make your case, you dont have what it takes, so be it, you wont be lookinsg smarter only more of what you really are, an ignorant flamer.
Quote: Rhetorical trick. Meaningless noise. but to really cut him up by showing the world what a fool he was by destroying him wiuth FACTS
FACTS ARE: You dont know the subject the slightest and ressort to insults and reverse psychology, you are in great need of people attantion and even more of education.
Quote: Apparently, you missed the rest of it when I correctly lumped you in with the other two. You are part of a class set of fantasists.
BOY the only fantasist is you, when i speak about the subject to a pilot or an aerodynamicist we understand each other, he would advise you to look at NASA's begginer's topics just as i did.
Quote: The general proof is the three of you mutually reinforce each other's stupidity and lies ON CUE..... Frenchmen generally are better educated and more HONEST than you.
StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy
