What happens if the engines were kept on full throttle all flight long? (except for the approach and landing)
This question received a negative score and was flagged as low quality. But while I understand that the question is very, very basic, what makes it unsuitable for an answer?
E.g. repeating what was said is agreed upon here to be deletable. Typos and grammar are not a quality issue (anyone can suggest edits). So it boils down to value. A good answer can have multiple errors, but would not be eligible for deletion, rather commenting or submitting a competing answer. But the example here is a clear and cut case of zero value.
when judging in the LQ queue, no distinction is shown to us whether the flag(s) that sent it are LQ and/or NAA. the post has to be judged in relation to the Q and other answers, that's why the new review UI allows the question and answers to be viewed from the review page -- otherwise there is no need to have the option to flag as LQ when NAA is the only flag where delete would be allowed
@ymb1 -- in the glide, the spoilers are functioning to increase drag, not to reduce lift. The reduction in lift is a function of the relationship lift = weight* cosine (glide angle), and that will happen regardless of whether you make the glide slope steeper by deploying spoilers, or by deploying flaps and shoving the nose way down, or by pitching up to a very high angle-of-attack to descend "on the back side of the power curve", or by leaving the shape of the wing and the a-o-a of the wing the same and simply reduce power. The relationship lift= weight *cos (glide angle) still applies. — quiet flyer1 min ago
@quietflyer I feared a discussion over there... the spoiler part was for emphasis, take the extreme with the nose down 90° and terminal velocity
though I'm sure there'll be the nuance of how you define the lift vector in this case
@ymb1 Hi ymb1, not sure I have anything to add to what I already commented (including the one from October 2018) -- and what's in my own answer to the same question-- one problem I have with the answer that I was commenting under, is it kind of implies that the reduction in lift is sort of proportional to the change in sink rate-- since it's a cosine function of glide angle, it is very much smaller than that.
Really we should open up a new room if we are going to get into this but actually I need to run now--
hi @quietflyer - I have one question that will either settle it for me, or perhaps we can discuss further, the question being: with the more nose down, the AoA is smaller, and with the same TAS, lift will be smaller -- is there anything wrong in that sentence? keeping in mind we're considering a fixed descent angle on a glide slope -- PS when I wrote "how you define the lift vector", I actually meant to say "how one would define...", not you you :)
Currently iaps x75 is used for "Instrument Approach Procedures (IAPs)".
And a newly created tag from two days ago, instrument-approaches x1, is not only more clear, but in line with the other "approach" tags (shown below). Q: Should iaps be renamed instrument-approaches?
Currently iaps x75 is used for "Instrument Approach Procedures (IAPs)".
And a newly created tag from two days ago, instrument-approaches x1, is not only more clear, but in line with the other "approach" tags (shown below). Q: Should iaps be renamed instrument-approaches?
The Hangar
The Hangar