Re: Isn't lift part of drag?


"WingFlaps" <Moreflaps@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9aeabecd-d09c-46f0-9a11-7d1e15c45ff2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 26, 7:58 am, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriq...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:pNGdnV57KtxeQYzVnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxx





es330td wrote:
Fortune magazine online has a photo essay about their new 787. On one
page,
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0804/gallery.boeing_dream...,
they make this statement:

The Dreamliner's wingspan is 197 feet, or about 25% longer than a
similar-sized plane, which increases lift and reduces drag.

I thought that lift, in addition to causing a net upward force on the
wing, also contributes to the drag force on the wing as well. If this
is the case then increasing lift should also increase drag. Did I
misunderstand?

The lift and drag curves for any given wing are a function of wing
design.
Although induced drag is a product of lift creation, the design of the
wing could easily change the lift and drag coefficients and make the
wing
more efficient.
These are complicated inter-relationships, and sometimes, when doing an
article in a non technical venue, a writer will simply present the tip
of
the iceberg.
This isn't necessarily wrong but you will probably notice a distinct
difference between an article on wing design written for Fortune as
opposed to one written for Aviation Weekly :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

I think you can say more and explain less than anyone I have ever heard.

Do you think the value of any writing can be most accurately expressed by
it's printed weight in pounds?- Hide quoted text -


Do you think you are achieving anything more than exposing yourself as
a rather tedious loser? Give it up man.

Cheers

No ***!!!!! What did I loose??


.

Loading