4 ms·
OK well we can add that to the simple explanation. If the top airflow is diverted down when it wants to go straight, it would still want to go straight therefor
by gear54rus 5y ago
OK well we can add that to the simple explanation. If the top airflow is diverted down when it wants to go straight, it would still want to go straight therefore pulling the top surface up, right?.
- ColinWright 5y agoThe numbers still don't add up, you still need to account for the pressure difference (lower on top, higher underneath) due to Bernoulli. The "downwash theory" doesn't give enough lift on it's own. So it's more complicated than that.
- mansoor_ 5y agoI think you have a misunderstanding here. You are right that downwash accounts for a tiny proportion of the overall lift, in fact it only become significant close to the wing tips. Downwash (in the context of lift generating wings) refers to the downwards motions of air generated by tip vortices (look-up "induced drag" for more details). This is not the same as the net downwards motion of the air in the wake, relative to the free-stream air. Take for example, an infinite wing (or a 2D wing). Here, there is no downwash but we still generate lift and have a net downwards motion of the air in the wake. You can see this with online fluid simulators for airfoil sections, many of them are 2D.