If one were to truly think about the energy consumption of an aircraft flying thought the air, one would quickly realize that dramatically less energy is consumed than would be expected.
When a plane is flying, say straight and level, the thrust generated from its engines must continuously transfer enough energy to overcome drag and create lift. The lift created must continuously counteract the gravitational weight of the craft. This would also be the case if the aircraft were pointed vertically and acting more as a rocket.
Very few aircraft are equipped or capable of sustained powered vertical flight (steady speed or even acceleration)--most if not all are fighter aircraft. The energy consumption of an aircraft in vertical flight is enormous and as a result is usually used in short bursts.
Now if an aircraft in straight and level flight should consume approximately the same amount of energy as one in vertical flight, what constitutes the difference?
I state that gravity is the additional energy source and also serves as the PRIMARY energy source of an aircraft.
Hi, I thought that the main thing keeping the plane up is the difference in air pressure above and below the wing.
ReplyDeleteThis principle is seen when blowing over the top of a piece of paper.
However, your idea of gravity as an energy source is brilliant but needs further creative thought.