-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
- Thread starter Tex_Hill
- Start date
Just a heads up on that book. It is a little advanced for someone who does not have an engineering backround or hasn't had exposure to aerodynamic principals before. There is a version that was developed for the Air Force that uses the T-38 as an example that I would highly recommend reading before delving into the "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" book. I think it is called "Physics For Aviators". It is published by Jeppesen and is a hand-held approach into the world of Aerodynamics. From my experience, it really helped to give me the foundation to read "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators" and understand it without thinking about jumping off the balcony.
How in-depth are we talking about? Are we talking solving Laplace's equation in multiple dimensions for a stream equation or are we talking about something a little simpler?
Tex_Hill
Airborne All the Way!!!
Hey man, I turned down two wing jobs (T-45 and T-6) to fly that same slower prop
However, that slower prop can go up, down, sideways, thatways, thereways, all ways. It's like driving a go kart, albeit a slow one. You'll like going upside down after being right side up for so many years. My point, it's not so bad.MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Besides, someone had to be the token COD guy here....
FWIW, still I have my original copy (cardboard cover, bound by literally an original shoe-string) of NAVAIR –00-80T-80, Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators.
Since I was at a distinct disadvantage, back in the day, being a "business major" AVROC and one of only 3 in my class of 27 other USNA recent grads of a class of 30 – I had to take "stupid study" aerodynamics, aka, AERO tutoring after hours.
That august tome has served me well, in training and in the fleet and beyond. Indeed, after so many decades ago it sits on my desk in front of me as I type this. Although I use it occasionally as a reference for my young, pilot daughter, I am still just a "little weak" on academic Aero. However, put me one-on-one against anyone in the air , and I should still prevail, despite my excessive years.
Now, on a totally different subject – Laplace equations.
Being a business major, my greatest challenge was 'business calculus' – it was also the same 'calculas' class the jocks took. But it was still a challenge.
However, re. The "Laplace Transforms", I wouldn't have a clue as to what that means. (Still don't) I was a stupid fighter pilot, even though my friend and brother-in-law wrote some of the more recent Laplace Transform textbooks. Go figure? Fortunately, Professor Peter is more interested in my Navy career than I can even understand what he teaches- but he is still a great guy, even if I haven't a clue what he sometimes says:
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-...3483316?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179212655&sr=8-1
When I was an eager student pilot looking to learn more about Aero. I picked up the book "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" but instead of explaining concepts in an easy to understand manner, the thing read more like a set of stereo instructions. It is definatly written for someone who has some kind of backround understanding of advanced aerodynamics or fluid mechanics. It is quite a task for a green-horn pilot to understand the complexities of something like induced drag like the book presents it. In reality, all student pilots are ready to understand is induced drag is a product of lift. Not, that it is caused by pressure differentials, and in the process of nature trying to rectify the difference in pressure, wake vorticies are formed which produce downwash on the trailing edge of the wing which tilt the lift vector backward at half the angle of the downwash causing induced drag.
Come on. Unless you had some idea of what was going on with an airfoil to begin with that explanation is to much information for a newbie.
Come on. Unless you had some idea of what was going on with an airfoil to begin with that explanation is to much information for a newbie.
Maybe we SHOULD have an understanding of an airfoil. I mean if you can't handle a little simple physics/engineering, then maybe you're not ideal.
Why do you think that a technical major is the strongest sought by the Navy?Granted, the Navy is pretty hard up and will accept almost anyone to be an aviator or NFO.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
They took you!