posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 05:53 PM
It seems to me, knowing aerodynamics as I came to know them:
There is a major difference in no engine thrust needed to gain momentum velocity speed by weight and mass doing the pushing, when pulled in by
vs. attempting to pick up velocity momentum using gravity, while fighting against atmospheric conditions (drag much heavier the closer one gets to
earth) using high powered engine thrust in diving and turning, particularly when leveling off parallel to gravity.
Simply trying to turn, particularly tight turns at high or low altitudes, creates mandatory slow down in velocity speed and forward momentum. Thus,
requires being able to do that without overshooting a target, from momentum push of weight and mass receiving delayed messaging to slow down going
into a turn.
Momentum and velocity speed with high engine thrust cut, when going into a turn, and then mandatory increased engine thrust, valiantly trying to
drastically pull coming out a turn, plus, slower weight and mass dragging, and then trying to push to equal the pull velocity speed, while gravity is
trying to drag a plane toward earth, when trying to level off, are all why one must have the expertise to operate the machinery capable of effectively
accomplishing that fete.
767s are not capable of making tight turns or going high speeds the closer they get to earth. 700' is not that high compared to flying or turning
through thin air at cruising altitude. Unpolluted cruising altitude at that. Even pollution creates more resistance drag at 700' feet above sea
level. NYC is full pollution at that altitude.
Pollution further causes additional drag resistance at 700' altitude. Just because all atmospheric resistance existence cannot be seen with the naked
eye, does not mean it is not there in invisible gaseous form. It always is. Then there is the wind coming which can always great low to high
resistance as well.
If anyone finds the above to be incorrect, please scientifically explain why it is incorrect.