Another Question For Warren Stutt, concerning altitude Options

[wstutt]

Hi Rob,

<snip>

Also, i think i now recall the conversation regarding an explanation for AOA indicating negative for level.

Stall of an aircraft is based on angle of attack only. You can stall an aircraft at any speed, weight, CG.. .etc. The angle of attack at which a wing stalls remains constant. This is called the critical angle of attack. This might be the reason AOA is calibrated the way it is in the data.

For example, if this data was proven to come from a 757, the 757 has a specific AOA at which the wing stalls. I personally dont know what it is and dont really feel like looking it up, but lets say it's 16 degrees. The AOA in the data may be calibrated to where 0 AOA means aircraft stall. Now, this doesnt mean the data was calibrated to a 0 degree stall indication as i do see some instances where the AOA is 0 (mainly on departure where the slats and flaps would be out changing the critical angle of attack needed for stall), but this may explain why the AOA shows -15.6 (or thereabouts) for level AOA.

In other words, any AOA indication showing positive is a stalled or near stalled condition? Sounds plausible to me.

<snip>

I see a post by celestrin on J.R.E.F. which comes to the same conclusion.

Warren.

[rob balsamo]

Hi Rob,

I see a post by celestrin on J.R.E.F. which comes to the same conclusion.

Warren.

Well, not exactly. He thinks its a Pitch Limit Indicator. Its not. Its data taken from the AOA Vane. Its just that the AOA vane seems to be calbrated in such a manner that positive "Indicated" AOA means aircraft stall condition. But yeah, we're basically on the same page.


And for those who appear to be confused with what i mean with "Level AOA", please read here again.

[rob balsamo]

Hi Rob,

I see a post by celestrin on J.R.E.F. which comes to the same conclusion.

Warren.

By the way Warren, if you would like to link to a J.REF post, just wrap it in code tags like this...

CODE

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5496199&postcount=4130

People can then copy/paste the url to their browser if they want to take a gander into the cesspool. But i would recommend a shower after.

Quite awhile ago, I entered all J.REF references into the Bad Word Filter (after all, J.REF is a 4 letter word (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) ) of the forum to change it to "the govt loyalist site" as a bit of satire, and to get their panties in a bind when they try to link to their BS from here (they're not smart enough to figure out the code tags..lol).

I also have filters on ATS urls as that site is loaded with malware, scam pop-up ads, and from what i understand, viruses.

Anyway, just a bit of FYI.

[wstutt]

Hi Rob,

By the way Warren, if you would like to link to a J.REF post, just wrap it in code tags like this...

CODE

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5496199&postcount=4130

<snip>

I noticed JFK doing that. I did not realise that would work before I saw him do that. I suppose I wasn't smart enough. I see tfk has commented on J.R.E.F. about it as well. Perhaps you already saw that.

CODE

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5498499&postcount=4138

Warren.

This post has been edited by wstutt: Jan 10 2010, 10:33 AM

[rob balsamo]

Hi Rob,
I did not realise that would work before I saw him do that. I suppose I wasn't smart enough. I see tfk has commented on J.R.E.F. about it as well.

Yeah, i saw.. .pretty funny.

Tommy has a habit of putting his foot in his mouth.

See here.

Scroll up if you want full context.

As i said, they do serve their purpose... We hope Tommy will continue to post here as he is a wonderful example of ignorance and blind faith in whatever the govt tells him.... .(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

What would even be better is if Beachnut finds the gonads to post here. But, he never found the courage in 3+ years. So, i guess he is a bit smarter than Tom... (there is also a rumor that Beachnut is a stroke victim. I never seen any proof, but you can see it in his posts i suppose. I wish the old timer the best, regardless of how he treats me...)

Reheat tried to post here claiming he is a single college female, and he can still post here under that name, i guess he just felt he might be better off in the Retreat position attacking us from his cesspool. Pinch/Will Paisley/sweetpea/10 other socks... the same.

Ryan Mackey? Well, according to him, there is nothing to debate. His actions prove otherwise.... lol.

[Craig Ranke CIT]

JFK is so mad that I am skeptical of Stutt that he shot off some smarmy comments at me on LCF and then took away my posting privilege after I responded.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/2758649/1/

He couldn't help but wield his playground monitor muscle even without a legit reason.

Doesn't look like I'm banned yet but I can't post.

What a joke.

This post has been edited by Craig Ranke CIT: Jan 13 2010, 02:47 AM