carman1877
Airman
- 51
- May 14, 2009
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I always thought it was very under-rated.
I'm not well-versed in that; what is a "lateral and vertical c-o-g"?
Thanks for the effort to explain, but I'm still within confines of school phisycs that claim that one body has only one CoG.
What is a "water line" in an aircraft?
I was just trying to make the point that ground attack was not the design genisis, nor was it something into which it evolved.
I would rate a plane as either; Poor, Decent, Good, or Great, when speaking of ground attack. Poor would be a .30 caliber only fighter, like early Spitfires, and little to no bomb load. The Airacobra at least had a cannon and some .50's, and little to no bomb load. I personally would rank the Airacobra just above the Spit in that regards, so you can choose whatever terminology, but Decent works for me. And if I had my choice, I wouldn't chose to fly and fight in "Decent", I would much prefer Good or Great!
I really think we agree, just different verbage.
Tomo - academic courses in physics (or Materials) rarely deviated from solid bodies when calculating CoG (ball, brick, I beam, Eccentric but solid body with multiple geometric features - each with definable CoG and solvable in tabular format.)Thanks for the effort to explain, but I'm still within confines of school phisycs that claim that one body has only one CoG.
What is a "water line" in an aircraft?