Yes, i have not claimed otherwise. No one here has. you just thing we have because you’re reading the things we are saying wrong
Mate for a given 28,000 pounds of gross thrust feet pics thinks that 50% of that will go backwards if the nozzles are 60 degrees biased forwards
That is correct.
50% of the input will be diverted to horizontal.
It will NOT be a 50% split between the two vectors.
Split VS percentage of input
1 Like
your chart only gives 20k lbs thrust
if the harrier has 28k lbs thrust why dosent it produce those when the nozzle is at 0°?
maybe its becasue you dont understand vectors and their components
The relationship does not correlate along the flightpath of the aircraft
I know that its correct for that given vector but the aircraft doesn’t exist on that plane.
Then calculate the “other xx%” using the same method, what’s the problem? I feel like I’m also starting to lose track of what’s going on.
That doesn’t make sense, it doesn’t matter in what direction the aircraft is moving, it could be going backwards, it doesn’t matter, the math would still be the same, the values of the components of the thrust would still be the same.
They don’t know what’s going on and they are trying to justify their misunderstanding.
You’re half way there now
huh?
im drawing it for you
No, it seems you really have some issues with vectors. Or maybe I do, because what I’m getting is pretty similar to what @Necronomica is saying.
The thrust line of the nozzles are pointing more forward then they are backwards yet you are trying to imply that they are giving equal parts thrust backwards as vertically
they are only 30 degrees short of producing nothing but pure lift and are 60 degrees away from providing horizontal thrust.
how in the world can it impart an equal amount of thrust in both directions.
This is with a 28k gross thrust, which is what the engine produces at mach .85
This with the 20k of the table
i already did it with 10k lbs to make it easier
the thrust vector always has the same length and will “draw” a radius around the plane
2 Likes
crazy that 45 degrees of nozzle results in an equal thrust split up and backwards. /s
No one said otherwise
and nobody ever argued against that
but crazy how you dont see that at a 45° angle that the horizontal component isnt 50% of the normal unvectored thrust
So then why are you even trying to make the vectors horizontal and vertical and applying that to a differently angled vector plane?
You can’t angle the aircraft (along with the nozzles) and apply the previous calculations to a new vector plane.
assume its acting on 1 flight path
should have put that in
how can a nozzle that is pointing closer to the nose provide 2 parts equal backwards and up
it will provide equal thrust down and backwards if the angle between down and backwards is equal