The Mathematics, Science, and Future of Flight: Exploring Flight Theory

“Can you write something about theory of flight and new navigation technology?”
This is what a BW Science Labs reader asked me a few days ago.
I am now very comfortable writing about flying as I have written many articles on the topic.
I first discovered the true basis of Flight Theory when I was 11. In Alaska, I asked a pilot to teach me to fly. It was a bolder statement than I first realized, but not at all impossible. It was then that I learned about weight (ok, when I was 11 I knew what weight was), lift, drag, and thrust.
Weight is the most obvious factor, the measure of the gravitational pull on an object, any fourth grader can tell you that. Because the plane stays on Earth during flight (excluding space ships, of course. “I’ll have to wait until I’m 16 to fly those,” I thought.) weight is a constant. It never fluctuates, though its Gs can of course. If you fly in an arc theWeightne point you will reach 0 Gs you will simulate zero gravity for a short period of time. NASA has a plane to train astronauts by taking them into a zero G environment for up to 40 seconds. NASA calls it the “Weightless Wonder” (cough*, cough* the Vomit Comet). Weight can be easily calculated using the basic equation w= mg, or Weight = Mass multiplied by the acceleration of gravity as a result of the pull between the Earth and the plane.
Lift is what keeps the plane up, and I find it more frustrating to explain. The Alaskan pilot Dan taught me that as you pull up, air particles are forced downward pushing the plane upward. This is in accordance with Newton’s third law that everything has “an equal [or proportionate] and opposite reaction”. I read another explanation years later, one a bit more confusing, but equally logical. The Bernoulli principle or effect as its called says that the shape of the wing splits the air into two parts. The air above the wing has less pressure than the air below it. Thus, the plane is pushed up not by air particles, but by a pressure difference. To this day there is still much debate over which explanation is correct.
Drag is the force that slows the plane down. Drag is also a fancy name for “air resistance” which a seventh grader can tell you about easily. The air in front of the plane resists the plane’s forward movement. Imagine running through a pit of floating bowling balls, the heavy spheres would get in your way, and you would have to push through them to continue. Though this metaphor is exaggerated quite a bit, the plane would feel similar resistance, just not on the same scale.
Finally we’re left with thrust, what moves the plane forward. Newton’s Second and Third Law are at work here. Propellers can pull the plane forward (or push if they’re on the back of the wings) by taking in air and pushing it backwards (once again, reverse the two for planes with propellers on the back).
In the title I promised to put a little something about the future of flight. In later posts, papers, and articles I will dive into depth of aerodynamics and how that will affect flight. By making plane airfoils and bodies more aerodynamic we can maximize efficiency in terms of speed and fuel consumption. I would like to see what future planes will look like. Unfortunately, I have to wait.

All data was checked for accuracy at:
http://web.mit.edu/16.00/www/aec/flight.html
and
http://www.livescience.com/technology/060828_how_planes_fly.html