Jump to content

Talk:Gliding flight

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Glide ratio)

soaring

[edit]

"How can I soar with eagles if I am surrounded by Turkeys". Soaring is the art of not coming down whilst still coming down. A bit enigmatic, but simple. Gliders fly because they are descending, ALL THE TIME. If they stop descending then they descend very rapidly, i.e. Stall. What the Americans call Soaring is still only gliding, they just do it in rising air more often than us Brits.

Gliders can actually do loop-the-loops and so forth. They are not limited to always descending, and can gain altitude (without soaring) and without stalling. However, they are constantly losing energy (except where they are able to soar successfully).- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 23:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion I see no harm in a central Glider or un-powered flying MACHINE (not animal) article with links to:- Hang gliders, Paragliders, Gliders/Sailplanes (there is a difference), and possibly a separate entry for transport and military gliders like the BV40 glider interceptor!!!

Anyway, my tuppence worth for what it is worthPetebutt (talk) 15:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A peace was negotiated on Feb 18 and some page moves and splits were undertaken. See the Talk:Glider archives for details. In my opinion several of the articles have been significantly improved in that time. In the meantime, contributions to the articles are always very welcome, and its good to see new faces. I'm archiving the older talk page sections. Regards AKAF (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Gliding (flight) → Gliding flight — The parentheses are not needed to distinguish this from other articles on the Gliding (disambiguation) page but there is already an article with this name that redirects here, so a simple move is not possible. JMcC (talk) 11:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm ambivalent on the proposed move, but it seems to me this should be the primary topic for Gliding, so I would also support a move to that title. Powers T 14:59, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The sport of gliding is probably what most people would want to see when they type in the word. Gliding is a featured article which was recently reviewed by the FAR process and no comment was made. Gliding is also an substantial activity with over 120,000 participants worldwide and former Olympic demonstration sport. Although this is not a definitive test, try Google. This gives an indication of what people might be looking for. Of course, there are other uses of the word and so the disambig page is only a click away. If the proposed move involves changing the title of the gliding article, then I would oppose the move. Incidentally this was a topic of much discussion (now archived) about two years ago. After arbitration, the sport of gliding was agreed as the main use of the word. JMcC (talk) 16:53, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not clear on what arbitration has to do with it; they are not supposed to comment on content issues, which is what this is. Two years ago or not, consensus can change. Anyway, I admit I haven't done a lot of investigation into this; I merely expressed my sense of the issue. Powers T 19:55, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unnecessary and ugly, ugly parenthesis. Let this article soar, free of them! walk victor falk talk 23:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Split article

[edit]

What do people think about splitting this article into two, i.e. Gliding flight (humans) and Gliding flight (animals)?__DrChrissy (talk) 13:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose No reason was given for this proposal. Gliding by animals is very similar to gliding by aircraft, especially types of lift used and the principle of the glide angle. There should be no confusion by having it all in one article and splitting it would result in duplication. There are interesting comparisons between the glide angles of birds and aircraft which would be lost by a split. Furthermore the article is not so big as to require a split. JMcC (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reply Apologies for not giving a reason for the suggested split. I am a biologist, and when I came to this article I was expecting much more material on gliding, non-human animals (for instance, the wor "pagium" is not even mentioned. I feel there could be considerably more information added regarding this, and others might see the same for human gliding. So, I was looking to the future. In addition, there seems to be a trend toward splitting articles about behavioural activities into human and non-human articles. I feel this is one of those. Regarding duplicity, this simply cannot be avoided when splitting articles this way - but a little duplication can be tolerated.__DrChrissy (talk) 16:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't suggested "duplicity" would be a problem, just "duplication". I have no idea what "pagium" is. If it is as significant as you suggest, it deserves an article on its own. The article was intended to describe the physics of gliding flight in all its forms. Human gliding is thoroughly described in several articles such as gliding, paragliding and hang-gliding, as are the individual animals. This article should not have a detailed description of any single aircraft or animal because it attempts to unify the principles that affect all gliding, but if you want to insert a short description and a link to a detailed article on Pagium then that would be OK in my opinion. JMcC (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. In researching ways of expanding this article from the animal perspective, I think the article containing the information I expected is already contained in Flying and gliding animals. So, I withdraw my suggestion for a split of this article. I appreciate that not every gliding animal should appear in this article, but I think what might be interesting to the reader is examples of the different ways in which animals achieve gliding e.g. wings/feathers, body attachments, body shape changes. Do you agree? I have already added some, and I will add some others in time. By the way, it is not "pagium" but "patagium" - completely my fault as it was my typo. And there is an article on Patagium.__DrChrissy (talk) 18:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem if you added information on the different ways in which animals achieve gliding e.g. wings/feathers, body attachments, body shape changes. Aircraft usually do it with wings: some rigid, some flexible, while some wings can change shape using flaps to change the amount of lift. There are also Lifting bodies. JMcC (talk) 11:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gliding flight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gliding flight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 June 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Obvious consensus against moving this page. (non-admin closure). Anarchyte (work | talk) 15:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gliding flight → Gliding – More general topic, makes it easier to find sub-topics such as the sport, animal gliding, forced gliding etc, and generates less WP:SUrprise and confusion for those not looking for the sport Siuenti (씨유엔티) 13:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments - Since two articles can't occupy the same the title, where are you proposing the current Gliding content be moved to? (That also needs to be proposed here.) - BilCat (talk) 20:10, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought maybe Gliding (sport) or Recreational gliding Siuenti (씨유엔티) 01:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Sport of gliding? Siuenti (씨유엔티) 01:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • So you haven't even thought that part out? Also, the question you haven't addressed, much less proven, is what is the Primary Topic, for Gliding, or if there is one, based primarily on usage and long-term significance. In other words what are readers searching for when they type in "gliding". Yes, you're proposing to move a more -general topic here, but is that the primary topic? - BilCat (talk) 03:54, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • My proposal is intended to make it easier for people to find whatever they are looking for when they type "gliding", a more general topic allows that to happen naturally without messing around with hatnotes and "see also"s. It's common sense really. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 04:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • For example, if you were on a page called "sport of gliding" you wouldn't have to wonder whether animals gliding was there or not. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 04:45, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • That still doesn't address the point of whether people who type in "gliding" are looking for the type of flight itself or the sport. Even if the flight topic is moved here, there will need to be a hatnote to the sport, especially since that topic has been at this location for apparently over 10 years. Also, per the guidelines on primary topics, if neither one is the by-far clear primary topic, or any other topic either, than the DAB page (Gliding (disambiguation)) should go here instead. - BilCat (talk) 05:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Siuenti: BilCat is right. The destination space has to be vacated before this article could be moved over. But even then, some people might want Gliding (disambiuation) to be moved there rather than this one. I do agree with you that the present arrangement is unsatisfactory and I'd suggest the current article be moved to Gliding (sport), which is in line with say Swimming and Swimming (sport). I'd suggest that you raise the proposal at Talk:Gliding, add a link to the new discussion below here, and post templates or similar notices on related articles and Project talk pages, including for example Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very strong oppose Gliding is the official name of a former Olympic sport given by the world governing body the FAI. It is enjoyed by over 100,000 participants. Although this is not a definitive test, if you Google the word 'gliding', you get pages of links to the sport and its clubs, not articles about airliners that have run out of fuel. Undoubtedly the sport/recreational activity is the most common use of the word. The Gliding article has a clear link to the disambiguation page at the start for other uses. Anyone looking for something else is soon correctly directed. By moving 'Gliding', you will increase the number of mouse-clicks that on average will be needed. We are not trying to create a taxonomy where you have to search through a hierarchy of words until you reach the one you want. Instead we should be able to find the most common usage at the first attempt. Try searching WP for Golf and you get the article on the sport and a link to the disambig pages. Would you seriously suggest extending your argument to golf? There was a highly time-consuming discussion about this same suggestion in 2009. It went to arbitration and it was decided that the sport of gliding was the main use of the word. There is no reason to suggest that a repeat of this tedious exercise will produce a different answer. The Cambridge Dictionary and Collins Dictionary both say that the only meaning of "gliding" as a noun is "the sport or activity of flying in a glider". If you were to say that a bat or an airliner is gliding, you would be using the present participle of the verb to glide. I think nouns make better titles for WP articles, don't you? JMcC (talk) 12:03, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - the sport is the primary use of the term, so that article should remain at Gliding. - Ahunt (talk) 17:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Gliding is already the appropriate common name article. MilborneOne (talk) 20:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - No evidence has been provided to show that the sport is not the primary topic. In case such evidence is provided, then the DAB page (Gliding (disambiguation)) should go here instead, as nothing else is the clear primary topic. - BilCat (talk) 23:42, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Drag Curve Misrepresents the Location of the Minimum Drag

[edit]

Although this curve illustrates that total drag is the sum of induced drag and form drag, it misrepresents that the minimum total or combined drag occurs at the point of interception of induced drag and form drag. Although it is possible for this case to occur, it is an isolated case. The minimum of the sum of two functions or curves occurs where the slope of the sum is zero which occurs when the slopes of the two curves are equal and opposite, not where they intersect. Although the example induced drag curve and the example form drag curve are depicted to have equal slopes at their intersection, this is not normally the case. And, because of this symmetrical depiction, it is possible to mislead the viewer into thinking that you can find the minimum by locating the intersection, which is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2E73:8930:47C:6751:2E03:A0BD (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gliding flight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glide ratio template

[edit]

A suggested addition to the glide ratio template:

—Source:  Jackson, Stephen M. (2000). "Glide angle in the genus Petaurus and a review of gliding in mammals". Mammal Review. 30 (1): 9–30. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2907.2000.00056.x. ISSN 1365-2907.

(I have no clue as to how to edit this into the template) 2606:A000:1126:28D:C6D:29BD:7CD3:A312 (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Now updated template JMcC (talk) 10:03, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Section should probably include info about lizards of genus Draco

[edit]

Specifically, this section. Could anyone please tell me some good links for citations? I'm not sure which one to use on the Draco page, or how much info I should include.--Thylacine24 (talk) 20:17, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done JMcC (talk) 08:59, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gliding_flight&oldid=1202316906"