Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm extremely sceptical about the wikipedia page on aircraft flight mechanics. When describing 'straight climbing flight', it says:

lift is unable to alter the aircraft's potential energy or kinetic energy

This seems like nonsense to me, given that 'lift acts perpendicular to the vector representing the velocity of the aircraft relative to the atmosphere'. In other words, I think there is always a vertical component of lift (except for the conditions where angle of attack for non-cambered aerofoil is 0 or 180 degrees). The reason I want to know this, is it also claims that

in straight climbing flight, lift is less than weight

I also can't believe that this is always the case, since an aerofoil can generate lift when it has a zero angle of attack if it is cambered. So if the aeroplane is going fast enough, not only can the lift can exceed the weight, but just the vertical component of lift can exceed the weight.

I'd appreciate criticisms of my understanding as well as the wikipedia page. (I wonder if it's an incorrect interpretation of the source, 'Aerodynamics' by Clancy).


share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Rather than try to debug a Wikipedia page, I suggest two things:

  1. Take your time and read this delightful on-line book. Also, why not get a copy of Stick and Rudder? It's been a classic for 70 years.

  2. Take an introductory flight lesson. It's a lot of fun and totally safe. They let you take off and fly around, and then you will understand all the basics. Don't worry about landing - they will do it for you.

How airplanes work is not a mystery. They've been around almost as long as automobiles, and they are just as well understood.

share|improve this answer
add comment

If we define lift to be perpendicular to the aircraft's velocity, then it is true that the lift will not change the aircraft's energy. The change in energy due to a force is that force multiplied by the distance over which the force acts. But if, by definition the aircraft is not moving in the direction of lift, then that distance is zero, and the change in energy is zero.

The text you have quoted is confusing; I wouldn't read too much into it. Like always in physics, the key to success is to carefully define what your terms (vectors) mean, and apply those definitions consistently.

share|improve this answer
Lift doesn't have to exceed the weight for an airplane to fly. If it did, the airplane would be in a kind of circular motion, going into an Immelmann turn. The majority of the time, the lift and the weight balance each other out so that the airplane is in straight-and-level, unaccelerated flight. –  Greg Jun 17 '13 at 4:51
Yes, I agree with you. –  nibot Jun 17 '13 at 13:46
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.