Originally Posted by
rarelyathome
No. You need to have another look at the vectors in wings level and banked flight.
Yes, you do. Weight due to gravity remains the same, regardless of whether the aeroplane is flying level, turning, climbing or diving and it always acts vertically.
In turning flight this weight must be reacted by the vertical component of lift (l*cos(bank_angle)).
In turning flight an additional force is required to produce the turn (m*v^2/r where r is the radius of turn and v is the airspeed at a tangent to the turn). This force is provided by the horizontal component of lift (l*sin(bank_angle)).
These two forces are at right-angles to eachother so the "weight" experienced by the driver is the vector sum of the two - as calculated using archie mede's famous squaws and hydes relationship. That defines the amount of lift the wing must produce in doing it, and that is the "g" the driver will experience.
With the lift vector tilted you need more thrust to compensate.
No - in turning flight the wing is producing more lift so it must be producing more drag, and more power is required to oppose that drag if you want to maintain a constant airspeed (you don't have to - that's the driver's choice). It's not compensating for the bank; it's just addressing the drag rise.
There is a wrinkle here because the vertical component of thrust has an effect, but if we assume this is a low-powered light aeroplane we can decide it's too small to worry about and ignore it. This comes up in the smartarse PPL-level question "is the AoA higher or lower in a steady state climb than it is in S&L flight at the same airspeed" because the intuitive answer would be that AoA must be higher to climb when the questioner will claim it could be lower because the lift required is the same and the vertical component of thrust adds to the lift. It's a "smartarse" question because it's more complex than that. If you draw out the vector diagram you see that while weight remains vertical, lift, trust and drag rotate by the climb angle so drag adds to weight and the lift vector is no longer parallel to the weight vector, negating the whole argument. But I digress...
PDR