ft and all temporary disbelievers.
Must take more care to avoid misunderstandings ft. My reference to the the vertical through which the total drag acts was to bring to attention that the horizontal forces we have been considering do not act along the same horizontal reference plane. They have vertical separations and most moments resulting are well looked after by longitudinal stability. For now forget I ever introduced that red herring.
All of us involved so far have been in agreement , I am presuming, with the superb logic in your first 6 paras after "That said, here's another version of what I posted above".
BUT then you continue to persist with the all too common proposition that an aircraft can fly straight and balanced with bank applied and not be side slipping. Old beliefs sure do die hard. Let me put it again as simply as I can.
The horizontally resolved portion of the total lift will be acting at right angles to the fore and aft axis emanating from the point through which total lift can be said to act. This will be close enough to the cg for our purposes.
What is the effect of this sideforce? There is ONLY ONE answer. The fuselage is of course forced to move sideways. This inevitably causes sideslip. This sideslip causes weathercocking of the fuselage and if adequate takes over from the rudder and allows us to fly rudder central. The sideslip angle then will be very close to that for wings level straight flight only differing as a result of the "efficiency" of the particular aircraft's vertical tail when sideslipping with and without rudder. The advantage we are endeavouring to achieve is to bring that rudder close to central thus providing us with better options at Vmca.
If you are still somehow skeptical, take the bank angle to an extreme as I did in a simplistic description of flight in an asymmetric twin in a post above.
Eventually with enough bank you reach a point where you have full opposite rudder, to that with which we started, attempting to oppose the now gross tail force due to sideslip. Take it a smidgin further and you have lost control.
Now, having succeeded in convincing you, SR71, John Tullamarine's tally sheet and the all too silent visitors to the thread of the fact that we are sideslipping whenever we fly with bank and fly straight at the same time, perhaps we can spread the gospel, correct the training references and switch to other fascinating aviation myths.
Could I have missed an obscure situation when you can indeed fly straight and level with bank and not be sideslipping?
Our unfinished myth on this thread is that rediculous proposition that steady state directional stability has any relationship to the cg at a particular weight. This one is bound to exercise great minds further. Perhaps we should tidy up and start a specific thread and a new tally sheet for JT.