It's all very well to sneer at people using 'artificial concepts,' but as anyone who's ever taught flying will know, sometimes they are the only way to communicate what you are trying to get across.
I guess. For some topics, anyway.
But - at the risk of repeating myself - all necessary information on the question posed at the start of this thread is spelt out, in crystal clear language and simple diagrams, without any fancy mathematical theory, in
Stick and Rudder. Any student who can't understand that book would seem unsafe to be put in sole charge of an ice cream cone, let alone an aircraft.
I don't mean to insult anyone who has contributed to this thread. My point is simply that Langewiesche got it right the first time, so what's the point in re-inventing the wheel, particularly in a questionable manner?
If someone believes that
Stick and Rudder is unreliable, please say so, and explain why you are of that opinion. I'm certainly willing to reconsider my faith in the book, if anyone has plausible criticisms to offer.
Thanks!