Relax Ozexpat.
I said "generally, instructors..."
not "all flying instructors..."
Which means, off course, exactly what you said. I.E. generally, but not always, in my experience. And I also mean 'instructors including myself', not 'other instructors because I'm such a genius'. I've certainly made the mistake of assuming knowledge on the part of the student. And as a student, not just in flying, I've had the reverse situation.e.g.
"We're going to start by looking at M32"
"What's an M32?"
"Number 32 in the catalog of Messier Objects"
"What's a Messier Object?"
Having said that, I don't think most flying instructors are that hot on the basics of mechanics. But I don't think they need to be, in most cases, so why worry? I on the other hand spent several years teaching commercial groundschool, but am by contrast, at best a mediocre flying instructor.
As far as your last paragraph is concerned, I did not say ' "lift" is increased in the climb'. I said that lift is increased to
enter a climb. For most average powered aircraft in mundane flight phases this is true.
Kermode says that the aircraft climbs because power is increased. That excerpt however doesn't tell us the mechanism by which the climb is established. His aircraft just suddenly, instantly, starts climbing and miraculously points its thrust vector along its new flight path.
In other words, in this excerpt, Kermode is not even attempting to discuss the
transition from level flight to climb. He is instead interested in studying the forces once
established in the climb.
Hopefully I've made myself a bit clearer and you can see where I'm coming from. If you actually want a discussion of the forces involved in entering, maintaining, and leaving the climb I'm quite happy to continue. I got the impression however that you were just pouncing on a perceived error on my part though, so I don't propose to continue unless you actually wish it.
CPB