%MAC,
I far prefer your third explanation and concur without any reservation ... however, as to the first and second ...
Could we revisit the very nice graphic at the site to which dvt directed our attention ..... which had, if I recall correctly, two pictures ... that on the left described as a "forward slip" .. and that on the right as a "side slip".
Might we make some minor alterations to the "side slip" image and do an interesting thing .... ?
(a) erase the reference to wind. Does anyone take issue with my suggestion that an aeroplane, other than via sophisticated electronic wizardry, knows naught about a steady wind ? If so, then the reference to wind is irrelevant.
(b) having removed the irrelevant reference to the wind, draw in an arrow which might represent the path, or track, which the now wind-less aeroplane might, perchance, take ....
(c) now, with scissors keenly sharp, cut out the resulting picture, apply some magic spray to render it somewhat transparent, and
(d) move the said somewhat transparent image to the left and superimpose it on the "forward slip" image
(e) rotate the superimposed image such that the arrow which you drew .. now is aligned with the runway
To my simple engineer's mind ..... the two appear to be quite similar .......
... which brings me back to my original question .....
... what is the difference between the conventional side slip ... which is well understood ... and this newfangled "forward slip" ?
I think that it is all waffle ....... any takers for a discussion on the pros and cons of my position ?
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 25th July 2002 at 13:28.