Now the only missing part is: flow of what mass of air?
Inlet.
You introduced the term "inlet drag" and said it was the phenomenon responsible for most of the braking effect of reverse thrust.
Not my term. If you mean "introduced" it in this thread, then yes. If you mean I introduced the term, then of course not. It is responsible for most of the braking effect of reverse thrust, however.
And you still haven't said!
I have, repeatedly, and no, I don't presume.
You hint you're not a mathematician, but the very first reference you cite is full of equations. Can we presume, then, that you are not actually familiar with the material in that reference? If so, I am at a loss to imagine why you cited it.
I don't think I hinted, at all. I was quite direct. You should not presume.
The equations and the information are cited precisely because it was requested. It is unnecessary, however, as the point stands without the equation.
But my formulation is preferable to yours, because you mix up your units [Edit: too quickly said: maybe not. See HN39's post below!]
Too quickly said, correct. My rationale for inclusion of more than one term into a composite has already been given, for the sake of simplicity. While one can certainly divide ram drag into components, it is unnecessary and does not contribute further to the point that it is not reverse flow of fan airflow or exhaust gas stream that provides the braking effect in reverse thrust operations, but ram drag (inlet drag, if you will. Also, if you will not).
Just as a point on discussion etiquette, I don't think it's helpful to use lots of technical vocabulary, of which it seems you may not know the meaning, and link them with lots of qualitative math (such as "mass airflow times TAS") which it seems you also do not quite master.
Perhaps you'd prefer to put words in my mouth and speak for us both?