Anon, it took one hundred years of trial and errors in design and mechanical failures, resulting in hundreds of deaths, to perfect the dark arts of aviation.
this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
450 points (95.7% liked)
Greentext
6259 readers
1358 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wokeness is what keeps them in the air, which is why they're falling out of it now
This person's grasp of physics is like halfway there. Like one more module and they'd calm the fuck down.
"A little knowledge" has never been more dangerous.
‘flying for no reason’
‘ignoring gravity’
‘somehow joints don’t break’
Halfway might be overstating it
I think large planes "look" like they can't work because their "relative speed" is really low
that is, their speed relative to their length. We're used to seeing birds cover tens of lengths per second, whereas a large airliner covers ~1ish per second at takeoff.
Or not, but this always seemed like a plausible explanation as to why planes look impossible. (Though given that hovering birds don't look funny, maybe this is a silly observation...).
Though given that hovering birds don't look funny, maybe this is a silly observation...
Birds flying against the wind and staying in the same spot as a result do look kinda weird though. Especially if you are not aware/don't notice there is mstrong winds
That's a really thoughtful take, I'm glad you shared. I think it has merit. I think proximity is a factor too. The public rarely gets up close to a jet, but I can attest from personal experience they seem much faster when you're closer during takeoff and landing.
My faith in humanity is so low that I 100% believe there are planes are not real truthers that's out there.
Well, I mean, those flat earth idiots clearly have never flown, so I wouldn't be surprised if their digging down attitude would include planes. They already think the moon landing is fake, don't they?
Actually that's something I don't understand, they think the moon is a sphere about 100 miles across about 1000 miles above the flat Earth. Why couldn't humans have flown that short distance?
it depends on your flavor of flat-earther. for the religious types, the firmament is supposed to be in the way. for secular flat-earthers, I think they just like being contrary?
i remember when i thought these jokes were funny. now i know tons of people actually think like this and it's depressing rather than funny.
Be human.
Have billions of tons of atmosphere directly above you
Don't explode
Make it make sense
...fake and gay
Hey now. Let's not blame gay people for the common-sense-defying demon-wizard sorcery that engineers get up to when someone threatens to take away their calculators and caffeine.
G.I.N.A.S.F.S.
Bruh some of the earliest planes were literally called biplanes. The gay has been complicit in aviation demon magic since the very beginning.
It's not pressure under the wings, it's fucking Bernoulli sucking on top of them.
(So, yes, sure, it is gay, but it's not fake.)
Actually, I studied aviation in university. It's literally just magic.
But then how can they fly upside down?
A fighter jet is basically a fancy dart, and darts dgaf about gravity
Flaps. (As in, the hinged bits at the back edge of the wings, that essentially change the shape of the wing as required, not by flapping the wings; that'd be an ornithopter, as in Dune, not a plane.)
But... right-side-up, the plane fights gravity, has upward lift, according to Bernoulli principle. And even if we angle the flaps to decrease altitude, it's still not dropping like a rock, the wings still generate lots of upward lift.
400 ton plane, wings w 400 ton lift = flight
Now (before engaging flaps) those same wings upside down would be generating downward "lift" PLUS pull of gravity. So now the 400 ton plane is like an 800 ton plane. Can the flaps alone lift that? Or, said another way, if we gave the plane flat wings, no Bernoulli, and stacked another plane on top of it (to make 800 tons), could it fly right-side-up just using flaps?
Because air doesn't give a fuck about gravity
When you nut, but Bernoulli keep sucking...
I'm 100% convinced this was never a battle of airframes and manufacturers and simply was down to: "No, sir/ma'am, I will not fly the derpy plane into combat. Can't do it. YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REST OF THE PILOTS WILL LAUGH AT ME"
view more: next ›