Jack Bowling about advantages or disadvantages of flying in formation:

>My comments on this are summed up thusly:
>
>- the wake-vortex pattern shed from the back of a mobile-winged
>structure such as that of a migrating goose's wing flying at 70 km/h would
>be substantially different from that shed by a fixed-wing fighter trainer
>flying at Mach 0.4, especially with regard to the initial magnitude of the
>horizontal vorticity of the vortex itself, and the rate of deformation
>of the vortex pattern by the ambient wind field. Likely apples and
>oranges here.

Ah, but apples and oranges are both fruits, both evolved as the plant's way
to get its seeds dispersed, and there are many opportunities to use our
understanding of apples to understand oranges and vice versa,
notwithstanding the "apples and oranges" adage (if you had said "apples and
bobsleds," I wouldn't have much to say).

>I remain appreciative of Dennis's ceaseless questioning of old paradigms.
>But I also remain acutely aware of nature's way of evolving just the right
>way of doing things.

Jack, I'm arguing in favor of "just the right way of doing things" too, but
I just happen to think "staying in line so you get where you're going
without midair collisions" falls under that category just as much as
"getting a lift from your buddy." In fact, several people who responded to
the discussion about formation flying pointed out the inadequacy of the
evidence for this long-accepted hypothesis. I'd like to think my ceaseless
questioning involves only the *questionable* paradigms; I'll leave the
questioning of the unquestionable paradigms to all the wackos out there!

Dennis Paulson, Director phone 206-756-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax 206-756-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416