PearlPilot

Ah the age old question of who is more responsible for lift. As a CFI, I feel more confident explaining Newton's action/reaction concept, upwash/downwash, and the wing's positive angle of attack to the relative wind. It makes sense to me, and I see that it makes sense to my students. BUT there is a reason for that cambered upper part of the wing. To say that the wind traveling on the top surface of the wing has to travel a longer distance than the bottom surface, and therefore it needs to "speed up" to "catch up" to the wind flowing the bottom part of the wing, just feels weird. Then I move on to draw a venturi tube and explain how air needs to speed up when flowing through the venturi. I have already explained Bernoulli's princple, which states that when a velocity of a fluid increases, its pressure decreases. Then I draw a line across that venturi and say, "what does this look like"? A wing indeed! The student is lost at this point and probably thinks I have no idea what I am talking about. At this point, I feel like a jerk for wasting his/her time. I can however, use Bernoulli to explain wing tip vortices and wake turbulence, but to explain lift via Bernoulli is a mighty feat. Am I alone here? As a side note, I have just begun to read Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators, hopefully it will help me better understand how to explain Bernoulli.