This is a bookmark to myself to ideally maybe make some simplifying illustrations in the future, that makes this more digestible.
I tried to do a better rough draft outline, that I burned out on before.
I put it here just in case anyone wants to try to tear it apart (always appreciated) in the meantime.
Maybe key theme here is that “='s” signs matter :) (there are equations behind the words)
The rough draft (little punctuation etc.)
energy of the relative wind cannot be destroyed - but any dissipation will go to either parasitic drag (energy loss as turbulent flow, and heat)
or pure lift generation.
energy for pure lift generation is experienced also as drag, which engine power or descent must be engaged to keep speed from reducing (just like parasitic drag).
the energy of pure lift is simple: kinetic energy of the air mass moved down to accomplish Newton’s 3rd law (reaction for every action) (1/2)mv^2
edit: MATH ERROR WAS IN THIS LOCATION!
relative wind energy not lost as parasitic drag (parasitic is that which leaves the system without helping lift the plane, and slows its forward motion) edit: as well as that lost going into producing pure lift,
has to leave the vicinity of the wing with the mass flow rate unchanged (it can’t sustainably pile up)
so the detour of camber + AoA, cannot slow the local relative wind’s progress,
yet it tries to
the pressure drop has to be there to accelerate air around the detour so that it leaves at the same rate it comes in
the speed increase caused by the Bernoulli pressure drop has to maintain the horizontal mass flow rate
it’s caused by deprivation at the detour bottleneck, that drops the pressure until the speed acceleration is high enough
(more advanced: air static pressure at a given temp represents air molecules at a wide range of speeds; the bottle-neck/pressure drop represents a filter for molecules with the necessary higher speeds, that average to a higher dynamic pressure)
The pressure drop pulls down the air from above, which causes the Newtonian action-reaction lift
but accelerating the air above down takes energy (the kinetic energy as before)
because the air moving down into the low pressure area attempts to raise the pressure
this is experience as “pure lift drag” to keep up the pressure drop (sufficient to maintain the mass flow rate)
which burns engine fuel
edit: simpler way to say to illustrate this: contour lines being pulled down by low pressure area reduce relative wind horizontal speed to increase vertical speed. Apply 1/2mv^2 to both of these: The vertical v is energy for lift
because there is clearly mixing of horizontal contour flow wind, and air descending from above
this process gets complicated in reality
but presumably this doesn’t affect the fundamental soundness of the principles tied together here
Sorry for the obsession
Shoot, I got an edit: I wanted to cram in that in wind tunnel or simulation diagrams, the Newton’s 3rd law air forced down will be become less evident illustrated as sinking flow lines, the higher the air density and TAS. Because if the air is "thick, the squared v term in kinetic energy means you need much less air forced down to make lift. So, higher density altitude, for example, means you have to generate disproportionally more down speed (steeper flow lines).
This is what makes airliners fuel efficient for long haul’s etc., with high L/D ratios (and why high bypass makes engines more fuel efficient)…all to minimize the squaring of the downward air speed needed. More air mass is much cheaper than airspeed (mass is not squared).
edit: Yes, the above is still too wordy. Engaging in the IFC for the past couple or three years has made me keep returning to the fact I never honestly felt like lift had been explained to in a way I could understand.
But this is leading to, I believe, a much more concise way to put it…