[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (short)

To: "The Dinosaur Mailing List" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (short)
From: "David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 22:22:41 +0200
References: <OE145OFQeYmVH5O57jr0000a1be@hotmail.com> <3CB5F8AE.B7CD4E35@bellsouth.net>
Reply-to: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu

----- Original Message -----
From: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 10:57 PM


> And I'd add that underwater swimming can use a
> different wingstroke than underwater flying.  Personally, I can't
> qualitatively reconcile the kinematics required for efficient thrust
> production under water with the kinematics required for efficient lift
> and thrust production in air.

Is just the length of the phases different, and the power invested into
each, or are there different phases? And is this the same among all
underwater fliers?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (short)
  - From: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>

References:
- Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (long)
  - From: "Patrick Norton" <ptnorton@msn.com>
- Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (long)
  - From: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>

Prev by Date: Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (the big one)
Next by Date: Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (also short)
Previous by thread: Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (long)
Next by thread: Re: Cost in Aquatic Birds (short)
Indexes: