2
$\begingroup$

Does the term "groundspeed" always refer only to the magnitude of the horizontal component of an aircraft's velocity vector with respect to the earth, or does it sometimes include the contribution from the vertical component of the aircraft's motion?

If the latter, what are some examples (from outside sources) of the terminology being used this way?

If the former, is there a standard term for the magnitude of the aircraft's full three-dimensional velocity vector with respect to the earth, including the contribution from the vertical component of the aircraft's motion?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Based on my interpretation of this question: aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/83163/… I think this is just a duplicate, with slightly different wording. I would guess that the OP agrees, but will let him/her speak for themselves... $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2020 at 20:11
  • $\begingroup$ Nah, I won't raise any objection, have more interesting battles to pick, feel free to vote to close/ reopen however you feel so moved... $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2020 at 20:13
  • $\begingroup$ Ditto, I will leave it for others to decide... ;) But I do like Ralph's answer. $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2020 at 20:16

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

The former is correct; an F-16 climing straight up has 0 groundspeed.

"Inertial velocity" would accurately describe the 3D motion you're describing.

$\endgroup$
0
0
$\begingroup$

As suggested in a comment by ASE user "nanoman", the most appropriate term appears to be "inertial speed".

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .