Do Balrogs Have Wings?

[Hookbill the Goomba]

The one thing that I worry about with this poll is that many people may be voting "Yes" because they would like Balrogs to have wings. I almost did. I really had to think about my Balrogian (My new word) theory. I remember having many a heated debate and I will admit I did sway this way and that to begin with. It was only when I re read Silmarillion last that in began to think about how I saw balrogs. I came to my conclusion by thinking; "Well, Melkor wasn't stupid. He wouldn't give them useless wings." Especially now considering that quote about no other creatures of Melkor ever taking to the air.

[HerenIstarion]

The way I see it, Tolkien left ambiguous clues about the Balrog that could be seen one way or another

I suppose that is because, up to a point, it does not really matter, after all. The point is, the higher, the nobler is the creature in its 'normal' state, the more terrible its fall if it does fall

[Child of the 7th Age]

Since this has become rather a technical argument, can anyone tell me what the air-speed velocity of an unladen Balrog is? (That is, assuming he can attain the air...)

Lyta Underhill -

I would encourage you to look closely at this article that suggests a way to factor in the following variables: aerodynamic center of wing body combinations---lift, normal force, pitching moment, aerodynamic centre, upwash, drag.

Please note that this method applies for zero or near zero roll angle solely to balrogs with diaphanous wings. When predicted values were compared with experimental values extracted from the literature an accuracy of 10 per cent was indicated. This is illustrated for results in the angle of attack range of 20 to 25 degrees, and the ranges of experimental parameters used are tabulated. Such a method applies to both the straight or swept-forward trailing-edges of the wings, but has been found to be satisfactory for moderate trailing-edge as well.

For balrogs with non-diaphanous wings, please consult Fordim Hedgethistle's well known treatise "Vortex interference factors as Applied to Balrogs". Fordim's analysis takes the body-alone contribution (ESDU 89008 provides values for both First and Third Age Balrogs) and adds contributions from the wing (in the presence of the body) and from the change in body lift-curve slope due to the wing.

Hope this clears up any questions in your mind!

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

The one thing that I worry about with this poll is that many people may be voting "Yes" because they would like Balrogs to have wings.

But what's wrong with that?

[the phantom]

The one thing that I worry about with this poll is that many people may be voting "Yes" because they would like Balrogs to have wings.

But what's wrong with that?

Come now, SP. Surely you know what is wrong with that sort of approach.

If you are someone like me who does not have a preference on the issue then you don't really mind people thinking what they want. But if you believe there is a definite answer then you do mind.

The fact is, when there is a definite right or wrong it doesn't really matter what you think, what you want, or what you'd like. Wouldn't you admit that there'd be something seriously "wrong with that" if I liked the thought and wanted to believe that Aragorn was a hobbit, though he is most definitely not?

Imagination is great, but it's not perfectly okay to let everyone believe what they want to believe about everything.

You can only do that when the answer is up in the air (or not up in the air, for you anit-wingers ).

So your opinion is probably justified in this case, but don't let it bleed over into other things.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

More than one hundred posts to the thread. . .

bwa HA hahahahahahahahahaaaaaa


*rubs hands*

[The Saucepan Man]

Phantom, just to clarify, my question was asked in the context of the topic of this thread.

[the phantom]

I saw that coming the day the thread opened, Fordy.

[Garen LiLorian]

Although Mr. Underhill's 'Gimli' thesis is one of the more interesting features of the debate, (to my mind) I have one small worm in that apple. The Fellowship, at that point, hadn't actually seen any Nazgûl since leaving Rivendell. It seems entirely possible that Gimli had never seen one at all, unless he was present at the Lonely Mountain debacle. Assuming he wasn't, it's pretty fair to assume that when he sees a big evil shadow thingy, he thinks 'Balrog'. I mean, it kinda reminded me of the Balrog. Not that I thought it was, just the description reminded me of it.

That all being said, I'm still on the pro-winger side of the debate.

[obloquy]

But what's wrong with that?

Is it fine with you that some people insist that Sauron was a disembodied eyeball during the War of the Ring? Or that the Witch-King's proper name is Angmar?

Good point, Garen. Combine Gimli's possible lack of experience with Ringwraiths with the Fellowship's lack of knowledge of Balrogs and I think that argument is effectively neutered.