I can also buy you beer...oh yeh
Will it take off?
250,647 Views |
1027 Replies |
Last: 17 yr ago by toucan82
--------------------------------------------------------
I'm legal... but you are a moran looser.
Everyone is talking about the wheels and friction and yada, yada, yada. MKF's skateboard analogy makes sense. I agree that because of the propulsion of the turbines the airplane will still move forward because the wheels are essentially irrelavant.
However, I don't get how the plane would still be able to pull enough speed to get enough airflow to lift it off of the ground. Quite the conundrum.
However, I don't get how the plane would still be able to pull enough speed to get enough airflow to lift it off of the ground. Quite the conundrum.
Assuming the runway is eleventybillion miles long and the friction from the wheels is nothing and they are super duper wheels and wont burn up then eventually the plane will get enough speed and take off.
the anwser is 23
Folks, the conveyor belt is moot.
The conveyor belt has no more effect on the plane than a normal landing strip as long as the wheels are able to turn. At first the plane may move slightly backwards as the friction on the wheel bearings is over come but beyond that there is no difference between taking off from a conveyor belt or a normal landing strip.
The plane will fly.
Unless of course the pilot is distracted by the smell of one of Tiny's co-workers that just had an accident.
The conveyor belt has no more effect on the plane than a normal landing strip as long as the wheels are able to turn. At first the plane may move slightly backwards as the friction on the wheel bearings is over come but beyond that there is no difference between taking off from a conveyor belt or a normal landing strip.
The plane will fly.
Unless of course the pilot is distracted by the smell of one of Tiny's co-workers that just had an accident.
quote:
A plane is standing on a movable runway(something like a conveyor) As the plane moves, the conveyor moves but in the opposite direction. The conveyor has a system that tracks the speed of the plane and matches it exactly in the opposite direction
What part of that scenario makes you think the plane will move forward? It states that the conveyor moves in the opposite direction and matches the speed of the plane. Sounds like it's stationary to me.
lets get mythbusters on it
http://forums.di.fm/printthread.php?t=92585&pp=100
Ah, 700+ posts later, these guys are still arguing about it. Please don't let this happen to the GB.
Ah, 700+ posts later, these guys are still arguing about it. Please don't let this happen to the GB.
I believe it can fly
I believe it can touch the sky
I think about it every night and day etc.
I believe it can touch the sky
I think about it every night and day etc.
Put it this way… if the airflow doesn’t matter then why have wings at all? Without wings, you now basically have a car in neutral on a conveyor belt. Would that ever take off?
The only thing the conveyor belt does is turn the plane wheels backward.
The tangential velocity of the wheels will result from two factors, the speed of the conveyor belt and the forward progress of the plane.
The only thing that will happen before take off due to the conveyor belt is that the plane wheels will be rotating faster.
The plane will fly.
Unless of course the pilot has loaded the plane down with too many emergency supplies in panic over the recent cold front.
The tangential velocity of the wheels will result from two factors, the speed of the conveyor belt and the forward progress of the plane.
The only thing that will happen before take off due to the conveyor belt is that the plane wheels will be rotating faster.
The plane will fly.
Unless of course the pilot has loaded the plane down with too many emergency supplies in panic over the recent cold front.
I thought the premise was that the plane would never move forward. If the plane does move forward then it will be a normal takeoff with faster spinning wheels.
The only thing that would keep the plane from moving forward is if the wheels are locked and not able to rotate.
The wheels are NOT providing the propulsion.
The wheels are NOT providing the propulsion.
Or friction....
quote:
The only thing that will happen before take off due to the conveyor belt is that the plane wheels will be rotating faster.
The plane will fly.
I don't see how you can say both of those sentences in the same post. The conveyor belt matches the tangential velocity of the wheels, therefore, the plane does not move forward and the plane does not fly.
Again ...
The wheels are NOT providing the propulsion.
[This message has been edited by IIIHorn (edited 11/30/2006 10:50a).]
The wheels are NOT providing the propulsion.
[This message has been edited by IIIHorn (edited 11/30/2006 10:50a).]
And? Are you suggesting that a sail boat on wheels on a conveyor belt will move forward because the wheels aren't providing the thrust?
I take the premise to mean that the belt will increase (i.e. match) the speed of the wheels.
If your point of the wheels not providing the propolsion is to say that the engine will create a situation where the wheels are no longer rolling without slipping, then yeah, I agree with you, the wheels are inconsequential.
[This message has been edited by mae1778a (edited 11/30/2006 10:54a).]
I take the premise to mean that the belt will increase (i.e. match) the speed of the wheels.
If your point of the wheels not providing the propolsion is to say that the engine will create a situation where the wheels are no longer rolling without slipping, then yeah, I agree with you, the wheels are inconsequential.
[This message has been edited by mae1778a (edited 11/30/2006 10:54a).]
You are attempting to equate the conveyor belt with a head wind.
I still don't see how the wheels would ever have enough traction for the plane to take off.
Goose ...
Yer killin' me.
Yer killin' me.
nerds
SHUT UP TOUCAN!
Actually, I'm equating the conveyor to a treadmill on frictionless bearings without a motor and assuming the wheels stay in a rolling without slipping condition.
[This message has been edited by mae1778a (edited 11/30/2006 10:58a).]
[This message has been edited by mae1778a (edited 11/30/2006 10:58a).]
What if a toucan was jogging on a treadmill and extended its wings...oh, nevermind.
Then Toucan would be moot?
Is this supposed toucan massless?
I thought the original premise was that the plane was to be stationary, and that the runway would be moving at 150 knots (or whatever) under it. In that case the plane will not take off.
If the plane is allowed to move forward (using it’s prop or jet), then the only thing keeping it from taking off is if the additional friction from the wheels turning twice as fast keeps the plane from reaching its take off airspeed before it runs off the end of the conveyor belt, killing everybody (including children and pets) on board.
If the plane is allowed to move forward (using it’s prop or jet), then the only thing keeping it from taking off is if the additional friction from the wheels turning twice as fast keeps the plane from reaching its take off airspeed before it runs off the end of the conveyor belt, killing everybody (including children and pets) on board.
Toucan: Not if you plan to kilogram cracker.
Folks,
The conveyor belt is not going to prevent the plane from moving forward. It's wheels are just going to rotate faster.
duh ...
[This message has been edited by IIIHorn (edited 11/30/2006 11:06a).]
Folks,
The conveyor belt is not going to prevent the plane from moving forward. It's wheels are just going to rotate faster.
duh ...
[This message has been edited by IIIHorn (edited 11/30/2006 11:06a).]
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
I HATE THIS F-IN TOPIC!!!!!!!
AeroAg2012
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
14
AggieBucksJB
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
14
Angry Beaver
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
10
Aggball2010
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
10
missinAggieland
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
7
Bruce Almighty
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
7
AgEngr12
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
7
sealyag
Was the final pitcher in game 3 Using an illegal substance?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5
country
we just won 4 straight series against 4 ranked opponents.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5
Harry Stone
we just won 4 straight series against 4 ranked opponents.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5