If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Open ForumsThe Open forum was created for people to discuss anything else Non-Moto related. Just about anything goes! Please remember this is a loosely moderated area. If you do not have thick skin. We suggest you stay out of here.
And everyones too busy stroking their own dicks to realize it's not a physics dilemna, but difference in reading comprehension.
It certainly could be considered a reading comprehension and logic question. Let's explore it more fully in that direction. The question states that the conveyor belt's speed is equal to that of the plane but opposite in direction. Speeds are of course relative in nature, so it's necessary to determine what each speed is measured relative to. There are three objects to consider: the plane, the conveyor belt's surface, and the ground. If both the plane's speed and the conveyor's speed are measured relative to the ground, the plane takes off with it's wheels spinning twice as fast as normal. Simple, easy, and completely satisfies the wording of the question. If the plane's speed is measured relative to the conveyor's surface and the conveyor's speed is measured relative to the plane, then a better word for the conveyor is "runway" as it will never ever move relative to the ground. The same applies if the speed of the plane is measured relative to the ground and the speed of the conveyor is measured relative to the plane so long as the plane is on or above the runway. Plainly neither of these satisfy the intent of the question. Finally we arrive at measuring the plane's speed relative to the conveyor and the conveyor's speed relative to the ground. Here we run into problems. Starting from a standstill, the plane can only gain velocity relative to the conveyor by also gaining velocity relative to the ground. If the plane has any velocity relative to the ground, it is mathematically impossible for the conveyor to match the plane's velocity relative to it's surface and will accelerate to infinity. This is of course impossible. Therefore, there is only one correct answer to the question.
I vote that the SBN forum rules be amended. Any thread started about an airplane on a conveyor belt will be locked. The OP will be banned, shot, stabbed, tarred, feathered, shat on, blown up, and called an ugly meanie head.
__________________
doublEEsta
Global Warming - A phenomenon where natural climatic cycles coincide with liberal aspirations.
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
Don't spread my WEALTH...Spread my WORK ETHIC!
I'm sure this is going to start an argument, but it needs to be said. So long as speeds are measured in the only logical way, as I've outlined above, the vehicle will gain airspeed whether propulsion is delivered through the wheels or not.
^frame of reference is important when analyzing vectors....
WannaMoto: i read to a certain point, then everything else became a moot point. the crux of the arguement is propulsion....the conveyer does not affect the question.
The plane will take off perfectly normal. No problem.
As the plane picks up speed from the thrust of the engines against the atmosphere the conveyor spins the wheels faster and faster.
Who cares what the wheels do, they are spinning freely from the plane. Just much faster than usual in this case. The wheels on a plane are independent of thrust.
^frame of reference is important when analyzing vectors....
WannaMoto: i read to a certain point, then everything else became a moot point. the crux of the arguement is propulsion....the conveyer does not affect the question.
His post was saying if you take a force other than the wheels (prop fan or your hand) then the conveyor has no relevance.
??
After telling this to a coworker, he originally said the same thing that I did.
When I tried to explain to him WHY we were wrong, suddenly everything clicked and I get why it will still take off.
I still think the question is worded differently than it was intended. I feel that it is meaning that the plane will gain NO forward momentum. But, as it stands, I was wrong and I now get why I was wrong.
__________________
In Life, Try To Be The Kind Of Person Your Dog Thinks You Are...
2002 Kawasaki Ninja 250--SV-650 rear shock, Sonic Springs .80kg/mm front springs, ZX-2R graphics, flush mount front signals, tail pod rear signals, Kerker 2-1 race pipe, Factory Pro Stage 3 jet kit, UNI pod filters, ZG Double Bubble, Custom Creations soft vinyl seat cover, Kawi Green rim stripes, carbon brake fluid cap, carbon control levers, No Rear Fender, Yamaha R1 Style Mirrors, V-LEDs.com H4 HID Kit, Nelson Rigg Silver Streak Mini Saddle Bags, Rapid Transit Recon Tank Bag, Various Manufacturers Decals
After telling this to a coworker, he originally said the same thing that I did.
When I tried to explain to him WHY we were wrong, suddenly everything clicked and I get why it will still take off.
I still think the question is worded differently than it was intended. I feel that it is meaning that the plane will gain NO forward momentum. But, as it stands, I was wrong and I now get why I was wrong.
And once again....YES YES YES YES YES, it will fly. If you cant understand why it will fly then i have pity for you since you somehow think that the wheels on a plane do anything except roll freely
__________________
The 954 is shy but the 929 was a whore hence the avatar
Right. Nobody is arguing that. But by your logic, an airplane would take off from a stand still immediately.
If the wheels are spinning at 200 mph and the conveyor is spinning at 200 mph, the aircraft is still standing still on the conveyor belt. Thus there is no wind passing the wings. Thus there is no lift. Thus there is no takeoff.
A slightly similar example would be, if an airplane were to produce enough thrust to takeoff, yet it were being held still by some giant metal arms that hold it in place, if those arms were removed would the plane immediately takeoff??
The kid is right. A Harrier jump-jet can take off from a stand-still. A helicopter can take off from a stand-still. The military has a twin-engine prop plane whose wings rotate at the fuselage which can take off from a stand-still. Your argument is full of holes.
__________________
If you want to stand out from the crowd, try being yourself for a change.
Linear Mode
