Will this plane take off?

[Gimpdiggity]

Originally Posted by OreoGaborio

and your feeling is wrong.

http://www.kottke.org/06/02/plane-conveyor-belt
http://txfx.net/2005/12/08/airplane-on-a-conveyor-belt/
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060203.html
http://www.michaelbuffington.com/art...es-skateboards
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc...5/phy05023.htm

http://txfx.net/2005/12/08/airplane-on-a-conveyor-belt/

That one there makes me rethink my original stance...

I still think that's not the POINT of the question though...but I will agree with you guys now that the way it's written, the plane will take off.

[Gimpdiggity]

Originally Posted by OreoGaborio

so i called him an idiot once.... it's not name-calling if it's true

[OreoGaborio]

what's the point of the question? the question is, will it take off? the answer is yes, because the wheels have nothing to do w/ the forward motion of the plane.

[rusaccord]

It took me a little bit to look at it, but I think I'm starting to see what's going on. The people who say that it won't take off are the ones who believe that the plane won't move forward. I agree with this, if the plane didn't move forward, then it wouldn't take off.

However, we're facing confusion in what produces the forward motion. Let's say you have a car standing on that treadmill runway with all of the same speed-matching conditions. The car won't move anywhere since whatever speed the engine spins the wheels at, the runway moves backwards. That means if you've got a wheel circumference of one meter (just to make things simple, I know it's not right), then for every rotation of the wheel, the runway will move back by one meter. The car won't go anywhere because the forward motion is provided by the wheels rolling forward, almost, crudely put, pushing off of the ground.

The airplane turbine, in the same crude way, is pushing off of the air. That's where the rolling chair and rope analogy comes from, I think. The rope is the air, and the air doesn't move. So, when the plane turns up its turbines, they push off of the stationary air. Then, for every revolution of the plane's wheel (let's say the same meter) the treadmill moves back one meter. Except what happens is since there's no driving force being applied on the plane wheels - they're not connected to an engine - they simply spin twice as fast and the plane moves forward. As someone said above, they act like bearings. Thus, since the plane is pushing against the air and not against the ground (like a car would), the plane moves forward and does take off. The thrust of the turbines moves the plane forward, from where Bernoulli takes over. However, you still need a full-length runway for this plane.

[Gimpdiggity]

Originally Posted by OreoGaborio

read the whole article and look at the other links i posted

You mean the links that you posted one by one while going back and editing your thread 6 times??

If you want someone to read your whole post, post it all at once...not bit by bit over 10 minutes.

[OFFICER737]

Originally Posted by OreoGaborio

so i called him an idiot once.... it's not name-calling if it's true

But it's name calling whether it is true or not...have to say though, that is a funny comeback

[Gimpdiggity]

Originally Posted by OreoGaborio

what's the point of the question? the question is, will it take off? the answer is yes, because the wheels have nothing to do w/ the forward motion of the plane.

I believe the point of the entire question is to suggest that the plane is NOT capable of moving forward AT ALL...that it's IMPOSSIBLE for the plane to gain any forward momentum...so even if it were travelling at 100 mph based on the speed of the RPMs of the wheels, it would be standing still to someone who were watching it.

[rusaccord]

Heh, I just read the txfx article and realized that he's writing about the same thing I was, the fact that the plane is not a car and doesn't achieve forward motion by driving the wheels.

[WannaMoto]

I used the word deluded... because I think it funny that you've read both sides of the argument and you still think it will not fly. Either that or you like to get suckers to argue

[OreoGaborio]

a thousand appologies for editing my post at first i figured one or two links would be enough but then i realized it probably wasn't.

[Gimpdiggity]

Originally Posted by OFFICER737

But it's name calling whether it is true or not...have to say though, that is a funny comeback

Yah, a funny comeback that I'd have probably gotten banned for.

[rusaccord]

Originally Posted by Gimpdiggity

I believe the point of the entire question is to suggest that the plane is NOT capable of moving forward AT ALL...that it's IMPOSSIBLE for the plane to gain any forward momentum...so even if it were travelling at 100 mph based on the speed of the RPMs of the wheels, it would be standing still to someone who were watching it.

But what would keep the plane from moving?

Admittedly, if the plane is on tethers and isn't moving forward, then it won't take off. But it seems like the whole point is the question of whether or not the treadmill will achieve the same effect as tethers would.

[yellowduc]

didn't read through all of the posts, but wouldn't it technically depend on whether it was a prop plane or not? If it was a jet, then no air is moving over the wings, if it is a prop plan, then the prop is pushing air over the wings.