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.
I did, even if it is an overused (and useless) expression. Thinking inside the box results in the conclusion that the plane will take off.
By default, there are many assumptions in these kinds of problems. One being that the air is still. This means that ground speed and air speed are the same.
The original version of this thought experiment refers to the rate at which the wheels spin versus the rate of the treadmill. If these match, then the axis of the wheels does not move. They stay in one place. If the wheels are staying in one place, this means the plane's ground speed is zero--which means that its air speed is zero.
In your example, the speed of the wheels and the speed of the treadmill do not match, which breaks the rules of the problem. It's not asking if a plane can take off on a treadmill which is going the opposite direction; but if the plane can take off on a treadmill for which the surface is moving in a direction opposite the plane's and at the same speed as its wheels. As, by definition, this means that the plane is not moving (either because the engines are shut off, or because the drag from the treadmill against the wheels equals the thrust), then this also means it cannot take off.
Uh, perhaps you could tell us where "wheelspeed" is even mentioned in the problem???
__________________ Able to split an infinitive at the speed of sound!
Uh, perhaps you could tell us where "wheelspeed" is even mentioned in the problem???
What part of "original version of this thought experiment" did you not understand? Reading is fundamental.
I was clearly addressing the problem as originally presented, not the hacked-up poorly worded version which various dumbasses have posted throughout the internet such as the one at the beginning of this thread. Obviously if you chop out important requirements from a thought experiment, it can completely change the outcome.
damn, talk about brought back from the dead post.... anyways the plane will take off. The wheels on the plane are free spinning, they don't have a transmission, so the thrust from the plane will be the same, and the speed that the plane is moving will still be the same, but the wheels will be freely rotating at twice the speed they normally would without the treadmill.
What part of "original version of this thought experiment" did you not understand? Reading is fundamental.
I was clearly addressing the problem as originally presented, not the hacked-up poorly worded version which various dumbasses have posted throughout the internet such as the one at the beginning of this thread. Obviously if you chop out important requirements from a thought experiment, it can completely change the outcome.
But you're missing the key point, that this thread addresses the question as posed by the OP, not what has been posted elsewhere. And, in any case, the measurement of an aircraft's velocity via wheelspeed is assinine, at best....
__________________ Able to split an infinitive at the speed of sound!
Wheel speed has nothing to do with the plane getting in the air. Its all about the speed of the air going across the wing creating the lift required.
If the plane is basically standing still, freewheeling on a treadmill, theres no lift being created by the wings to get it in the air.
__________________
Eric
"A bad day racing is better than a good day working."
Wheel speed has nothing to do with the plane getting in the air. Its all about the speed of the air going across the wing creating the lift required.
Exactly why it will take off. As already mentioned, the wheels are free-spinning. Even if the treadmill was capable of spinning 500mph in the opposite direction it would not negate forward motion of the aircraft.
The only way to negate the forward motion of the aircraft would be to generate a headwind (e.g. wind tunnel) >= the thrust of the engines. However since there would be air flowing over the wings, it would generate lift and the plane could leave the ground and literally fly in place all things being equal.
__________________ ~El Pepeleesta~
Quote:
It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder. Frederic Bastiat
Exactly why it will take off. As already mentioned, the wheels are free-spinning. Even if the treadmill was capable of spinning 500mph in the opposite direction it would not negate forward motion of the aircraft.
The only way to negate the forward motion of the aircraft would be to generate a headwind (e.g. wind tunnel) >= the thrust of the engines. However since there would be air flowing over the wings, it would generate lift and the plane could leave the ground and literally fly in place all things being equal.
exactly...I flew my plane backwards a couple months ago. Wind was strong enough that it provided enough airspeed to keep me flying, and had extra left to push me backwards.
Conspiracy!
There is no one left that actually believes the plane won't fly. Those that post that the plane doesn't fly are only doing it to troll responses from those that care enough about their opinions that they want to force the nay-sayers to repent and turn to the believing side.
Conspiracy!
Conspiracy!
There is no one left that actually believes the plane won't fly. Those that post that the plane doesn't fly are only doing it to troll responses from those that care enough about their opinions that they want to force the nay-sayers to repent and turn to the believing side.
Conspiracy!
What's your mailing address??? I want to send you a package....
__________________ Able to split an infinitive at the speed of sound!
It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder. Frederic Bastiat
But you're missing the key point, that this thread addresses the question as posed by the OP
No, this thread addresses not only the question as posed by the OP, but the question as it is supposed to have been worded. It's called a correction.
If someone posted a thread asserting that the Earth is flat and then asking how long it takes to travel from edge to edge, and if it went like this thread did, you'd have a huge number of people coming up with explanations of how long it would take to get from edge to edge and a few individuals pointing out that the Earth isn't flat in the first place. Again, a correction.
Quote:
, not what has been posted elsewhere.
There's no point in debating the problem as posted because the plane will clearly take off and there's nothing counterintuitive about it. That was the magic of the actual, original version of the question. It was just tricky enough to actually result in debate. To debate the question as posted is idiotic.
Quote:
And, in any case, the measurement of an aircraft's velocity via wheelspeed is assinine, at best....
Nobody said anything about calculating the aircraft's velocity by wheelspeed. RIF.
__________________ PISSLEESTA
Never argue with an idiot. They bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Arguing over the internet is like competing in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OFFICER737
Yeah, the no nut fucking fucksticks that couldn't find their fucking dicks with a fucking Lojack system on it and a fucking Locater in their fucking hands!!
PISSLEESTA
Linear Mode
