Will the plane take off?? Finally going to be answered.***

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

Actually not...depends on the aircraft...
With ultralights/props the powerplant is used to create a takeoff roll to gain lift and to aid with pulling the aircraft through the sky...

But if you use turbine powerplant...the powerplant pushes the aircraft through the sky.

See with props...the aircraft is light enough to glide and fly on its wings, but it still too heavy to glide on its on throughout the flight...hence why it has a prop.

But with commerical airliners like a 757, which is pretty much a flying brick. Remove the powerplants and you got squat. The Wings provide lift to stay aloft and able to glide to safety. But without its powerplants its screwed...

It doesn'tmatter how the thrust is produced in this equation for lift off, so long as it isn't coming from the wheels. I think you missed a few pages. Seriously.

 

[DBfan187 5,000+ posts]

In the youtube video the guy is testing the theory using a model aircraft which has it's gear powering it's movement...
Unlike in real aircraft...

there's a friggin matchbox car mounted on that plane, no gears!

 

[hoss 5,000+ posts]

this thread needed something useful.

 

[rollerdj 10+ year member]

this thread needed something useful.

agree'd. i can't belive this is STILL going on. i thought all this was sorted out in like, what, page 7 or 8. lawlz

 

[93EXT 10+ year member]

Others in this thread are looking at it like this: The plane is completely stationary relative to the ground. The treadmill is moving at 150 mph backwards and the plane is only throttled up enough to keep the plane in the same position relative to the ground. Thus, no air speed (and no lift) is generated.

thats how I "was" before.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

but to be going 5 miles an hour backwards, and to stay stationary going 5 forward, it has to be a car or something that has force being applied down to the conveyor, not something that pushes air.

But like others and myself said earlier, the experiment will get focked up somehow.

 

[ngsm13 5,000+ posts]

I love the tards that just come in saying the first WRONG choice that pops into their mind...

It's HILARIOUS to read their comments, especially when they try to incorrectly justify their WRONG answer.

LAwl.

nG

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

thats how I "was" before.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

So was I until I actually thought about it for a second.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

Actually not...depends on the aircraft...
With ultralights/props the powerplant is used to create a takeoff roll to gain lift and to aid with pulling the aircraft through the sky...

But if you use turbine powerplant...the powerplant pushes the aircraft through the sky.

See with props...the aircraft is light enough to glide and fly on its wings, but it still too heavy to glide on its on throughout the flight...hence why it has a prop.

But with commerical airliners like a 757, which is pretty much a flying brick. Remove the powerplants and you got squat. The Wings provide lift to stay aloft and able to glide to safety. But without its powerplants its screwed...

Ummm...

I think you need to stop guessing because there is no way that an airliner just flys only on the force generated by the motors. There is CONSIDERABLE lift from the wings. The reason a 'flying brick' doesn't last very long in a "glide" is because of the drag. The drag slows the plane down causing what? You guessed it less air to move over the wings causing less and less lift.

Savvy?

I love the tards that just come in saying the first WRONG choice that pops into their mind...
It's HILARIOUS to read their comments, especially when they try to incorrectly justify their WRONG answer.

LAwl.

nG

It is just shocking to me how people don't understand the simple principles of flight.

It is obvious now why it took man so long to get into the sky.

 

[regal8r 5,000+ posts]

im sure this has been posted, but in order for a plane to get lift, there must be wind rushing past the wings to create low pressure. a plane on a treadmill will not achieve this because its not moving anywhere

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

 

[HitManSE 10+ year member]

Read the thread asshat...

Bleh...

Well, after further review. The simplest thing that made sense was what Acidburn posted "the conveyor's effect on the plane is negligible in all regards until the brakes are applied" Which ill agree with. The plane would have to be moving in the reverse at takeoff speed in order for the answer to be NO.

That being said, id have to say Id like to change my answer because the plane will take off. (so long as they dont mess it up //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif )

 

[savagebee 10+ year member]

you really need to read the thread man

I lol'd @ my vote after I read a few posts.. like most, I wasnt thinking about it properly.. my first response was of course.. hell no it wont work..

then it was pointed out that its not a car with gear driven wheels.. its a plane.. with thrusters (or a prop.. whatever) pushing the plan forwards, regrdless of ground speed, not the wheels

 

[Chevillac 5,000+ posts]

I hate when people cite MythBusters to me as being their source of knowledge. I can't remember watching an episode where more conclusive tests couldn't have been done.

thats the only thing im worried about, they might mess it all up. However, it has to have already been filmed if its coming out Wednesday I just wanna know how they made a runway long treadmill.

or the plane falls off this "treadmill" crashes, end of show.

heh, that would be interesting.

indeed wow...
Are you ****ing kidding me?

8 pages of BS to determine the aircraft won't lift off?

its common sense, no air no lift...no take off...

Jesus christ, maybe this forum should discuss the theory of turbine engines...

****, Squeeze, Bang & Blow... might interest some of these pathetic minds...

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I had to keep this one quoted. you seemed really upset.

I think we have two arguments going on here.
The people saying that everyone here are idiots are looking at it one way, while others who say it won't take off are looking at it another way.

Squeak, tama, njizzum, etc. are looking at it like this: The plane is able to move forward on the treadmill because the wheels aren't driven. The plane can move forward relative to the GROUND, generate enough air speed (and thus lift) and take off. This is pretty obvious.

Others in this thread are looking at it like this: The plane is completely stationary relative to the ground. The treadmill is moving at 150 mph backwards and the plane is only throttled up enough to keep the plane in the same position relative to the ground. Thus, no air speed (and no lift) is generated.

Bottom line is that we'll have to wait until the episode to see EXACTLY what they are trying to prove here.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/word.gif.64b12e39f936af3b4fff38a1c0bd0244.gif its basically a riddle to **** your thinking up, but once you get passed that, its clear.

anyone got a remote control airplane and a treadmill?

its been done 100 times. :youtube:

It is obvious now why it took man so long to get into the sky.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif the wright brothers probly had this same arguement. Except, without the treadmill.

im sure this has been posted, but in order for a plane to get lift, there must be wind rushing past the wings to create low pressure. a plane on a treadmill will not achieve this because its not moving anywhere
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

On the last page....

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I love the tards that just come in saying the first WRONG choice that pops into their mind...
It's HILARIOUS to read their comments, especially when they try to incorrectly justify their WRONG answer.

LAwl.

nG

I personally like the fegs who pop in calling everyone retards with no explanation for the correct answer. Those are my favorites. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

thats the only thing im worried about, they might mess it all up. However, it has to have already been filmed if its coming out Wednesday I just wanna know how they made a runway long treadmill. X2





heh, that would be interesting.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif I had to keep this one quoted. you seemed really upset. He is a self proclaimed aeronautical genius too!

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/word.gif.64b12e39f936af3b4fff38a1c0bd0244.gif its basically a riddle to **** your thinking up, but once you get passed that, its clear. Indeed. It sunk in real quick after I got the shock from nG to pump my blood and get me thinking an then tama and squeak following up with excellent explanations. Did I feel a bit foolish when I realized my error?, yes, but I also know I haven't dealt with questions like these in 14 years and just didn't give the problem any real attention, so I am ok with it.

its been done 100 times. :youtube: oh

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif the wright brothers probly had this same arguement. Except, without the treadmill. oh

On the last page....Indeed this is... for now.

...

 

[Chevillac 5,000+ posts]

...

oh.