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

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

im about to draw in paint what im trying to say.

Draw away. It has already been proven with math that you are wrong. I believe math is > paint last time I checked.

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

the only way that the plane will stand still is if there is a tether keeping it stationary.
and the experiment isnt "can a stationary plane take off?", the question is "can a plane on a treadmill take off?". and a plane on a treadmill is only going to need the same amount of force as it would if it was on stationary surfaces.

change the way you think, because you are thinking about it incorrectly.

THERE IS NO OPPOSITE REACTION CREATED BY THE TREADMILL. IT IS IRRELEVANT IN THE PLANES ABILITY TO PROVIDE PROPER THRUST FOR FORWARD MOMENTUM.

Actually, thats incorrect. SOME force will have to be provided by the engines to overcome the friction of the wheels being turned by the treadmill.

Look at it like this. Set a car on a treadmill. Turn the treadmill on. The car will move backwards. SOME force has to be applied to keep the car in the same place.

Of course a plane's engines will be able to easily overcome this, BUT if the planes engines are exerting zero force then the plane is going to move back with the treadmill.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

Actually, thats incorrect. SOME force will have to be provided by the engines to overcome the friction of the wheels being turned by the treadmill.
Look at it like this. Set a car on a treadmill. Turn the treadmill on. The car will move backwards. SOME force has to be applied to keep the car in the same place.

The friction in this case is very minimal, so for all intent purposes it is negligible.

 

[04_edge 10+ year member]

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

The friction in this case is very minimal, so for all intent purposes it is negligible.

Read my edited post above. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

You replied too quickly. haha

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

Read my edited post above. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
You replied too quickly. haha

agreed.

 

[hoss 5,000+ posts]

Actually, thats incorrect. SOME force will have to be provided by the engines to overcome the friction of the wheels being turned by the treadmill.
Look at it like this. Set a car on a treadmill. Turn the treadmill on. The car will move backwards. SOME force has to be applied to keep the car in the same place.

Of course a plane's engines will be able to easily overcome this, BUT if the planes engines are exerting zero force then the plane is going to move back with the treadmill.

well yes, there will be some friction involved. and i was trying to write up some formulas to show how o4 edge was thinking about it incorrectly, but unfortunatly while im at work i just have the time to tell him he is an idiot. expecially after those drawings...

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

You will need better paint skills to defy the laws of physics and mathematics. Insert quarter and try again.

 

[hoss 5,000+ posts]

You will need better paint skills to defy the laws of physics and mathematics. Insert quarter and try again.

lol. when i get home tonight, im going to pull out the old college physics index cards to explain exactly why everyone is an idiot.

i think that the forum needs at least one more thread on this topic...

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

lol. when i get home tonight, im going to pull out the old college physics index cards to explain exactly why everyone is an idiot.
i think that the forum needs at least one more thread on this topic...

1 more certainly couldn't hurt.

 

[Chevillac 5,000+ posts]

wait, so they are going to try to take off on a moving belt? or are they just going to sit a plane on top of it, while holding it stationary to see if lift is created?

if the plane was using its engines trying to take off on a treadmill it would work, but if its just sitting there no lift will be created, at all. /story

what the hell would be the point of that? Thats just dumb, of course it cant create lift without having forward motion through the air.

i finally read what the actual experiment was........
but im still going to say no.

the plane will still be stationary if they do it right...therefore, there will still be no lift.

oh boi. If they do it right, the plane will take off.

if the treadmill is traveling in reverse at 100mph and the plane is traveling at what would be 100mph on the ground, it will not be moving compared to what is around it, thats why i say stationary.
if the plane needs to be going 100mph to lift off, it would need to be using enough power to make it go 200mph to overcome the opposite force........

no, why do you think this? The wheels are still spinning forward.

well yes, there will be some friction involved. and i was trying to write up some formulas to show how o4 edge was thinking about it incorrectly, but unfortunatly while im at work i just have the time to tell him he is an idiot. expecially after those drawings...

yowzers, that drawing was just.....

lol. when i get home tonight, im going to pull out the old college physics index cards to explain exactly why everyone is an idiot.
i think that the forum needs at least one more thread on this topic...

I posted a video where the guy goes over the formulas. I dont think anybody watched it.

 

[04_edge 10+ year member]

well see tonight, im done with arguing,

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I posted a video where the guy goes over the formulas. I dont think anybody watched it.

Didn't need to. I understood Tamas post where he wrote the forumulas the first time I read it.

 

[td5turbo 10+ year member]

OK listen its NOT a law of relativity.

OK the myth: the plane is at takeoff thrust. The treadmill is at takeoff thrust speed.

OK so lets say at thrust percent 70, the plane is able to get up to speed and take off. Thrust is a measure of air displacement force that causes motion. OK, it has nothing to do with wheel speed. If you were to put the plane on a treadmill, the wheels will spin under the airplane. Well, a small amount of friction between the wheels and the ground, as well as the wheels and the wheel-bearing will hold the plane on the treadmill, thus it will move backwards some (slower than the rate of the treadmill though)

OK so now you turn on the engines and the THRUST pushes air thus the plane starts to move forward. For the plane to not be able to more forward, the friction between the wheels and wheel bearings would have to be so high that the thrust couldnt overcome it. The MAX amount of friction is absolute lock of the wheel bearings, thus all the friction is between the tires and the treadmill. So your saying there is NO possible way a plane could even more forward if it had non-rotational rubber wheels? I agree that it wouldnt move very fast, but a jet would sure enough more forward at least slowly!

But we all know that the friction between the wheels and the plane isnt too much seeing as "stong man" competitions hold plane pulling contests. OK, so your saying the thrust of a jet at takeoff 70% of throttle is LESS than that of ONE human!? fucck off!

So what exactly is the friction percent of the plane and I am guessing the friction/drag of the wheels is going to increase as speed increases. But the extra 30% of thrust avaliable is WELL capable of overcomming this friction.

All thats really happening is the wheels are spinning twice the speed per unit of air speed. The plane is going to take off, the wheels are just working overtime.

 

[Pl8er 5,000+ posts]

Draw away. It has already been proven with math that you are wrong. I believe math is > paint last time I checked.

Oh sweet lord that is funny to me. That is going in the sig for awhile