| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 64128 | 2005-12-04 07:01:00 | Sunday night Brain Bender - Airplane Physics | miknz (3731) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 410142 | 2006-02-05 00:19:00 | Wouldn't teh bird be too knackerd for flying after that damn convetor matched its speed no matter how fast it ran? Anyhow, The plane would fly just fine in the same situation as the bird, If it could flap its wings......Muhahahahaha. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 410143 | 2006-02-05 00:20:00 | Erm, the sparrow would not run, rather it would start flapping its wings in a VTOL fashion thereby bypassing this brain softening quiz and get the hell out! :p |
bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 410144 | 2006-02-05 21:29:00 | I have begun to hate this thread with such an intense passion, that I would rather die a painful, lingering death by slowly being boiled alive in acid before I could admit I was ever wrong, despite whichever stance I took. | Greg (193) | ||
| 410145 | 2006-02-05 21:41:00 | I agree with you there. This thread deserves the guys from Mythbusters. | bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 410146 | 2006-02-08 01:28:00 | How did the checkout lady react to your flying your plane on the conveyor belt Greg? | Graham L (2) | ||
| 410147 | 2006-08-20 03:27:00 | Alright here it is. Imagine a plane is sat on the beginning of a massive conveyor belt/travelator type arrangement, as wide and as long as a runway, and intends to take off. The conveyer belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels at any given time, moving in the opposite direction of rotation. There is no wind. Can the plane take off? Discuss.... Well, apart from Haze who almost got it, your ALL wrong. Here's why. As the plane moves forward, due to the engine thrust acting on the surrounding stationary air, the wheels would start to turn this will, according to the original proposition, cause the conveyor belt to match the speed of the wheels, which would be the same speed as the forward motion of the plane (the original proposition did not say "match the rotation") so the wheels and the conveyor will match the forward motion of the plane until the plane takes off. However, if the original proposition meant that the rotation of the wheels is matched by the conveyor the as the wheels start to rotate then the conveyor would more than double the rotation speed until the wheels exploded due to centrifugal force as the forward motion would always be accumulated to the rotational speed of the wheels. This would happen very rapidly and the plane would fall onto the speeding conveyor and be thrown backwards to its total destruction. ie not take off. For Sale:- 1 slightly used mythical conveyor belt, 1 light aircraft slightly damaged in transit. All offers considered. ;) |
JackStraw (6573) | ||
| 410148 | 2006-08-20 04:12:00 | the original proposition did not say "match the rotation"No, but neither did it specify whether it was linear or rotational speed, so in reality both options you have stated are correct. The other thing to consider is whether the plane's engines are actually capable of overcoming the friction of the ground against the fuselage after losing the wheels. Assuming the conveyor stops moving once the wheels explode (there are no longer any wheels, so they can't have speed for the conveyor to match) it would be the same situation as a plane taking off from a normal runway with no wheels. For the purposes of this question, what is the conveyor made of (so we know how much friction to allow for)? JackStraw - nice to see this thread again, it's given me a lot of amusement, although I daresay Greg will object to its resurrection :D |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 410149 | 2006-08-20 04:27:00 | Yawn............I'll save Greg the trouble. OK mastermind, did it never occur to you that aircraft landing speeds are so much greater than lift off speeds, especially for high performance aircraft or the space shuttle, yet runways are not littered with the remains of exploded wheels? Fiddle with the words as much as you like, aerodynamics and physics win, the plane flies away leaving doubters floundering in its wake. Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 410150 | 2006-08-20 05:49:00 | He's also missing the point that there is a certain amount of hypothesis in the scenario, eg the tyres blowing up isn't a consideration. So yeah, the plane's still sitting there waiting for its fuel to run out. |
Greg (193) | ||
| 410151 | 2006-08-20 08:23:00 | AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!! Not this bloody thread again! |
bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | |||||