| 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 | ||
| 410152 | 2006-08-20 09:12:00 | Please spammers, post some spam to this thread so it may be locked!!! | gibler (49) | ||
| 410153 | 2006-08-20 10:09:00 | If you want the correct answer look through last years posts. It's all there. Now put it away and , if you must, write something interesting. |
JJJJJ (528) | ||
| 410154 | 2006-08-20 11:36:00 | [edit: spam removed] [edit: This might of been done as a joke, however it is still against the forum rules to advertise like this and unfair on those other members with commercial businesses. You know the rules ... so 24 hrs off the board] |
george12 (7) | ||
| 410155 | 2006-08-20 11:51:00 | ^^^ ban | roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 410156 | 2006-08-20 12:16:00 | yello, just found this thread, very entertaining.pressf1.co.nz 2cents As has been stated before, an aerofoil must have air moving over it to generate lift. As the air is in a fixed position relative to the Earth i.e it is still, the aerofoil must move forward to enable airflow over it.As the conveyor belt has a positive feedback mechanism to enable it to match the speed of the circumference of the tyres,it will accelerate to match the postion of the aircraft relative to the Earth until such time as thrust from the engines is in equilibrium with the speed of the conveyor belt which means that the aircraft will stay still in relation to the earth & not have any airflow over the aerofoil therefore the plane will stay on the ground, cheers |
Whenu (9358) | ||
| 410157 | 2006-08-22 08:20:00 | Sorry Gibler, I did try... Sorry Jen, won't happen again. Whenu, the thing is that the thrust to push the plane forwards comes from the jet engines, which pushes against the air, which as you say, is still. So there is nothing to keep the plane from moving forwards, and as you say, if it moves forwards it can take off. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 410158 | 2006-08-23 04:09:00 | The basic premise is zero traction between wheels and surface. Ask yourself if the plane could take off on a long flat stretch of oil covered ice, and most people would say yes. No difference. Personally, I would just order up a Harrier and settle the argument with a vertical take off. |
RandomCarnage (9359) | ||
| 410159 | 2006-08-25 14:45:00 | 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 Nothing here says engines are running or that the plane is moving, or even trying to The conveyer belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels at any given time.......so the belt isn't moving either, seeing zero movement matches zero movement. There is no wind. So the non moving plane is sitting on a non moving belt on a still day...... Sounds a very relaxed scenario to me..... Shall we picnic on the wings? Can it fly? Well maybe if someone switched the jet or propeller on there'd be an chance, otherwise, as is, with a still plane. NO Of course if the plane did start engines, get moving, and the belt matched the speed backward, then the tyres spin at twice the normal speed, which means nothing other than bearing wear, and the plane travels forward as per usual, and of we go, spoiling an otherwise wonderful picnic. So to fly we need the unstated movement that everyone has assumed. We do know what assume means don't we? |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 410160 | 2006-08-25 15:42:00 | LOL!! Brilliant. personthingy for PM!! | roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 410161 | 2006-08-27 06:11:00 | It was stated that the plane intends to take off. This gives some latitude for assumption regarding the engines etc. | RandomCarnage (9359) | ||
| 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 | |||||