That’s what I am saying. The question can be interpereted differently and depending on your interpretation the conveyor either can or can’t impart a force to counteract the acceleration of the plane. Depending on this interpretation, your model is correct or incorrect. Simple as that.
and just because you put roller skates on and get on a treadmill with a rocket pack strapped to your back proves nothing either. you are not a plane so using that example is as much of a waste as the matchbox car.
the point is. when you have the plane match the speed the opposite direction as the treadmill you are then going even… which means your MATCHING the speed nothing else. that speed that your using to match the treadmill is coming from the thrust!
in order to take off and createair to flow you need to then break the match point and go forward.
how does this not make sense?
in order to fly, you need the air to pass over/under the wing to create lift
if your merely matching the speed your not doing anything but wasting fuel
holy fuck… 11 people reading this thread… i hadnt read it till now…
HOT TOPIC FO SHO
BOURNULLI’S PRINCIPLE DOES NOT CREATE ENOUGH LIFT TO MAKE A PLAIN TAKE OFF NEWTONS SECOND LAW DOES
ok now that I feel better about that, and the boeing guy is really make me question his position there since he actually stated this. It is not that hard of a principle to understand, it does create lift but no where near enough to make a plain take off. Shit a pipe cub with zero angle of attack would need to be going near 250mph to take off.
ps it will take off, anyone that has taking a fluids, thermo fluids and a dynamics class will be able to see this
ok so here is a question for all of you then…
if the treadmill was moving the same way would you get lift?
if so explain why.
Hi noob ummm, my .02 was already added, and it is not like we are debating something like who should be president. We are talking about something that has a right answer and a wrong answer. YOU being the aerospace engineer and having the wrong answer allows me to form opinions, and to therefore post and express them.
As far as to how i would do in a debate? I have been in many formal debates and won more than i have lost. This however is not a formal debate, more like people posting on the internet. And well, opinions are like assholes everyone has one.
Oh, and i did help to prove the “theory” search out my posts in this thread, they started productive, then the stupidity got thicker! hey Lafengas help me out here, i dont know what to tell this guy.
EXACTLY… the question is poorly worded. If it’s assumed that the plane will eventually surpass the belts speed, than it’s entirely true. If not, then it plan old wont work. (unless it’s a harrier jet :P)
ok people, please stop getting all antsy in pantsy
if you take the original question, and reverse the direction of the runway, it will SLIGHTLY help push the plane forward (using the friction of the wheels) to help the plane take off faster
the only thing the runway does in the original example is slightly SLOW the plane down, it doesnt stop the plane from flying
The treadmill is irrelevant! it always has been it always will be!!! The wheel are not a propulsion device on the plane, they are FREE ROTATING MASS. they could spin in any direction at 11tybillion RPM and once the thrusters kick in it will fire forward
nothing is holding the plane down.
thats what i have been trying to say but apparently i am wrong and im whatever tpgsr thinks of me cause he is smarter then i am…i guess
i just do it for a living but im wrong.
so what do i know. maybe i should just quit and and work on treadmills all day…
if they are free rotating then how does it match the speed of the treadmill without the help of the thursters wiseguy?
oh thats right… it can’t the wheels need the help of the thrusters to move them forward or else it does not work.
you pushing the thruster forward to matc the belt speed… the wheels won’t MOVE FREELY ON THEIR OWN TO MATCH THIS SPEED…
altho the wheels are not powered by the thrusters they still need the thrusters to move them forward.
gravity 
Ever heard of a proof-of-concept test? I.E. you design an experiment to simulate the basic physics of a concept.
Assuming no frictional loss at the wheels axles, the treadmill does not affect the motion of the plane. The motion of the plane is completely independent of the motion of the ground underneath it.
I am never flying on another Boeing plane.
dude, if the plane moves forward @ 10mph in relation to the face of the earth, the runway will move backwards at the same speed in rel;ation to the face of the earth … its that simple
the wheels are just chillin between the plane and the runway… and in the process they spin at 20mph because 10mph that way ---->>> + 10 mph <— that way = 20 mph total
last comment was uncalled for because you do not agree with me…thanks for being an E-dick…
but yes assuming such was true then yes your right.
but like i sad everyone is trying to answer a different questionthen the original posted.
while that is true… again, the question is very poorly worded.
Newmans orgional post said that if the belt was able to match the speed of the wheels @ any given speed (aka, adjusts it’s speed accordinly) then it wouldnt work, because even though the plane is able to easily overcome it, the belt would spin faster and it would need even higher wheel RPMS to over come that… and when it does, repeat said process.
in a sense… everyone is correct
Ok, I’m done. Those who have the slightest chance of ever getting the right answer already have it, and those who don’t never will.
oh shit, heres an example for you
you hop in your cesna planning to fly to your island off the florida coast … you taxi out to the runway facing east … as you taxi out and start to build speed, a MASSIVE meteor plows into inda in a eastward direction … and it accelerates how fast the eart is spinning … effectivly moving the runway in the opposite direction underneith you …
does your plane still take off ?