lmao
:word:
Willybean, Choda:
fucking lol
huh I am saying it will take off as there is no direct contact between the plane and the ground, ie the plane is not driven off of the ground but the air that is directly behond it
I re-read your sentence structured abortion… (post #184)…i have removed you from the list. 
“it does crat lift but no where near enough to make a plain take off”
bah engineers dont have to beable to create perfect sentances, that what proof readers are for.
Hahahaha Fuzzyfish.
That rocked :tup:
Wow… what a fucking thread…
First off, Which Boeing division do you work for? Which one is in Chicago?
Second; the answer to this question is VERY dependent on wording of the question; if it’s worded one way, then it will, the other it won’t.
The simple answer is try the treadmill experiment. The matchbox car will make it’s way down the angled treadmill even though the treadmill is spinning the wheels in the opposite direction. Due to the “theoretical” frictionless connection between the wheels and the car; gravity is accelerating the car against the treadmill; the EXACT same way that the jet engines are greating a force forward on the body of the aircraft and wings; thus creating airspeed; thus creating lift after the critical speed.
If you don’t believe the treadmill example, try it; matchbox car costs $.99 if you don’t have one and go “borrow” a demo treadmill at Sears.
The scary part is I believe u might be an aerospace engineer; most of them I deal with on a daily basis love to do what you are doing; read a newspaper by looking at the molcules of the ink that it was printed with. They OVERANALIZE EVERYTHING, and forget the common sence part of engineering; the look at things with a microscope that should be looked at from 20’ away.
Oh, and to be honest; and just because I feel like being a dick; this might partially explain why Boeing lost the JSF competition and had to remove parts off the airplane to get it to fly vertically.
Oh, and the Rolls-Royce engine used in the Harrier is not a special all-powerful engine like a rocket engine; it’s a simple turbofan engine with thrust vectoring nozzles; and infact is a INSANELY touchy engine that is so tempermental that just about every mechanic and a lot of the pilots hate it.
Oh, and as for my credentials; I have a BSMET degree from RIT; I’m currently a mechanical project engineer working on the Lockheed F-35 JSF (The first every STOVL supersonic airplane), the Eclipse 500 Business Jet, the Cessna Mustang Business Jet, the new Embraer VLJ, the Hawker Horizon, as well as the V-22 from Boeing Helicopter.
Fuck yeah. so remind me why people still care about this thread?
cause its kind of like watching a retard and a normal person have foot races … its just so fun watching the retard say “im gonnah wih thsth time” that you cant stop …
i cant beleive this is even being argued, where is the picture that HRK drew for this, it explains it all. if u think the plane wont move ur just dumb. if u can put a mathbox car on a treadmill and push it forward with ur hand, then u can do this with a plane.
alright bitches, lets put this to rest
I have:
1 - Camera
1- R/C airplane
1- treadmill
will post results later
wtf i missed something
please dont tell me that the question is if a plane on a giant tread mill will take off??
cause it wont.
jeez, half of this thread is “dee-de-deee!”
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
http://users.adelphia.net/~cdabable/test2.avi
you also realize that that means the plane would be incapable of LANDING on a giant treadmill, dont you ???
tell me why it couldnt LAND on a giant treadmill, and ill beleive that it wouldnt take off from the treadmill …
