Mythbusters - Anyone see something that will stop 6000 page threads?

[quote=“jrod0187,post:236,topic:37377"”]

In all seriousness unlike yesterday when I was posting, the plane will move as Newman stated but it will not create enough lift under the Airfoil. For all you idiots (Walter) instead of posting my knowledge in avionics, I’ll just refer to a few examples that are somewhat “dumbed down” (again this is for people like Walter). Taken for Wikipedia:

where x is the location at which induced velocity is produced, x’ is the location of the vortex element producing the velocity “X” doesnt exist because there is no induced velocity produced. Why? Glad you asked. Again from Wikipedia since they explain things so well:

A symmetric airfoil must have a positive angle of attack to generate positive lift. At a zero angle of attack, no lift is generated. At a negative angle of attack, negative lift is generated

This right here is why I said no… the plane will not take off. That being said IN MY OPINION, I think that the plane will not create enough lift around the surrounding airfoil. The plane will move with resistance but depending on how far the conveyor belt is (which I’m sure it wont be long at all) I dont think it will get up to speed to fly. Now all you who said yes it will fly and supported a diagram that doesn’t represent the proper magnitude of the question is quite appalling. Maybe someone smarter than you said “yes it will fly” and then you jumped on the band wagon. :tup: to all those who agreed or disagreed and provided some what intellagent explanations.

[/quote]

There is so much wrong with this, I don’t know where to start, but I’ll give you an easy one.

Did you know, that outside of aerobatic aircraft, there are no planes that utilize a symmetric airfoil?

That said, symmetric airfoil aircraft do exist, and all start on flat horizontal ground, similar to our treadmill, yet still manage to take off. Care to explain?