Alright, just trying to help him save face…
Either way, the plane would still take off, for the same reasons.
Yeah
hmm my argument was on point with the others in the article but it looks like it was proven wrong. I just cant see how if the wheel speed and belt speed matched how it would move. like i said before i was having trouble visualizing and still am. was fun to argue tho. thanks for finding that, the awnser would haunt me.
This thread has been a great source of entertainment at work so far. :tup:
Need I post the pics again. 
translated
the skateboard example is very similar, its a force, not being put on the belt through the wheels, propeling you forward
I was having trouble getting my head around it too
you dont have to be a fucking asshole man, its a debate, dont get all in a hissy over an argument like that. U want a fuckin medal or a monument for being right? i hope ur over there screaming at ur monitor over how dumb i am, cause im laughing at how much of an asshole u are
:redface:
If the treadmill measures wheel speed as soon as the plane inches forward the wheels are spinning at 11ty billion mph putting their maximum ammount of resistance against the plane, and that is almost nothing, and the plane takes off.
The treadmill has about the same effect as a mild tail wind on plane takeoff
its not at all a debate, its either right or wrong…but ya Walter is a once again acting like a jackass… what a surprise!
People need to go back to 11th grade. How in the fuck is this 6 pages.
:wiggle:
I really hope this keeps going, I need something to keep me entertained tonight at work. :tup:
I don’t see how that’s possible
Actually I take it back, the plane could take off just fine but it won’t. The design of the control system has runway speed dependent on wheel speed, and their physical connection coupled with the jet engines controlling overall speed has wheel speed dependent on runway speed.
The control system would see the infinite loop and crash. Given the way anything with the FAA works, a control system crash would trigger automatic shutdowns, so the runway would stop moving and the pilot would be told to abort takeoff immediately. :tdown:
.
Conveyer-Belt Runway
What I learned from Old Hack was that an updated version of a question aimed at confusing folks over relative measurements of airplane motion and the medium in which it operates had shown up on the Internet, and it was causing the fracas in the Lounge.
The question that has been going around is not particularly artfully worded, and I think that has caused some of the disagreements, but I’ll repeat it as it is shown: “On a day with absolutely calm wind, a plane is standing on a runway that can move (some sort of band conveyor). The plane moves in one direction, while the conveyor moves in the opposite direction. The conveyor has a control system that tracks the plane speed and tunes the speed of the conveyor to be exactly the same (but in the opposite direction). Can the airplane ever take off?”
My comment: Notice that the question does not state that the conveyor’s movement keeps the airplane over the starting position relative to the ground, just that it moves in the direction opposite to any movement of the airplane.
Initially, about a third of the folks here said that the airplane could not ever takeoff, because the conveyor would overcome the speed of the airplane and it could never get any airspeed. The rest said the airplane would fly.
The “It won’t fly, Rocky” group said that the conveyor would hold back the airplane. They asked us to imagine a person running on a treadmill. As he or she sped up, the treadmill would be programmed to speed up, just as the conveyor in the problem, and the person would remain over the same locus on the earth, while running as fast as possible.
The argument was that if the airplane started to move forward, the conveyor program was set up to move the conveyor at exactly that speed, in the opposite direction, thus, the airplane would never move relative to the ground, and, because the air was calm, it could never get any wind over its wings. One of the analogies presented was the person rowing at three mph upstream in a river on a calm day. However, the current was flowing downstream at three mph, so the resultant speed with reference to the stream bank and air was zero, and thus there was no wind on the rowboat.
I watched and listened to the disagreement for a while and was fascinated to see that the argument seemed to split between those who had some engineering or math background, all of whom said the airplane would takeoff and fly without any problem; and those with some other background, who visualized the airplane as having to push against the conveyor in order to gain speed. Because the conveyor equaled the airplane’s push against the conveyor, the airplane stayed in one place over the ground and in the calm air could not get any airspeed and fly.
It was an interesting argument, but as things progressed, more rational heads prevailed, pointing out that the airplanes do not apply their thrust via their wheels, so the conveyor belt is irrelevant to whether the airplane will takeoff. One guy even got one of those rubber band powered wood and plastic airplane that sell for about a buck, put it on the treadmill someone foolishly donated to the Lounge years ago, thinking that pilots might actually exercise. He wound up the rubber band, set the treadmill to be level, and at its highest speed. Then he simultaneously set the airplane on the treadmill and let the prop start to turn. It took off without moving the slightest bit backwards.
thank god thats over…Newman, how did it turn out on elisetalk??
It most likely didnt, haha.