Plane Problem

[[CoR]MiccyNarc]

 

[Silky_Slim]

Thank you for the visual aid.

 

[Moz]

I know that everyone else knows I am right. I don't care about them.

Username has to know that I am right.

I have to defend physics!

User name is giving Einstein a headache.

Infact he would be able to give a grade 10 physics teacher a headache.

youtube is taking forever to process my file

So here is a rapidshare

http://rapidshare.com/files/5962225/Movie_0001.wmv.html

 

[Valac]

do I HAVE to feel your brain?

and I say no

 

[Moz]

do I HAVE to feel your brain?

and I say no

Valac, you have been proven not to have a brain.

 

[Bobdog]

It will lift off.

 

[Moz]

if you actually read this thread

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=10770&st=135

You'll see that everyone short of one person is in agreement that it would take off, but that one person keeps trolling the question into other threads and attacking this one guy who claims (quite believably) to be an MIT graduate. (the one I quoted)

There is nothing wrong with being wrong, there IS something wrong with not accepting right.

edit:

****ing google video beat youtube upload.

argh

the compression is awful

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=466399553996375185&hl=en

 

[Pycckuu]

After reading this thread, I have respect for Moz once again.

/edit 9 pages later, and the plane will still take off.
p.s downloading video. I hope its not porno.
p.p.s downloaded video, good stuff. Mentions porno.

 

[Deeival]

After page 4 I didn't even know what I thought was right and wrong.
Taking a step back and thinking about it I can to the conclusion that it should take off. But I still think someone should built a giant treadmill and try it out

 

[Pycckuu]

I agree... as long as I'm not the one piloting

 

[Moz]

I tried to add some LOL at the end of the video.
It done on the spot, half of the rough cuts were just to hack out some parts were I repeated myself. Also I forgot which law newtons third was :S Plus some of the terms I used were wrong or mixed up... stupid dyslexia.
Doesn't matter, I felt good to vent my frustration!

I am not a authority on the subject, but I can say with confidence I know more than most those who claim the no stance.

The no has some arguments which I can understand, like the wheels failing.


There is one way to simulate this in real life though if you agree on this stances.

• Take a small treadmill, or a power sander or something.
• Place a toy car on the top of it. (wheels of the plane)
• Tie a string to it (this is the thrust of the engines)
• first try and pull the car along the non running treadmill. Feel how much for it takes.

• Then start up the treadmill, and while holding the car in place and then pull it off the treadmill at the same speed. How much force did that take?

if it was relatively the same force you have proven that the plane would be able to take off.
if it took a lot more force, you have proven that you'll need a more complicated experiment.

I'd totally love to see a mythbusters episode with this.

Plane on treadmill.

WE GOT MOTHER****ING PLANES ON A MOTHER****ING TREADMILL

 

[Deeival]

Mythbusters... that would be perfect

 

[all_purpose_box]

............... im confused





Moz i will try that in shop class tomorrow

 

[Moz]

Make a video.

Especially if someone gets dismembered

 

[BuddyLee]

The plane would not have enough lift, however, if the plane had enough thrust... like a high-powered jet fighter, it might take off like a rocket.

Lift is generated by air flowing across the wings surface, the jet engines may help create a natural airflow, but not enough to lift a large plane like a passenger jet.

That is my hypothesis.

 

[[CoR]MiccyNarc]

The plane would not have enough lift, however, if the plane had enough thrust... like a high-powered jet fighter, it might take off like a rocket.

Lift is generated by air flowing across the wings surface, the jet engines may help create a natural airflow, but not enough to lift a large plane like a passenger jet.

That is my hypothesis.

By this logic no plane can fly.

The engines push the plane generating the lift.
You seem to have a misconception: The engines don't drive air over the wings, they drive the wings through the air. Same effect, different means.

 

[Moz]

The argument isn't so much the lift. The argument is if the plane could move forward.

if the plane could move forward and reach its take off speed, it would be take off. (with no wind)

Nothing else matters.

Jet engines do not create flow. They create thrust, that is all they do. Plane moving into air creates airflow (this is how player airplanes work)

The real question is:

if a plane was on a treadmill, that moved backwards, would that be enough drag to prevent it from taking off?

The physics say no. The plane would still be able to take off because the drag transfered from the treadmill to the plane from the wheels would not ever be enough to prevent it from taking off anywhere near the speeds it would take to take off.

 

[BuddyLee]

By this logic no plane can fly.

The engines push the plane generating the lift.
You seem to have a misconception: The engines don't drive air over the wings, they drive the wings through the air. Same effect, different means.

What I mean is, if a 25,000 pound thrust jet is running full throttle, you are gointg to have a micro climate around the plane were air is being ****ed into the engine and out the back at such a high speed, winds are created.

The JSF can take off without lift with thrust vectoring.

 

[BuddyLee]

if the plane could move forward and reach its take off speed, it would be take off. (with no wind)

Wrong, this is why at airports they have wind-socks that tell them what direction the wind is blowing. Airplanes take off into the wind.

Jet engines do not create flow.

You must not understand the principles of airflow. The air is moving into the front of the engine extremely fast, and out the back even faster because of combustion.

if a plane was on a treadmill, that moved backwards, would that be enough drag to prevent it from taking off?

There is no drag, only rolling resistance.

The physics say no. The plane would still be able to take off because the drag transfered from the treadmill to the plane from the wheels would not ever be enough to prevent it from taking off anywhere near the speeds it would take to take off.

If the plane was standing still and facing a headwind = or greater that its' take-off speed, it would lift off.

see above^^

 

[Moz]

see above^^

Originally Posted by Moz
if the plane could move forward and reach its take off speed, it would be take off. (with no wind)

Wrong, this is why at airports they have wind-socks that tell them what direction the wind is blowing. Airplanes take off into the wind.

That is irrelevant, I mean no wind in the sense of the theorical situation, in a tail wind if could reach its groundspeed but not take off. I'm tired.

Jet engines do not create flow.

You must not understand the principles of airflow. The air is moving into the front of the engine extremely fast, and out the back even faster because of combustion.

over the wings. the wings, wording, kill me.

if a plane was on a treadmill, that moved backwards, would that be enough drag to prevent it from taking off?

There is no drag, only rolling resistance.

wording again, I'm tired, its late sunday.

The physics say no. The plane would still be able to take off because the drag transfered from the treadmill to the plane from the wheels would not ever be enough to prevent it from taking off anywhere near the speeds it would take to take off.

If the plane was standing still and facing a headwind = or greater that its' take-off speed, it would lift off.

I've said this before, many times, but my poorly wording paragraph completely unvalidates that

Yes, I am wrong.

all my arguments are invaild.

I am going to shot myself now.

Thank you buddylee