It was just a matter of time until this would happen - I can't wait to see it. Aired today.
Last edited:
Mythbusters 6x14
- Thread starter Deeival
- Start date
It was just a matter of time until this would happen - I can't wait to see it. Aired today.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Yes of course, but people still argue about it on the discovery site 
Why? Well they claim it would be a different story if they would "equal" (Impossible anyway, when the conveyor belt moves at 25mph you cannot get the plane to 25mph without it moving forward you dumbasses) the speeds before they try taking off. Guess what? The only thing the plane has to overcome is a little more friction. What you could do is make that it stays still, wait 3 minutes and then take off. IT DOESN'T MATTER. If you think otherwise, go back to school or become president (Ok that was mean).
GET IT INTO YOUR FREAKING ********************* SKULLS: IT TAKES OFF AND IT ALWAYS WILL, UNLESS YOU GET THE TIRES AND BALL BEARINGS TO EXPLODE (But that has nothing to do with the myth).
RAK IT DOESN'T MATTER IF ITS A JET AN UFO OR SUPERMAN, IT IS GOING TO TAKE OFF. God......
Why? Well they claim it would be a different story if they would "equal" (Impossible anyway, when the conveyor belt moves at 25mph you cannot get the plane to 25mph without it moving forward you dumbasses) the speeds before they try taking off. Guess what? The only thing the plane has to overcome is a little more friction. What you could do is make that it stays still, wait 3 minutes and then take off. IT DOESN'T MATTER. If you think otherwise, go back to school or become president
(Ok that was mean).GET IT INTO YOUR FREAKING ********************* SKULLS: IT TAKES OFF AND IT ALWAYS WILL, UNLESS YOU GET THE TIRES AND BALL BEARINGS TO EXPLODE (But that has nothing to do with the myth).
RAK IT DOESN'T MATTER IF ITS A JET AN UFO OR SUPERMAN, IT IS GOING TO TAKE OFF. God......
Upvote
0
My god, that's not how planes work.
The engine pushes the air particles to the back of the plane. Because for every action there's an opposite reaction, the plane will move forward. Doesn't matter if it's a propeller plane or a jet, it'll accelerate.
Upvote
0
Relative to the thread yes, relative to the air (except airflow from propeller) not.
But to get a lift the air must flow around wings. If not ... there is no lift off except if the flow induced by the propeller is big enought. So Rak has a goot point with propeler vs jet.
The particles pushed back (air) are just to compensate the friction between weels and thread if the plane remains in place.
BTW Rak get +10pts.
Upvote
0
ok, this is silly....
How can you argue against real, tangable evidence?
And being of the camp (before this was proved) that the plane would take off I'd like to give you a little model to help you think.
If you are on a treadmill and the treadmill starts, if you run forwards at the same speed that the treadmill runs backwards then you will stay in the same place. This is because it is your legs which are powering you forward and they are in direct contact with the conveyor belt. The same would apply to a CAR on a conveyor belt. It's wheels are driving it forward, but they are in contact with a surface moving the opposite direction at an equal speed therefore it stays in the same place.
Now.... put some rollerskates on. If you get on the conveyor belt and hold onto something you will notice the wheels will spin on the skates. If you had done this with trainers on you would notice that your legs would be pulled backwards and you would fall over. There is a little bit of pull (due to the friction in the bearings of the wheels on the skates) but it is nothing compared to the pull without skates on. If you try to move forwards (lets say that you move forwards on skates at the same speed that you were running in the first example) you will find that you will be able to move forwards because of the wheels. Because it is not the wheels that are driving you forwards, but your legs (which are now NOT connected to the conveyor belt) you are able to overcome the backwards motion of the conveyor belt.
Put that into context: The plane will ALWAYS move forward, and therefore be able to take off, because it's wheels are NOT part of it's driving force. Because it's driving force is not touching the conveyor belt, but only the wheels, it will always move, however the wheels will spin twice as fast as they would usually.
It's actually really simple and to think otherwise means you need to think things through a little more. And arguing with evidence is also pretty silly
How can you argue against real, tangable evidence?
And being of the camp (before this was proved) that the plane would take off I'd like to give you a little model to help you think.
If you are on a treadmill and the treadmill starts, if you run forwards at the same speed that the treadmill runs backwards then you will stay in the same place. This is because it is your legs which are powering you forward and they are in direct contact with the conveyor belt. The same would apply to a CAR on a conveyor belt. It's wheels are driving it forward, but they are in contact with a surface moving the opposite direction at an equal speed therefore it stays in the same place.
Now.... put some rollerskates on. If you get on the conveyor belt and hold onto something you will notice the wheels will spin on the skates. If you had done this with trainers on you would notice that your legs would be pulled backwards and you would fall over. There is a little bit of pull (due to the friction in the bearings of the wheels on the skates) but it is nothing compared to the pull without skates on. If you try to move forwards (lets say that you move forwards on skates at the same speed that you were running in the first example) you will find that you will be able to move forwards because of the wheels. Because it is not the wheels that are driving you forwards, but your legs (which are now NOT connected to the conveyor belt) you are able to overcome the backwards motion of the conveyor belt.
Put that into context: The plane will ALWAYS move forward, and therefore be able to take off, because it's wheels are NOT part of it's driving force. Because it's driving force is not touching the conveyor belt, but only the wheels, it will always move, however the wheels will spin twice as fast as they would usually.
It's actually really simple and to think otherwise means you need to think things through a little more. And arguing with evidence is also pretty silly
Upvote
0
what you said is right.
nobody said the plane would not take off as soon as it has enought speed relative to the air.
what rak was talking about was that the propeller (if it is big) can generate "fake" airspeed *if the plane stays in place*
nobody said the plane would not take off as soon as it has enought speed relative to the air.
what rak was talking about was that the propeller (if it is big) can generate "fake" airspeed *if the plane stays in place*
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
To be fair, the prop created airflow does provide some lift, its nowhere near enough for takeoff on any conventional design, i dont think any real aircraft design actually (no, the Osprey doesen't count, as technically it can't really be called a fixed wing aircraft as its wings alone do not provide enough lift to fly it), but it is there, and i guess if one really wanted to, you could make a plane with a gigantic prop, about the size of the planes wingspan, that probably could lift off on its own propwash alone.. infact some RC models can allmost do that, needing only about a meter of runway (now thats STOL taken to the extreme!).
But this does create one important difference between props and jets, props don't need powered steering, the propwash moving across the rudder is plenty to steer the plane on the ground on all but the largest of craft (infact many early planes didn't even have a tail wheel, it was just a steel rod sticking out the back), not so with jets though, where the nose wheel will usually have a servo steering it to ease the workload, even on small jets, since the rudder is really doing you no good untill way past safe taxi speeds, the rudder pedals would be extremely heavy whilst taxiing without this.
Yeah yeah, its useless trivia, and not really connected to any of this, but trivia can be fun you know
Upvote
0
Sometimes even "scientists" can't see the forest for the trees.
Kind of reminds me of the school yard science debate in the '60's of "What freezes faster? Hot or Cold water?".
Floyd
Kind of reminds me of the school yard science debate in the '60's of "What freezes faster? Hot or Cold water?".
Floyd
Upvote
0