Principles of flight?

[Ako]

I watched a chicken fly once. Standing on a fence post, gave it a fright, flew DOWN off the hill it was on top of.

Funniest thing I EVER saw, even better was the cows which walked up to it afterwards and confused the hell out of the poor bird.

[V8MOFO]

aaah, life on the farm ay

[rollas22]

FLY like the wind!

[Fraud]

Sorry to put my 2c in after arguments over, I missed some of the middle pages due to time restraints.

The wheels/conveyor belt would accetlerate exponentially (I think thats the word I'm looking for), so IMO, as long as the plane could take off before friction took over and started destroying stuff, there is a possibility the plane could take off.
The argument of Newtons 3rd law, states that for every action there is an equal and oppostie reaction. True, so what is happening to the thrust the engines are creating, if the plane is not moving forwards?

Also, saying there is no such thing as linear motion when rotational objects are concerned? Well, tell me: when you do a burnout in your car, there is rotational motion, and there is friction. When you drive your car there is rotational motion BUT the friction is then replaced (mostly) with linear motion, is it not?

As in all science, there is a for and against argument, this is what experiments stand to prove!!

I haven't done physics for three years so someone please correct me if I'm wrong!!

[V8MOFO]

The problem is, it is physically impossible to set up this situation.

[Ako]

Just use my trick - give up on thinking. Makes things like 10X easier.

[pidge]

The problem is, it is physically impossible to set up this situation.

Bingo...

The way the question is worded, the "speed of the wheel" bit means that the question is either plausible or physically impossible, depending on what you use for the "speed of the wheel" - either the speed of the wheel's hub (i.e. the plane's speed), or the wheels rotational speed (wheelspeed). This is the cause of the arguments in the thread about the answer....


Oh, and if you are sick, do you trust advice from a Medical Doctor, or just any Joe/Jane Blow on the street?

Me? Bitter? Probably!

[RedMist]

Oh, and if you are sick, do you trust advice from a Medical Doctor, or just any Joe/Jane Blow on the street?

Me? Bitter? Probably!

I fail to understand why you keep on repeating this. You're occupation is computing is it not? So I gather you weren't any good at physical sciences? I gather that since I was a systems engineer for Microsoft in Reading England and most major international banks, makes my opinion more valid than yours? I gather you are also no good a solution solving, as you fail to think laterally within the confines of the question. Blow your trumpet elsewhere, it just makes you sound like an idiot here.

In regards to your other statements. I gather you can't solve the Schrodingers cat situation simply because you don't know the color of the cat.

Of course you cant simulate the situation. Its a fuggin runway sized conveyor with a pre-emptive reacting controller with ability of infinate speed!

Instead of answering the question, you now have to result in questioning the validity of the question when its plainly obvious. How often have you seen a wheel speed indicator indicate ground speed? Or know of an ABS wheelspeed sensor directed at the ground, or for that matter part of the bodywork? Search the web, look up dictionaries, do whatever to attempt and find a definition of wheelspeed that refers to the referance of linea speed of a body against ground. Can't find any? Why? Because its preposterous.

[Fraud]

Preposterous.

[mr30%jr]

i wasnt aware that planes had rwhp:P

the thrust comes jet engines not the wheels so yes it would just move forward and take off the wheels would just be spinning faster

[V8MOFO]

i wasnt aware that planes had rwhp:P

the thrust comes jet engines not the wheels so yes it would just move forward and take off the wheels would just be spinning faster

If the travelator was set to a certain speed ( say 10kmph backwards ) would it be possible to keep the plane at that speed forward? So that it is not moving relative to the earth?

[RedMist]

i wasnt aware that planes had rwhp:P

the thrust comes jet engines not the wheels so yes it would just move forward and take off the wheels would just be spinning faster

You need to think for about 5 seconds.

What groundspeed are you doing at takeoff?
What wheelspeed are you doing?
What speed is the travelator doing if travelator speed matches wheelspeed?
So what speed are you actually doing?

Absolutely nothing to do with thrust, or RWHP, you can power it with a mouse running in a wheel turning a fan if you so wish. There is NO possibility for the plane to take off as the instant you attempt to move forward the wheels turn and the travelator turns in exactly the same speed in reverse.
Or are you saying that the plane travels forward without turning wheels?

[igor]

There is NO possibility for the plane to take off as the instant you attempt to move forward the wheels turn and the travelator turns in exactly the same speed in reverse.
Or are you saying that the plane travels forward without turning wheels?

You are getting things a bit confused dude.

The travelator is set to turn in the opposite direction of rotation to the wheels. Not to turn in the opposite direction of travel as the aircraft.

Which would mean that the travelator is trying to stop the wheels from rotating, yes?

Therefore, for this to be achieved, the travelator has to move in the same direction as the aircraft the wheels hubs are attached to.

Which also would infer that the plane can take off, even though the wheels will remain stationary.

[vvega]

i wasnt aware that planes had rwhp:P

the thrust comes jet engines not the wheels so yes it would just move forward and take off the wheels would just be spinning faster

You need to think for about 5 seconds.

What groundspeed are you doing at takeoff?
What wheelspeed are you doing?
What speed is the travelator doing if travelator speed matches wheelspeed?
So what speed are you actually doing?

Absolutely nothing to do with thrust, or RWHP, you can power it with a mouse running in a wheel turning a fan if you so wish. There is NO possibility for the plane to take off as the instant you attempt to move forward the wheels turn and the travelator turns in exactly the same speed in reverse.
Or are you saying that the plane travels forward without turning wheels?

so please explane how the wheels turing affects the plane movement ??
they are not locked to the plane movement in anyway aside from when the brakes are on

this then means that the travelater willnot effect the planes movement...it will affect wheel movement

v


v

[sergei]

Plane will take off.
First problem is that people think that wills will keep spinning really fast, but actually if conveyer belt is desgined to counteract the movement of the wheels actuall roational velocity of the wheels would be zero!, further more the conveyer belt will match the speed of the plane, wich infact will accelerate due to thrust created by its engines, and eventually lift off because of lift created due to speed difference between planes wings and surrounding atmosphere (becuase of the speed gained due to thrust of the engines).
My answer is based arround a few assumptions:
There is gravitiy pulling down the plane
There is atmosphere to create lift
There is friction between wheels and coveyer belt ( otherwise wheels will slip and speed of the belt would be 0)

[sergei]

Ohh yeah, I forgot to add that speed of the wheels/belt has nothing to do with plane taking off... Think about hydro planes, planes lifting off from catapults, planes lifting off the ice etc..

[V8MOFO]

further more the conveyer belt will match the speed of the plane

Nope, the plane speed and conveyorbelt speed have nothing to do with each other. The conveyorbelt isn't turned because of the plane speed, it is turned because of the wheels. And the wheels are turned because of the conveyorbelt. It can't happen unless one moves first. Thus, will contradict the question....

[sergei]

I just found another flaw in this experiment:

The conveyer belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels at any given time, moving in the opposite direction of rotation

Is the top part of the conveyer moving opposite to the vector of the rotational velocity of the bottom part of the wheel, or is the rotational velocity direction of the conveyer belt is opposite to roational velocity direction of the wheel???

[V8MOFO]

I just found another flaw in this experiment:

The conveyer belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels at any given time, moving in the opposite direction of rotation

Is the top part of the conveyer moving opposite to the vector of the rotational velocity of the bottom part of the wheel, or is the rotational velocity direction of the conveyer belt is opposite to roational velocity direction of the wheel???

Look at it side-on. Wheel will move counter-clockwise, belt will move clockwise. Or vise-versa.

[sergei]

Plane will take off.
But the speed of the conveyer will depend on the plane's speed (if the contradicting statement is resolved) becuase of the friction of the wheel against conveyer and wheels are attached to the plane.. (think about bearings - the actual ball/rollers/needles rotate at a speed relative to to both outer and inner shells)