|
|
#11
11-23-2005, 09:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] this doesnt require much thought [/ QUOTE ] so what's your answer? maybe it requires more thought than you're giving it credit for. [/ QUOTE ] if im reading your question right, it will absolutely take off maybe im stupid [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] and if im stupid, im stupid!!! 
|
|
#12
11-23-2005, 09:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
Airspeed = 0 the plane cannot take off. This would be the same if the plane had a tail wind that was = to it's forward motion. [/ QUOTE ] this is not true.
|
|
#13
11-23-2005, 09:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded.
If a car were going 60 miles an hour and you stuck your head out the window, you'd feel a strong breeze in your face. Put the car on a treadmill that equalizes the speed, stick your head out the window, and you won't feel the wind rush through your hair.
|
|
#14
11-23-2005, 09:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
The problem with this scenario is that the drive isn't created by the wheels, so this belt wouldn't result in the plane not moving, it would mean the wheels would be moving REALLY quickly, but the thrust would still push teh plane forward.
This scenario is impossible.
|
|
#16
11-23-2005, 10:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded. [/ QUOTE ] When did I say the plane wasn't moving?
|
|
#17
11-23-2005, 10:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded. [/ QUOTE ] When did I say the plane wasn't moving? [/ QUOTE ] you essentially gave us two velocity vectors of equal magnitude that work in exactly opposite directions. the plane has zero velocity relative to somebody standing on the ground observing it. it is going nowhere. i think.
|
|
#18
11-23-2005, 10:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded. [/ QUOTE ] When did I say the plane wasn't moving? [/ QUOTE ] you essentially gave us two velocity vectors of equal magnitude that work in exactly opposite directions. [/ QUOTE ] All I really told you is that the conveyor belt velocity and the wheels' tangential velocity are equal, essentially. But does this address the plane's velocity?
|
|
#19
11-23-2005, 10:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded. [/ QUOTE ] When did I say the plane wasn't moving? [/ QUOTE ] you essentially gave us two velocity vectors of equal magnitude that work in exactly opposite directions. the plane has zero velocity relative to somebody standing on the ground observing it. it is going nowhere. i think. [/ QUOTE ] Everyone seems to be figuring this from the standpoint that the plane's wheels are where the thrust is comming from. The wheels do not push the plane forward, the props do.
|
|
#20
11-23-2005, 10:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: think about this...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If the plane is not moving, no air is being forced under its wings. If no air is being forced under its wings, there is no lift. So it stays grounded. [/ QUOTE ] When did I say the plane wasn't moving? [/ QUOTE ] you essentially gave us two velocity vectors of equal magnitude that work in exactly opposite directions. [/ QUOTE ] All I really told you is that the conveyor belt velocity and the wheels' rotational velocity are equal, essentially. But does this address the plane's velocity? [/ QUOTE ] i'm misunderstanding the way you're phrasing this, I suppose. the comments I made above assumed that the forward velocity of the plane was exactly canceled by the reverse velocity of the conveyor. I thought your original post was implying that with a setup like this one could get the plane to take off vertically like a harrier jet without the vertical engines
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
