Yes, but like doitall said, the plane is on the ground and for it to move forwards the wheels must rotate. If the ground is countering the forward rotation of the planes wheels it can't move forwards.
physics puzzle no.2
- Thread starter noseall
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Yes, but you are just thinking of the ground forces involved, and not the fact that, if the plane was using its engines as the driving force, then the thrust of these would easily overcome the reverse travel of the conveyor.
The wheels would just be travelling faster forwards, because of the forward thrust, than the conveyor would be going backwards....... you will suss it out, as I did
The wheels would just be travelling faster forwards, because of the forward thrust, than the conveyor would be going backwards....... you will suss it out, as I did
It took me a while, and I imagine that most of the posts saying that the plane won't take off are getting confused, as I was, with regard to the wheels / conveyor issue, totally forgetting about the fact that there are hoofing great big engines providing thrust through the air.
The conveyor isn't an issue, because an planes forward thrust is via its engines, not it's wheels. If it was by its wheels, apart from the fact that it would be called a car with wings, then the standing still situation would be correct, and in fact a moot point as the question would be something that a 5 year old could answer.
The wheels would, in fact, be turning at the opposing speed of the conveyor, plus the forward speed that the planes engine thrust provided...... its fairly simple really, once you get over the conveyor not being an issue
Good post crockett
just discount the bits you don't like. The wheels of the plane is standing on the conveyor, the only contact between the two is the tread on the wheel, which has to turn to reach a land speed in order to take off, a car with wings perhaps.
At this point forget all about fancy engines and how a plane fly's, we know that already, and read about the wheel and the surface the wheel is stood on, doing the same speed, so the only thing thats moving is the surface and a spinning wheel, until the wheel goes faster than the surface, the plane is stalled and not going anywhere, so how can it take off.
Perhaps your 5 year old will tell you.
doitall. do you agree that a winch will pull the wheeled object forward?
yes or no.
yes or no.
Sponsored Links
Yes, but you are just thinking of the ground forces involved, and not the fact that, if the plane was using its engines as the driving force, then the thrust of these would easily overcome the reverse travel of the conveyor.
The wheels would just be travelling faster forwards, because of the forward thrust, than the conveyor would be going backwards....... you will suss it out, as I did
But you haven't sussed it out.
Forward thrust has nothing to do with the post, the wheels are going the same speed as the belt, it doesn't matter whether its 1mph or 100mph, the surface is going the same speed the opposite direction.
Ask your 5 year old.
If two objects are going at the same speed in opposite directions which is going the fastest.
You asked me that before
Yes it will pull the object forward no problem, but to so will mean the wheel speed will be faster than the belt, so the question is irrelevant
Then why don't you say, " The plane has no engines, but is driven through its wheels." Then your theory holds water. But I don't think it's meant like that. It's talking about whether the thrust of a planes engines can overcome the reverse pull of the conveyor. The conveyor has no bearing on whther the plane will be hindered or not. Its AIR thrust, not ground thrust..... as I said before, once you blow the smoke from your overheated brain, you will see the light
My 5 year old still agrees with me...... if you still don't, then prove it by a videoing a visual test and posting it on here, not just your theoretical musings......
My 5 year old still agrees with me...... if you still don't, then prove it by a videoing a visual test and posting it on here, not just your theoretical musings......
You are still referring to the original poser as if the plane was like a car, with the drive through its wheels. It hasn't. Once you get past this you will get it. I asked my 5 year old. She agrees with me .
It doesn't matter how the plane moves or how its propelled.
The rotation of the wheel is recording the same speed as the conveyor, That means the surface contact between the two must be the same. That also means the plane cannot move forward, without breaking the speed difference.
What a nonsensical piece of logic.
And it will break the speed difference by virtue of the engines thrust. If the wheels bearings can cope with speeds up to 300mph or an infinite roll speed, then it will take off, no probs.... I think you are just attempting to be belligerent for the sake of it
Then why don't you say, " The plane has no engines, but is driven through its wheels." Then your theory holds water. But I don't think it's meant like that. It's talking about whether the thrust of a planes engines can overcome the reverse pull of the conveyor. The conveyor has no bearing on whther the plane will be hindered or not. Its AIR thrust, not ground thrust..... as I said before, once you blow the smoke from your overheated brain, you will see the light
My 5 year old still agrees with me...... if you still don't, then prove it by a videoing a visual test and posting it on here, not just your theoretical musings......
What you think it says is not what it says. to take off the wheels have to go fastest and break the rules of the post.
How do you work that out then, for the object to outrun the belt it has to go faster, otherwise it will stay where you put it
Diyitall wrote
It has everything to do with the original post thats for sure.
Most likely not this one though.
This is where you are wrong as you cannot define the speed of the wheel in relation to the conveyor as the definition was not clearly stated in the original question. At the moment you are only making assumptions to back up your argument.
The original post stated that the belt has a control system that tracks the aircraft wheels speed.
We can assume (for arguments sake) this tracking system will match the aircrafts forward movement with the counter movement of the belt from fixed locations.
It has everything to do with the original post thats for sure.
Most likely not this one though.
This is where you are wrong as you cannot define the speed of the wheel in relation to the conveyor as the definition was not clearly stated in the original question. At the moment you are only making assumptions to back up your argument.
The original post stated that the belt has a control system that tracks the aircraft wheels speed.
We can assume (for arguments sake) this tracking system will match the aircrafts forward movement with the counter movement of the belt from fixed locations.
Sponsored Links
