hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[wulfe13]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dave, as was stated clearly before, airplanes fly because of airflow over and under the wings, not because of thrust. Wings do more than just keep the plane from tumbling.

[/ QUOTE ]
airflow over and under the wings will have no choice but to happen creating lift because of the forward motion created by the thrust overpowering the weight of the plane. rockets dont have to have wings just to move, just enough thrust to overpower the weight,,
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you!!!

[zeegler]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

I'm sorry guys, I gotta go. I feel like I'm arguing with ten year olds.

[VinceV]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Again LOL, if wheels made did not affect a planes airspeed in any way , then why are they there. They allow the plane to build up airspeed buy rolling forward thus creating lift on the wings. read my post, and if you can say that for certain if you could run 50 mph on a treadmill and there would be wind blowing at you, then I'll agree with you, but thats not what happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

By that logic, one would have to assume that seaplanes work under the same wacky rules of physics. So floats, like wheels somehow assist an aircraft to take off. Well, I argue, that other than keeping the aircraft fuselage away from the ground, wheels or floats serve only to create drag, thus impeding the aircraft's take-off. Wheels are a necessary evil for aircraft. It's all about reducing friction. In other words, they do exactly the opposite of the wheels in a car. You want wheels on a car to create as much friction as possible (traction), but in an airplane, the oposite is true. Some experimental planes were launched from linear motors (magnetically powered monorail system), and magnetically supported monorails.

[/ QUOTE ]


And was there forward motion in these monorail systems? I bet there was.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not the magnetically supported ones. They were used just for the reduction of friction. That is the only purpose of an aircraft wheel.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, but they still allowed for forward motion of the aircraft, thus allowing it to build airspeed and take off.

[wulfe13]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
once the thrust becomes greater than the weight ratio of the plane, said plane becomes a rocket and will gain forward motion regardless of how fast the wheels spin on the conveyor belt, because the "thrusts'" point of contact to its resistor(air) happens above the conveyor and not with the conveyor itself,,at the point of thrust becoming greater than the weight ratio of the plane from pushing against the frictionous air behind it, the plane has no choice but to move forward regardless of the wheels on the conveyor which now have been put into a state of multiplied acceleration until the wheels leave the conveyor. once the thrust becomes greater than the weight holding it back...wheels and conveyors are not even a factor. the resistance of the air the thrust is pushing against is the only factor. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY!!! Finally someone gets what I am saying!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wont work, airplanes are not rockets. They do not have 1 to 1 power ratios. A 747 has 4 engine cranking out about what 60-80 thousand pounds of thrust on a plane that clearly weighs more the 500,000 pounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't matter! This whole question was a "what if" scenario! It can't really be proven anyway. We aren't talking about a specific model of plane!

[Number Of The Priest]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]

airflow over and under the wings will have no choice but to happen creating lift because of the forward motion created by the thrust overpowering the weight of the plane. rockets dont have to have wings just to move, just enough thrust to overpower the weight,,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is assuming that the operator of the conveyor belt does not have enough power to keep the plane where it is, and the plane keeps moving forward because it has enough thrust to overcome the belt. This is what I keep saying, it wasn't 100% clear in the original question so we can't resolve this fully.

[wulfe13]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

airflow over and under the wings will have no choice but to happen creating lift because of the forward motion created by the thrust overpowering the weight of the plane. rockets dont have to have wings just to move, just enough thrust to overpower the weight,,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is assuming that the operator of the conveyor belt does not have enough power to keep the plane where it is, and the plane keeps moving forward because it has enough thrust to overcome the belt. This is what I keep saying, it wasn't 100% clear in the original question so we can't resolve this fully.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't have to overcome the conveyor, it has to overcome the weight of the plane!

[MOSHWITZ]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
once the thrust becomes greater than the weight ratio of the plane, said plane becomes a rocket and will gain forward motion regardless of how fast the wheels spin on the conveyor belt, because the "thrusts'" point of contact to its resistor(air) happens above the conveyor and not with the conveyor itself,,at the point of thrust becoming greater than the weight ratio of the plane from pushing against the frictionous air behind it, the plane has no choice but to move forward regardless of the wheels on the conveyor which now have been put into a state of multiplied acceleration until the wheels leave the conveyor. once the thrust becomes greater than the weight holding it back...wheels and conveyors are not even a factor. the resistance of the air the thrust is pushing against is the only factor. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY!!! Finally someone gets what I am saying!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wont work, airplanes are not rockets. They do not have 1 to 1 power ratios. A 747 has 4 engine cranking out about what 60-80 thousand pounds of thrust on a plane that clearly weighs more the 500,000 pounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

an f-18 has enough thrust [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
MOSH ON wulfe
DAVE

[RobRR]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

Alright Ill try this...

Forget the engines for a second. If the plane is sitting on a conveyor. Tie a rope to that plane, then have a tow vehicle on the other end of that rope, and start the conveyor. It would take just about the same amount of strength to hold that plane in its position as it would to pull the plane forward on a standard runway. Dont you think that the engines could compensate enough thrust equal to that tow vehicle? Come on now, a small group of men could pull an airplane or hold it steady on a conveyor.

[MOSHWITZ]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]


It doesn't have to overcome the conveyor, it has to overcome the weight of the plane!

[/ QUOTE ]
amen
MOSH ON
DAVE

[buzzsaww]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


It doesn't have to overcome the conveyor, it has to overcome the weight of the plane!

[/ QUOTE ]
amen
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]
at which point you might as well lop off the wings because you don't need 'em.

[VinceV]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
once the thrust becomes greater than the weight ratio of the plane, said plane becomes a rocket and will gain forward motion regardless of how fast the wheels spin on the conveyor belt, because the "thrusts'" point of contact to its resistor(air) happens above the conveyor and not with the conveyor itself,,at the point of thrust becoming greater than the weight ratio of the plane from pushing against the frictionous air behind it, the plane has no choice but to move forward regardless of the wheels on the conveyor which now have been put into a state of multiplied acceleration until the wheels leave the conveyor. once the thrust becomes greater than the weight holding it back...wheels and conveyors are not even a factor. the resistance of the air the thrust is pushing against is the only factor. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY!!! Finally someone gets what I am saying!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wont work, airplanes are not rockets. They do not have 1 to 1 power ratios. A 747 has 4 engine cranking out about what 60-80 thousand pounds of thrust on a plane that clearly weighs more the 500,000 pounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't matter! This whole question was a "what if" scenario! It can't really be proven anyway. We aren't talking about a specific model of plane!

[/ QUOTE ]

I was using the 747 as an example, that even big powerfull planes still do not have the ability to create 1 to 1 thrust ratios, hence they are not rockets. I gurantee that if this treadmill runway idea worked, it would have experimented with. Just like the Russians did with ground effect "airplanes".

[Number Of The Priest]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

HAHAHAHAHA:

http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1438689&page=1

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[VinceV]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
once the thrust becomes greater than the weight ratio of the plane, said plane becomes a rocket and will gain forward motion regardless of how fast the wheels spin on the conveyor belt, because the "thrusts'" point of contact to its resistor(air) happens above the conveyor and not with the conveyor itself,,at the point of thrust becoming greater than the weight ratio of the plane from pushing against the frictionous air behind it, the plane has no choice but to move forward regardless of the wheels on the conveyor which now have been put into a state of multiplied acceleration until the wheels leave the conveyor. once the thrust becomes greater than the weight holding it back...wheels and conveyors are not even a factor. the resistance of the air the thrust is pushing against is the only factor. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
MOSH ON
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY!!! Finally someone gets what I am saying!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wont work, airplanes are not rockets. They do not have 1 to 1 power ratios. A 747 has 4 engine cranking out about what 60-80 thousand pounds of thrust on a plane that clearly weighs more the 500,000 pounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

an f-18 has enough thrust [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
MOSH ON wulfe
DAVE

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, and after a full afterburn powerup when the breaks are released they still need 5000ft of runway(carriers use catapaults) to achieve a proper airspeed,, to take off. If you guys were all correct then these planes would just become airborne, but that isnt what happens.

[VinceV]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

[ QUOTE ]
HAHAHAHAHA:

http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1438689&page=1

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

OK that is funny, almost word for word what is happening here.

[RobRR]

Re: hmmm.... physics question for you guys....

The plane would accellerate normally throughout the entire length of the "conveyor" runway which is just as long as a regular runway.