Comments on: conveyor belt plane http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/ music, opinion and technology Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:53:50 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: brian t http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35384 brian t Thu, 21 May 2009 21:20:51 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35384 "A plane with no movement relative to the air will not get lift upwards." So? The whole point of this piece was to explain why the plane WILL move forward: because a practical conveyor belt CANNOT hold the plane stationary. It moves, therefore it takes off. The plane's engine is running, remember, why are you talking about the conveyor belt generating wind? If you ignore these practical considerations, this question becomes just a variation on "an irresistible force meeting an immovable object" i.e. a problem that has no resolution, because it describes an impossible situation. “A plane with no movement relative to the air will not get lift upwards.”

So? The whole point of this piece was to explain why the plane WILL move forward: because a practical conveyor belt CANNOT hold the plane stationary. It moves, therefore it takes off. The plane’s engine is running, remember, why are you talking about the conveyor belt generating wind?

If you ignore these practical considerations, this question becomes just a variation on “an irresistible force meeting an immovable object” i.e. a problem that has no resolution, because it describes an impossible situation.

]]> By: Torstein http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35383 Torstein Thu, 21 May 2009 20:38:51 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35383 And we were never to see the plane stationary to a camera on the side. the plane move forward! Accelerated! And we were never to see the plane stationary to a camera on the side. the plane move forward! Accelerated!

]]> By: Torstein http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35382 Torstein Thu, 21 May 2009 20:34:08 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-35382 Please! A plane with no movement relative to the air will not get lift upwards. The entire y-moment is because the wing's shape that divides the air stream, generating turbulence under the wing, and then because of pressure difference (Bernoulli equation) an upwards force works under the wing. Forget the wheels, unless the movement of belt or the rotor makes enough wind to pass the wings the plane will not go up! Please!

A plane with no movement relative to the air will not get lift upwards. The entire y-moment is because the wing’s shape that divides the air stream, generating turbulence under the wing, and then because of pressure difference (Bernoulli equation) an upwards force works under the wing.

Forget the wheels, unless the movement of belt or the rotor makes enough wind to pass the wings the plane will not go up!

]]> By: Airplane vs. Conveyor Belt - Page 5 - 420 Magazine http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-8640 Airplane vs. Conveyor Belt - Page 5 - 420 Magazine Wed, 11 Apr 2007 05:55:12 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-8640 [...] would require infinite acceleration of its mass, meaning an infinite force would be needed" (Source:conveyor belt plane) __________________ 420 Magazine Creating Cannabis Awareness Since 1993 [...] [...] would require infinite acceleration of its mass, meaning an infinite force would be needed” (Source:conveyor belt plane) __________________ 420 Magazine Creating Cannabis Awareness Since 1993 [...]

]]> By: brian t http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-4067 brian t Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:53:44 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-4067 > That said I have heard people try to argue that the questions was worded improperly and that it is sometimes stated that the conveyor belt matches the speed of the plane. Then the only required understanding is that once the planes thrust exceeds the friction coefficient then plan will move forward. That's the way I've always seen it worded. Of course the speed of the belt will match the speed of the WHEELS, but it's always phrased as needing to keep the whole plane stationary, so that there's no airflow over the wings and it can't take off. See the videos I linked: the fact that the engines act on the air, and not on the wheels or ground (belt or not) is all you need to know. The belt's technical inability to precisely match an object's speed is just extra grist for the mill. > A plane moves through the air relative to the ground. Wheels are solely used to reduce friction at take off and increase friction upon landings. No. a plane, in flight (or aiming to be) moves relative to the AIR. If the air flowing over the wings provides enough lift, it can be stationary relative to the ground, or even going backwards. e.g. do we care about the ground speed of a "hurricane chaser" plane when it's inside one? 8) > That said I have heard people try to argue that the questions was worded improperly and that it is sometimes stated that the conveyor belt matches the speed of the plane. Then the only required understanding is that once the planes thrust exceeds the friction coefficient then plan will move forward.

That’s the way I’ve always seen it worded. Of course the speed of the belt will match the speed of the WHEELS, but it’s always phrased as needing to keep the whole plane stationary, so that there’s no airflow over the wings and it can’t take off.

See the videos I linked: the fact that the engines act on the air, and not on the wheels or ground (belt or not) is all you need to know. The belt’s technical inability to precisely match an object’s speed is just extra grist for the mill.

> A plane moves through the air relative to the ground. Wheels are solely used to reduce friction at take off and increase friction upon landings.

No. a plane, in flight (or aiming to be) moves relative to the AIR. If the air flowing over the wings provides enough lift, it can be stationary relative to the ground, or even going backwards. e.g. do we care about the ground speed of a “hurricane chaser” plane when it’s inside one? 8)

]]> By: the_dude http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-4016 the_dude Sat, 30 Dec 2006 23:02:06 +0000 http://stereoroid.com/2006/12/21/conveyor-belt-plane/#comment-4016 I have had this argument so many times with people of varying intellect and ego blockage. I am not going to be able to add anything that anybody else hasn't already mentioned. Often times these threads fail to mention that a wheel and a treadmill always move at the same speed. There would be no "programming" required. A relationship exists between the wheel and the conveyer. Say the conveyer belt made a 1000 ft. (or just short of) runway making the belt 2000 ft. lets say your plane wheel travels 1 ft. per rotation. You have a solid unbreakable relation of 2000:1. That means no matter what the rate of the plane speed is in relationship to the ground speed, the wheels will (in this example) spin at a rate of 1 rotation of the conveyor belt to 2000 revelations of the plane wheels. If we are to believe that Newton’s third law is correct, then the conveyor belt will never actually have to move. The wheels will achieve flight 1000 ft down the runway, spinning 1000 times, with the ration remaining at .5 rotations of the conveyor belt to 1000 rotations of the wheel. The plane moved across ½ of the conveyor belt the full length of the runway. This is irrelevant to the speed in which the plane is moving across the ground. Wheels and conveyors move in terms of RPM not MPH. That said I have heard people try to argue that the questions was worded improperly and that it is sometimes stated that the conveyor belt matches the speed of the plane. Then the only required understanding is that once the planes thrust exceeds the friction coefficient then plan will move forward. You and your buds can prove this with a pair of roller blades, a treadmill, a water-ski rope, a fishing scale, and a 4 pack of really good Russian imperial stout. Attach the scale to the wall, the ski rope to the other end of the scale. Have your friend don the roller blades, climb on the treadmill, and power up the treadmill. The beer should be obvious. Note that only a small amount of pressure will be exerted on the fish weight scale. That will be true no matter what the setting is on the treadmill or even if he pulls himself forward. A plane moves through the air relative to the ground. Wheels are solely used to reduce friction at take off and increase friction upon landings. I have had this argument so many times with people of varying intellect and ego blockage. I am not going to be able to add anything that anybody else hasn’t already mentioned. Often times these threads fail to mention that a wheel and a treadmill always move at the same speed. There would be no “programming” required. A relationship exists between the wheel and the conveyer. Say the conveyer belt made a 1000 ft. (or just short of) runway making the belt 2000 ft. lets say your plane wheel travels 1 ft. per rotation. You have a solid unbreakable relation of 2000:1. That means no matter what the rate of the plane speed is in relationship to the ground speed, the wheels will (in this example) spin at a rate of 1 rotation of the conveyor belt to 2000 revelations of the plane wheels. If we are to believe that Newton’s third law is correct, then the conveyor belt will never actually have to move. The wheels will achieve flight 1000 ft down the runway, spinning 1000 times, with the ration remaining at .5 rotations of the conveyor belt to 1000 rotations of the wheel. The plane moved across ½ of the conveyor belt the full length of the runway. This is irrelevant to the speed in which the plane is moving across the ground. Wheels and conveyors move in terms of RPM not MPH.
That said I have heard people try to argue that the questions was worded improperly and that it is sometimes stated that the conveyor belt matches the speed of the plane. Then the only required understanding is that once the planes thrust exceeds the friction coefficient then plan will move forward. You and your buds can prove this with a pair of roller blades, a treadmill, a water-ski rope, a fishing scale, and a 4 pack of really good Russian imperial stout. Attach the scale to the wall, the ski rope to the other end of the scale. Have your friend don the roller blades, climb on the treadmill, and power up the treadmill. The beer should be obvious. Note that only a small amount of pressure will be exerted on the fish weight scale. That will be true no matter what the setting is on the treadmill or even if he pulls himself forward.

A plane moves through the air relative to the ground. Wheels are solely used to reduce friction at take off and increase friction upon landings.

]]>