Can this airplane take off?

[SASQUATCH]

There is an airplane on a run way. The run way is like a conveyor belt, and can detect the speed of the wheels of the airplane. When the run way senses the wheels moving, the run way will move match the speed of the airplane's wheels but in the opposite direction.

Can this airplane take off?

Discuss.

[EXEcution]

I kinda agree with Marz. Looking at it from a completely practical standpoint as opposed to a physics standpoint if an airplane taking off from a conveyor belt was possible then why would we even have runways at airports that take up all that land. Instead we could have someone engineer and mass produce these take-off conveyor belts and save land since the plane would remain in one spot.

EDIT: Unless of course the technology has already been approved and has yet to be implemented.

So I agree with Marz and say no.

[NastyDawg]

I this on Myth Busters, so I wont vote. (but it was very interesting)

[Bingo]

I actually saw that episode as well, and I totally disagree with thier methods.

While this doesn't really give anything away, I still put this in spoiler tags in case someone wants to vote without any discussion of the physics involved.


Think about the concept: the plane is on the conveyor belt with the belt matching the speed of the plane. Then why, in their setup, was the plane moving forward?

To me, that means the conveyor was NOT going at the speed of the plane - hence the whole test was invalid. Don't you think? Or am I missing something?

[NightBreed]

I would think the air flowing over the wings would control the takeoff and landing of a plane, not the speed of the wheels..

<--- didn't see the episode, just thinkin...

[BIGSHOW201]

um wouldn't the plane still need thrust do get velocity to push it self up into the air I don't think the conveyor belt would replace the massive thrust it needs to implement flight. but i'm no scientist either . have to say no

[FUS1ON]

I would think the air flowing over the wings would control the takeoff and landing of a plane, not the speed of the wheels..

<--- didn't see the episode, just thinkin...

Exactly, in order for lift to occur they are going to need air to move over the wing's surface.

I guess I missed that episode of Myth Busters too and thought I had seen them all.

[NastyDawg]

I just saw it this week Sho, think it was a new one for 08

[Bingo]

Yeah, it was a new episode this week.

While I'm not a pilot or a physicist, I do know that "lift" - the thing that makes an airplane fly - is created by the difference in pressure above and below the wing surface. This is caused by airflow over, above and around the wings.

My thinking is that since the plane itself is stationary (To stay perfectly true to the question/myth), there would be no airflow and therefore would be no lift.

[OUTLAWS WHOCARES]

If a Bear farts in the woods can you smell it?

[Oscar(WCFD)]

Yes...The plane is not putting the power to the ground (conveyor belt) via the wheels, it is getting it's forward thrust via a prop or jet engine, it doesn't matter how fast the conveyor belt moves, the plane will still move forward, it just means that the wheels will spin that much faster. ;)

[Wiper]

Yes...The plane is not putting the power to the ground (conveyor belt) via the wheels, it is getting it's forward thrust via a prop or jet engine, it doesn't matter how fast the conveyor belt moves, the plane will still move forward, it just means that the wheels will spin that much faster. ;)

:thumbs:

Edit:
For those who don't believe this: It would be otherwise impossible to use a water plane since it has no wheels at all and what else than the engines could push the plane forward:P

[Suicidal]

I said no. All my ideas have been said.
And I guess that mythbusters episode is where SAS got the idea from.

What surprised me the most is that everyone posted a reason why it WOULDN"T fly, yet we have MORE "yes" answers than "no!" Congrats on some very successful reasoning guys :)

[Goober]

Why of course it could...............if it was an AV8B Harrier.

[Oscar(WCFD)]

Vote before watching this video clip. ;)

Some of you might want to get a piece of humble pie. :)


http://mythbustersresults.com/episode97

[NightBreed]

Dunno Oscar, sure looked like that plane was traveling down a runway...:confused:

Besides, ultralights don't count..Chrissakes, you could push that off your garage roof and it'll fly..:D :funny:

[Oscar(WCFD)]

Dunno Oscar, sure looked like that plane was traveling down a runway...:confused:

Besides, ultralights don't count..Chrissakes, you could push that off your garage roof and it'll fly..:D :funny:

Re-read the question, it didn't say that the plane couldn't move, it just stated that the conveyor would match the speed of the wheels, the wheels are not providing the power for forward movement, (the wheels are free spinning) the prop is providing the power to move the plane forward through the air, so if the plane is moving 100mph the wheels will be going 200mph.
The bottom line is that the conveyor can not stop the plane from moving forward, the size and weight of the plane wont change the basic law of physics. ;)

[OUTLAWS high ping camper]

No..........I was answering Whocares question. :)

[SASQUATCH]

I figure this would be fun for you guys to figure it out. I love watching them guys because they come up with some strange ideas. hehehehe

They are fun to watch and very creative.

Thanks a lot guys for participating on this thread it was fun to see you guys figure it out.

Cheers to you Oscar.


hehehe

[NightBreed]

Does the plane have to land on another conveyor belt ? and which direction is that belt going to have to spin ?


:D just sayin....


Oscar, I'm a long way out of my high school physics classes. I do remember a test we took back then about a Cessna in a 50mph headwind that had an airspeed of almost the same. We had to explain how the plane was able to stay in the air, even though it appeared at a standstill:confused: It was due to a locomotive force ( dunno how I remember that term, damned if I can explain it today though ! )


Best post of 2008 so far, guys...keep 'em coming !! :thumbs:

[SASQUATCH]

So basically what i'm getting from all this is that it doesn't matter how fast the treadmill is going the plane will always move foward (as long as there is a foward force, even if it was less than the backwards force from the treadmill)- even if the plane was going 10mph when the treadmill was going 100mph the plane would still move fowards.

It cannot possibly stay stationary because the foward force generated by its engine is independant to whats happening to its wheels. What i'm thinking is that even the slightest pull (or push) fowards on the plane will cause the wheels to move (begin motion) and cancel out the backwards forces of motion from the treadmill; because the wheels will equal the speed of the treadmill (effectively canceling them out no matter how fast its moving) and not the speed of the plane.

Therefore it can always move forwards and get wind underneath its wings to take off, so long that it attempts an acceleration.

[Bingo]

So yeah, as I understood the whole myth - none of it even makes sense or is possible.

I was reading the myth to mean the plane would always remain stationary. But yeah, as was pointed out the forward motion is totally independant of the wheels. The wheels are just free-spinning wheels, of course.

So since the plane CANNOT remain stationary - the treadmill is really irrelevant.

What I WOULD be interested in knowing though, is this:

Say a plane requires 150 feet to take off.
If it's on a moving treadmill, would that distance change?

[Oscar(WCFD)]

Bingo.... You write this statement.

So since the plane CANNOT remain stationary - the treadmill is really irrelevant.
Then you ask this question.

What I WOULD be interested in knowing though, is this:

Say a plane requires 150 feet to take off.
If it's on a moving treadmill, would that distance change?
I think you answered your own question before you asked it. :)


Oscar, I'm a long way out of my high school physics classes.
You're a long way out of high school physics!! Look at my profile. I finished high school in 1959, you are only 3 months older than my oldest son.:P

[SASQUATCH]

This is the key to understanding the problem: An airplane is not like a car; it has free-spinning wheels. The forward speed of the airplane during taxi does not depend on the speed of the wheels.

So all the conveyor belt can do is make the wheels spin very fast but their speed of rotation does not really impede the airplane's forward progress.

Adam and Jamie of Mythbusters did a fine job of proving this result.

[Grimmy]

Having not seen this episode, I'd have to say that the plane would not take off. From what was said in the first post, the wheels are spinning, but still the plane isn't moving. If you were standing off the conveyor, as the plane started to move, the conveyor would start to spin against the wheels. There would be no air flow (expect behind the engines weeeee).

It'd be sorta the same concept of a car on a dyno. ;)

[SASQUATCH]

HOLY... i had no idea u were that age, now i have to agree with u since u have been on this earth 40 more years that me :-p
Wise Old Man

p.s. i think Shogun is like a couple years older than you LOL

I think I am the oldest btw. heheheh :D

[SASQUATCH]

Having not seen this episode, I'd have to say that the plane would not take off. From what was said in the first post, the wheels are spinning, but still the plane isn't moving. If you were standing off the conveyor, as the plane started to move, the conveyor would start to spin against the wheels. There would be no air flow (expect behind the engines weeeee).

It'd be sorta the same concept of a car on a dyno. ;)

You should watch it Grim, go to the link. ;)