![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "John T" wrote in message ... "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in message This has NOT been adequately explained or there would be no question about it. If the plane is not moving on the treadmill but rather keeping up with the speed that the treadmill is moving (yes planes DO have throttle controls) the thing is going to takeoff with no air moving over the wings? NO WAY. Assuming you're a pilot, I don't understand why you think no air would be moving over the wings, but I'll give this one good "college try"... Yes I am a pilot. First, the question posed in the link by the OP of this thread is an incorrect variation of the original. The original problem asks: "A plane is standing on a giant treadmill. The plane moves in one direction, while the treadmill moves in the opposite direction and at the same speed as the plane. Can the plane take off?" As has been explained, placing a car on the question's treadmill would result in a stationary vehicle relative to the observer standing beside the treadmill. The reason is the car derives its propulsion through the wheels sitting on the treadmill and the speed of the car is measured by how fast the wheels are turning. The faster the wheels turn, the "faster" the car moves. However, this is only relative to the treadmill belt. To the observer standing beside the treadmill, the car is motionless. If the driver placed his hand out the window, he would feel no wind even though his "speed" as indicated by the speedometer may be 100 miles per hour. This is very similar to your example of running on the treadmill. You did not feel a relative wind in your face because you were stationary relative to the observer standing beside the treadmill. The reason you were stationary is you generate your propulsion by moving your feet against the ground (or belt, in this case) and the belt is moving in the opposite direction and same speed of your "travel". Like the car, your speed is measured by how fast your feet move from front to rear and they match the speed of the belt to cancel out each other. Now, replace the car and runner with an airplane. The airplane derives its propulsion from its engine pushing air from front to back. None of this energy is sent to the wheels to propel the airplane. The speed of the airplane is measured by the flow of air past the airplane, not the turning of its wheels. As the airplane's engine spools up to takeoff power, air is forced from front to rear and the plane moves forward regardless how fast its wheels are turning. The observer standing beside the treadmill would notice the treadmill speed up, the airplane's wheels turn twice as fast as normal, and the airplane move forward (not stationary). Speed is relative and the key here is the means of propulsion. The airplane's speed is measured by how fast the air is moving past it, not by how fast its wheels are turning or how fast the ground is flashing by. None of the airplane engine's energy is transmitted to the wheels to generate speed. All of the airplane's propulsion is derived from moving air (otherwise it would never stay in the air after takeoff). Since the treadmill has very little effect on the air (and what little effect it does have actually helps the airplane generate more lift), the airplane will indeed takeoff in the same distance it normally would use without the treadmill. However, the airplane wheels would be turning at twice their normal speed at the time of takeoff. Try this experiment: Take a toy car and attach it to a string. Tie the other end of the string to a small spring scale. Place the car on the treadmill belt and hold the scale in front of the car while you turn on the treadmill. Observe nearly zero (essentially 1G) force being exerted on the string/scale. Speed up the treadmill (for simplicity, let's say you set it to a constant 10mph) and you'll observe no significant difference in force exerted on the string (the only additional force is the friction of the car's axles). Now gently pull the string/scale forward. As long as you maintain a 1G force on the string, the car will continue to accelerate. Now, to the observer standing beside the treadmill, was the car stationary or moving forward? It's speed was certainly not zero as the car most definitely moved from rear to front of the belt. What was the speed of the car relative to the "driver" sitting inside the toy? The wheels would be turning faster than 10mph. If the "driver" were to put his hand out the window, how fast would the air be moving? Much slower than his wheels would say he's moving, but faster than the driver I mentioned at the beginning of this post. Replace the toy with the mythical airplane above, replace your arm with the airplane's engine (and propeller, if appropriate), then replace the string with the airplane engine mounts. You should now be able to visualize why the airplane sitting on that giant treadmill would most definitely takeoff. If not, I wish you good luck and safe flight. You'll need it. ![]() -- John T Thank you for your reply. Here is my .02, it would seem that the plane never actually moves in respect to the observer no matter how fast the treadmill moves, the plane will just take off like it is hovering and then slowly accelerate away? I guess I'll have to set this up and try it, I do have a few RC planes laying around and I have a treadmill so I guess I'll know one way or another, unless Mythbusters beats me to the punch. ------------------------------------------------------- DW |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VQ-1's P4M-1Q crash off China - 1956 | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | May 6th 06 11:13 PM |
Passenger crash-lands plane after pilot suffers heart attack | R.L. | Piloting | 7 | May 7th 05 11:17 PM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | May 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | April 1st 04 08:27 AM |