Can a Plane on a Treadmill Take Off?

Why dont we look at it from another direction !!!

If the treadmill is moving at 60 MPH in one direction and the trust is
set to pull 60 MPH in the oppisite direction, the plane would be
neither moving forward or back.

so the only thing that is moving is the wheels, the wings are not
generatring any lift becuase they are not moving in a positive
direction, the wings dont know that the wheels are going like a bat out
of hell !!! the wings still things its standing still. you WILL NEED TO
HAVE FORWARD MOMENTIUM to generate lift.....

the only lift the wings will get is downwash from the prop.

and i used the word STUPID not to offend anyone, but i am right in what
i said about the aircraft. but its really fun to talk about this after
over 75 messages posted...

"The Flying Scotsman" wrote

so the only thing that is moving is the wheels, the wings are not
generatring any lift becuase they are not moving in a positive
direction, the wings dont know that the wheels are going like a bat out
of hell !!! the wings still things its standing still. you WILL NEED TO
HAVE FORWARD MOMENTIUM to generate lift.....

Man, you are about as dumb as a fence post, or bag of rocks, or.......PLONK
--
Jim in NC

"The Flying Scotsman" wrote:

Why dont we look at it from another direction !!!

If the treadmill is moving at 60 MPH in one direction and the trust is
set to pull 60 MPH in the oppisite direction, the plane would be
neither moving forward or back.
Why. What's keeping it from moving forward if the thrust is set for a
thrust that would normally move it forward at 60mph. And besides, you
just said that the plane is moving neither forward nor backward. The
statement of the problem is that the conveyor moves at the same rate
and opposite direction as the plane. Since you say the plane is not
moving, I guess neither is the conveyor. Do you really think that is
what the poser of the question intended? g

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

"The Flying Scotsman" wrote in message
ups.com...
Why dont we look at it from another direction !!!

If the treadmill is moving at 60 MPH in one direction and the trust is
set to pull 60 MPH in the oppisite direction, the plane would be
neither moving forward or back.

You are implying that because the treadmill is spinning the wheels at 60mph,
that the treadmill is therefore exerting a force equal and opposite the
thrust generated by the propellor neccesary to propel the plane forward at
60mph. That is incorrect.
The force that the treadmill is capable of exerting on the mass of the
aircraft through the wheels is negligible.

you WILL NEED TO
HAVE FORWARD MOMENTIUM to generate lift.....

WOW, I must have missed that in ground school.
You need airflow across the wings to generate lift. Which, because the plane
is moving forward as stated in the question, is present.


the only lift the wings will get is downwash from the prop.

and i used the word STUPID not to offend anyone, but i am right in what
i said about the aircraft.

Apparently you are the only one that thinks so.

"The Flying Scotsman" wrote in message
ups.com...
Why dont we look at it from another direction !!!

If the treadmill is moving at 60 MPH in one direction and the trust is
set to pull 60 MPH in the oppisite direction, the plane would be
neither moving forward or back.

You are implying that because the treadmill is spinning the wheels at 60mph,
that the treadmill is therefore exerting a force equal and opposite the
thrust generated by the propellor neccesary to propel the plane forward at
60mph. That is incorrect.
The force that the treadmill is capable of exerting on the mass of the
aircraft through the wheels is negligible.

you WILL NEED TO
HAVE FORWARD MOMENTIUM to generate lift.....

WOW, I must have missed that in ground school.
You need airflow across the wings to generate lift. Which, because the plane
is moving forward as stated in the question, is present.


the only lift the wings will get is downwash from the prop.

and i used the word STUPID not to offend anyone, but i am right in what
i said about the aircraft.

Apparently you are the only one that thinks so.

All,
I read some of my posts in response to comments made about me. The
spelling, punctuation, and grammar mistakes are all because of my
blatant laziness, and excitement to get my post out. The comments I
made about the gun and the crowd seemed a bit disturbing to me when I
read through them. I should have picked a better example. Please do not
take those comments as some subconscious plea. I have been through
several hefty background checks in at least two states and the latest
for the Department of Defense that went back to when I was a teenager.
I admit that I was wrong initially about the answer to the question.
After working through it via the posts, discussions with my friend, and
my own reasonings, I changed my mind. I hope that in the future if you
all see my posts you will not regard me as some crazy loon. I have been
following r.a.s since late 2000 and think it is a priceless source of
information and support. Many people helped my as I was going through
my private pilot training, and I appreciate that. I hope that when I
begin my instrument training that people will be just as kind and
helpful. Thank-you.
Jesse

P.S. I could always chalk it up to the chemicals at work. Maybe my Mom
dropped me on my head when I was a baby, you never know!

"jesse" wrote

I read some of my posts in response to comments made about me. The
spelling, punctuation, and grammar mistakes are all because of my
blatant laziness, and excitement to get my post out. \\

Jesse, is that you? I didn't recognize you!

You will find that you will be taken more seriously around here, if you
continue you attempts at correctly (minus a few typo's) written posts. The
small mistakes will always creep in, it seems, no matter how hard we all
try. In this case, a small one was there,

Many people helped my as I was .....

but I'm almost sure there is a mistake in me post. It is a rule, I was
told. g
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

You will find that you will be taken more seriously around here, if you
continue you attempts at correctly (minus a few typo's) written posts.
The small mistakes will always creep in, it seems, no matter how hard we
all try. In this case, a small one was there,

Many people helped my as I was .....

but I'm almost sure there is a mistake in me post. It is a rule, I was
told. g

Yup. In addition to writing "you attempts" and "me post", you misspelled
"typos" (apostrophes are not used to form nonpossessive plurals). Also, the
comma in the first sentence is incorrect. It indicates that the dependent
clause is parenthetical, but in fact that clause is integral to the sentence
(the sentence means something substantially different if the clause is
removed). The Chicago Manual of Style gives these examples to illustrate the
distinction:
She ought to be promoted, if you want my opinion.
We will agree to the proposal if you accept our conditions.

--Gary