will it take off?

[TomKioti]

Think of the wheels like the clutch in a car. When you push the clutch in, the torque (thrust) of the engine no longer has a connection to the thrust (resistance) of the ground. Wheels on a plane are the same. With the brakes released, the thrust of the engine or the resistance of the ground no longer influence each other.

No, I disagree. That is a direct drive train with a much different set of rules. An aircraft is (Usually) a push or pull thrust system with many other variables at play. Also how is thrust resistance? unless metaphorically derived. If so explain please.

 

[Egon]

So.... your truck has wings? :)

Surely does. One covers the right front wheel. The other covers the left front wheel. There's a Bonnet between them!

 

[TomKioti]

Tom

I know you love my drawings So let's go back to the first of the helicopter.

In this drawing, if the wheels are attached to the treadmill. Can the treadmill prevent the helicopter from lifting off the ground and flying vertically by moving in the opposite direction? Just answer this question first.

The answer is no, the rotors of the helicopter pull it upward and it lifts off of the ground no matter how fast the treadmill spins in the opposite direction. If you argue I am wrong on this then there is no point in going any farther.

Now take the second illustration. This is no different then the first illustration. Only now, the rotars are pulling through the air horizontally instead of vertically. The very same application as an airplane.

If you answered "The helicopter will not lift off the ground" for the first illustration. Then there is no hope for further explanation. If you answered "Yes, it will lift off of the ground" Then please explain to me why it will not move horizontally as well in the second illustration

jk

That is NOT the same set of applied rules as the original post. Why is it everyone changes the argument rather than challenging the submitted points?

 

[TomKioti]

So.... your truck has wings? :)

Surely does. One covers the right front wheel. The other covers the left front wheel. There's a Bonnet between them!

That's freakin AWESOME!!!

 

[RayH]

No, I disagree. That is a direct drive train with a much different set of rules. An aircraft is (Usually) a push or pull thrust system with many other variables at play. Also how is thrust resistance? unless metaphorically derived. If so explain please.

Resistance is a bad word for me to use. The true equivalant of thrust is drag. There are four forces involved in flight. thrust-drag-lift-gravity, .

 

[RayH]

That is NOT the same set of applied rules as the original post. Why is it everyone changes the argument rather than challenging the submitted points?

Ok, heres right to the point. Does the plane move forward?

 

[jk96]

Tom,

how is the second illustration different. If you answered yes to my first question, which I'm assuming you have, then you have to agree that the helicopter would pull horizontally on the second illustration. Meaning what? It moves. Now, change the shape of the helicopter to the shape of an airplane and add wings. How is this different from the original question. Please tell me.

jk

 

[jk96]

Here’s one more scenario:

You're in a wheelchair. The wheelchair sits on top of a treadmill which can sense your speed and match it 1:1, like our plane's conveyor belt. A man lassos you and begins to pull you forward on the treadmill, with a constant force. By F = m*a, you will accelerate with a constant acceleration. But wait, the treadmill is going to pull you back, right? Tell that to the man with the rope. As long as he keeps pulling you, you will keep moving forward, no matter WHAT the treadmill does or how fast it responds in reverse. In this case, the plane is the wheelchair, the force of the rope is the thrust from the air plane's engine, and the treadmill is your conveyor belt. Since the force vector of the rope and the treadmill are COMPLETELY DISCONNECTED, and your wheels are free to spin, the only net force is that of the rope.

jk

 

[TomKioti]

IMO No. Not if the conveyer assimilates ground speed = thrust and nullifies the mass (aircraft) from achieving forward (actual) movement. I want movement of the mass in relation to static footing to achieve lift. These are rules the Wright Brothers had to overcome. They did it BUT if it was on a conveyer belt moving in opposition we'd all be taking buses and trains. Now if the convyer was in effect opposing wind at equal speed you would have a hard time stopping that plane from flying.

 

[RayH]

IMO No. Not if the conveyer assimilates ground speed = thrust and nullifies the mass (aircraft) from achieving forward (actual) movement. I want movement of the mass in relation to static footing to achieve lift. These are rules the Wright Brothers had to overcome. They did it BUT if it was on a conveyer belt moving in opposition we'd all be taking buses and trains. Now if the convyer was in effect opposing wind at equal speed you would have a hard time stopping that plane from flying.

Ok, your answer is no. Lets see if you can stick to that.
The plane does not move. According to the question, the conveyor matches the speed of the plane. hence, the conveyor can not move, agree? I'll assume you agree.
The engine starts and turns the prop at full RPMS. Weve already determined that the plane does not move, hence the conveyor does not move. So now the plane sits still with its engine and prop running full RPMs and the plane sits perfectly still on the conveyor with the prop beating the snot out of the air. Can you explain to me what is holding the plane still?
that would truelly be magic if you could run a plane or jet engine up without tieing it down, all you have to do is put it on a non moving conveyor and it will stick in one place.
What is a nonmoving conveyor, its a normal runway, right, Still following? Now our plane will not move on a normal runway, hmmmm.