Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will it take off?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I thought about it a little more, and I am now pretty sure that you guys are right - the plane would probably take off


    To be added soon-Firebird Graphic

    Comment



    • okay, I think I'm starting to see how it could fly...

      physorg.com

      Christopher Teng

      1999 · A4 · 3.73's · Auburn LSD · Whisper Lid · K&N · Pacesetter Headers/Y-pipe
      Magnaflow Cat & Catback · MSD Coils/Wires · Bosch +4 Plugs · EGR Bypass
      B&M SuperCooler · 160* Stat · Descreened MAF · SLP CAI · BMR STB & SFC
      Strano Sways · Eibach Springs · Bilstein HD Shocks · Hawk-Pads · Brembo Blanks
      Speedlines · Nitto 555s · Texas Speed Mail Tune

      Lots of Weight Savings · Stubby Antenna · Corbeau TRS · Zaino · 273K

      F-Body Dirty Dozen

      Comment


      • Ya'll are going to hate me for this but if you put a car on the tread mill under the same conditions the car would move forward, Here is why. The question says the car moves in one direction while the ground moves in the other direction. The point is the you have to base the movement from a fixed object. You can not base the car movement to the moving ground and the moving ground to a non moving ground. You have to base both from the same point or you won't ever start motion. So the car start to accelerate, remember the car has to move to a fixed object before the ground will move in the opposite direction, when the car is moving at 1 mph based on the ground speed the ground is moving the opposite direction at 1 mph but the car speedometer is reading 2 mph. The car has to go 1 mph to keep up with the ground plus 1 mph to achieve to forward movement to make the ground move 1 mph in the other direction.
        2002 Electron Blue Vette, 1SC, FE3/Z51, G92 3.15 gears, 308.9 RWHP 321.7 RWTQ (before any mods), SLP headers, Z06 exhaust, MSD Ignition Wires, AC Delco Iridium Spark Plugs, 160 t-stat, lots of ECM tuning

        1995 Z28, many mods, SOLD

        A proud member of the "F-Body Dirty Dozen"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Joe 1320
          You can't use that analogy. The car's wheels are driven. An airplane freewheels like in neutral.
          Are you talking to me?
          2002 Electron Blue Vette, 1SC, FE3/Z51, G92 3.15 gears, 308.9 RWHP 321.7 RWTQ (before any mods), SLP headers, Z06 exhaust, MSD Ignition Wires, AC Delco Iridium Spark Plugs, 160 t-stat, lots of ECM tuning

          1995 Z28, many mods, SOLD

          A proud member of the "F-Body Dirty Dozen"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Jeff 95 Z28
            Ya'll are going to hate me for this but if you put a car on the tread mill under the same conditions the car would move forward, Here is why. The question says the car moves in one direction while the ground moves in the other direction. The point is the you have to base the movement from a fixed object. You can not base the car movement to the moving ground and the moving ground to a non moving ground. You have to base both from the same point or you won't ever start motion. So the car start to accelerate, remember the car has to move to a fixed object before the ground will move in the opposite direction, when the car is moving at 1 mph based on the ground speed the ground is moving the opposite direction at 1 mph but the car speedometer is reading 2 mph. The car has to go 1 mph to keep up with the ground plus 1 mph to achieve to forward movement to make the ground move 1 mph in the other direction.
            This is where my first post of relative motion comes in to play. From the control tower, the car could move 1 mph forward and the the treadmill move 1 mph backwards... that would mean the wheels are turning at 2 mph.

            Or... as observed from the control tower, the car could be stationary if the wheel's velocity exactly matched the treadmill's.
            Former Ride: 2002 Pontiac Trans Am WS6 - 345 rwhp, 360 rwtq... stock internally.

            Current Ride: 2006 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - spec.B #312 of 500

            Comment


            • Originally posted by LimTeng99TransAm

              okay, I think I'm starting to see how it could fly...

              physorg.com
              Your freebody diagram is in error because there is no rearward acceleratory force acting on the plane. The rearward force of acceleration acts upon the wheels only - and because the wheels spin freely, they exert no force on the plane. Therefore, the only acceleratory force on the plane is forward (actually, its rearward, thus moving the plane forward - but you get the idea), and the plane moves and will take off.

              You are stuck picturing the same thing I was - a stationary plane to an observer in the control tower - yet in reality, that's a physical impossibility.
              Former Ride: 2002 Pontiac Trans Am WS6 - 345 rwhp, 360 rwtq... stock internally.

              Current Ride: 2006 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - spec.B #312 of 500

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jay 02 TA ws6
                This is where my first post of relative motion comes in to play. From the control tower, the car could move 1 mph forward and the the treadmill move 1 mph backwards... that would mean the wheels are turning at 2 mph.

                Or... as observed from the control tower, the car could be stationary if the wheel's velocity exactly matched the treadmill's.
                That's correct. The similarity of the car to the plane is that the speed is measured to a non moving point not to the speed of the treadmill or the speed indicator in the car or airplane.
                2002 Electron Blue Vette, 1SC, FE3/Z51, G92 3.15 gears, 308.9 RWHP 321.7 RWTQ (before any mods), SLP headers, Z06 exhaust, MSD Ignition Wires, AC Delco Iridium Spark Plugs, 160 t-stat, lots of ECM tuning

                1995 Z28, many mods, SOLD

                A proud member of the "F-Body Dirty Dozen"

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Jay 02 TA ws6
                  Your freebody diagram is in error because there is no rearward acceleratory force acting on the plane. The rearward force of acceleration acts upon the wheels only - and because the wheels spin freely, they exert no force on the plane. Therefore, the only acceleratory force on the plane is forward (actually, its rearward, thus moving the plane forward - but you get the idea), and the plane moves and will take off.

                  You are stuck picturing the same thing I was - a stationary plane to an observer in the control tower - yet in reality, that's a physical impossibility.

                  Bingo. Jay is seeing things clearly.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Joe 1320
                    Bingo. Jay is seeing things clearly.
                    Yet technically there is a drag force acting on the airplane in the opposite direction as the thrust force.
                    Tracy
                    2002 C5 M6 Convertible
                    1994 Z28 M6 Convertible
                    Current Mods:
                    SLP Ultra-Z functional ramair, SS Spoiler, STB, SFCs, Headers, Clutch, Bilstein Shocks, and TB Airfoil. 17x9 SS rims with Goodyear tires, 160F T-Stat, MSD Blaster Coil, Taylor wires, Hurst billet shifter, Borla catback with QTP e-cutout, Tuned PCM, 1LE Swaybars, 1LE driveshaft, ES bushings, White gauges, C5 front brakes, !CAGS, Bose/Soundstream audio, CST leather interior, synthetic fluids

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TraceZ
                      Yet technically there is a drag force acting on the airplane in the opposite direction as the thrust force.
                      OK, OK... but if you want to get that technical, then you have to take in to account the friction of the bearings and that the wheels actually do exert a miniscule amount of force on the plane in a rearward direction... we have to ignore the small things like that, because the thrust force that moves the plane forward is much, much greater.
                      Former Ride: 2002 Pontiac Trans Am WS6 - 345 rwhp, 360 rwtq... stock internally.

                      Current Ride: 2006 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - spec.B #312 of 500

                      Comment


                      • The point is that the force of the engine is being exerted on the air, not the treadmill. The wheels are freewheeling and only used in this application to support weight.

                        Comment


                        • I'd say we have beat this horse to death. 117 beatings so far.
                          2002 Electron Blue Vette, 1SC, FE3/Z51, G92 3.15 gears, 308.9 RWHP 321.7 RWTQ (before any mods), SLP headers, Z06 exhaust, MSD Ignition Wires, AC Delco Iridium Spark Plugs, 160 t-stat, lots of ECM tuning

                          1995 Z28, many mods, SOLD

                          A proud member of the "F-Body Dirty Dozen"

                          Comment


                          • That's it...dangit! I'm calling MythBusters! I'm sure if anyone can come up with a real-world test for this, then they can. Let's all find a way to submit ideas to the show and get those suckers to settle this once and for all! LOL I'm serious. Stop laughing.

                            By the way...it will fly.

                            2000 Black Camaro w/3800 V6. Hotchkis STB, Whisper Lid, K&N, Flowmaster exhaust.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by TODD 2000 V6 CAMARO
                              That's it...dangit! I'm calling MythBusters! I'm sure if anyone can come up with a real-world test for this, then they can. Let's all find a way to submit ideas to the show and get those suckers to settle this once and for all! LOL I'm serious. Stop laughing.

                              By the way...it will fly.
                              Here's the link to mythbuster's submissions page. I have not read to see if this one is there or not.
                              http://community.discovery.com/1/Ope...4&f=9701967776
                              2002 Electron Blue Vette, 1SC, FE3/Z51, G92 3.15 gears, 308.9 RWHP 321.7 RWTQ (before any mods), SLP headers, Z06 exhaust, MSD Ignition Wires, AC Delco Iridium Spark Plugs, 160 t-stat, lots of ECM tuning

                              1995 Z28, many mods, SOLD

                              A proud member of the "F-Body Dirty Dozen"

                              Comment


                              • I'd say we have beat this horse to death. 117 beatings so far.
                                No fights either....
                                96 Camaro Z28/A4,Vortech elbow,Moroso CAI,Flowmaster.Addco PHR,LCA,160* Stat,pcmforless,1LE Driveshaft,1LE A/C delete pulley,1LE Front sway bar,Strut brace,sub frames, LT4 knock module,255 lph pump,Cutout,

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X