Will it take off ?!

Post by **Billy Whiz** » 19 Jul 2006, 23:30

threeyardmiss wrote:If the plane does take off, then whats the big fuss about all these jet powered on the spot take off jets? Why dont they just bung a big conveyor belt on these war ships?

Believe it or not, the Navy did look into this idea. Or a form of it.

Post by **threeyardmiss** » 19 Jul 2006, 23:40

Fuzzy Logic wrote:the conveyor belt still needs to be as long as the runway is.

So you dont need the conveyor belt at all? If its as long as the runway...

Post by **snout** » 19 Jul 2006, 23:52

Just imagine the runway is a moebius strip... a bit like this thread!

Post by **DixieDean** » 19 Jul 2006, 23:53

I think this whole thread should be locked

Post by **uncsimes** » 20 Jul 2006, 07:30

threeyardmiss wrote:
Fuzzy Logic wrote:the conveyor belt still needs to be as long as the runway is.
So you dont need the conveyor belt at all? If its as long as the runway...

Well, in theory, airplanes don't need a conveyor belt to take off, just a normal runway will do...

as long as there's enough room to get up the necessary airspeed, bingo.

Can't believe this is still running

Post by **dead parrot** » 20 Jul 2006, 09:33

this thread is probably still running because someone has likened Aston Villa to a plane attempting to take off while on an opposing conveyor belt?

Post by **murf** » 20 Jul 2006, 09:37

dead parrot wrote:this thread is probably still running because someone has likened Aston Villa to a plane attempting to take off while on an opposing conveyor belt?

But Doug Ellis built a brick wall and DO'L taxied the plane until its nose butted against the wall. A new captain is being looked for but he may be put off by the current situation even if he can negotiate his way across the conveyor belt to get to the steps up.

Post by **Patrician** » 20 Jul 2006, 17:06

This is why it flys!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cBQJiggLyPY& ... umbo%20car

Post by **snout** » 20 Jul 2006, 22:12

But would it have taken off if the tarmac had melted in all this hot weather?

Post by **Fido** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:20

I asked my flatmate who has a degree in aviation. He said "There's no chance in hell it would take off".

Especially since there is no wind.

Post by **stormy** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:21

oh no...........here we go!

Post by **stormy** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:21

oh no...........here we go!

Post by **murf** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:23

Fido wrote:I asked my flatmate who has a degree in aviation. He said "There's no chance in hell it would take off".

Especially since there is no wind.

How did (s)he get a degree when (s)he incapable of reading a question correctly?

Post by **barry** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:26

murf wrote:
Fido wrote:I asked my flatmate who has a degree in aviation. He said "There's no chance in hell it would take off".

Especially since there is no wind.
How did (s)he get a degree when (s)he incapable of reading a question correctly?

you never read that post correctly!

Fido asked her flatmate - she never said the flatmate read this question (or the other 16 pages of answers I'm guessing!)

Post by **murf** » 17 Nov 2006, 09:40

barry wrote:you never read that post correctly!

True or I would have picked up it was a he and not bothered with the open bracket s close bracket.

Post by **theswinger** » 17 Nov 2006, 12:32

Lift is generated by the vacuum created under the wing as the air is forced under the flap and so the pressure drops. When the flap moves then the air is routed and so provides lift. But if the plane is static then none of the weight has been reduced through kanetic enregy so requires VTOL engines like the Harrier has..

Post by **Patrick@SquadGod** » 17 Nov 2006, 12:41

maybe

Post by **Madchester** » 17 Nov 2006, 12:47

i had a feeling something 'orrible from the past would rear it's head again

Post by **AKNel1** » 17 Nov 2006, 12:50

Can somebody not forward this to Mythbusters or Brainiac

Post by **Madchester** » 17 Nov 2006, 12:58

oh no...

Post by **murf** » 17 Nov 2006, 14:03

theswinger wrote:Lift is generated by the vacuum created under the wing as the air is forced under the flap and so the pressure drops. When the flap moves then the air is routed and so provides lift. But if the plane is static then none of the weight has been reduced through kanetic enregy so requires VTOL engines like the Harrier has..

Aye but this plane isn't static. A fact the flat-earth society are still failing to grasp.

I'll come round later with my etch-a-sketch and prove it if you like

Post by **uncsimes** » 17 Nov 2006, 14:03

AKNel1 wrote:Can somebody not forward this to Mythbusters or Brainiac

no need. it's pretty obvious that it takes off as long as you read the question properly and realise that the motion of the 'runway' doesn't stop the plane moving forward and taking off as normal.

Post by **Madchester** » 17 Nov 2006, 14:06

not listening! not listening!

la dee da dee da...

Post by **The Jezster** » 17 Nov 2006, 14:19

AKNel1 wrote:Can somebody not forward this to Mythbusters or Brainiac

Already been done.

Mythbusters website has about 500 threads on the thing, with simple people asking the question again without bothering to look through the site and then being flamed for being idiotic and pointed in the right direction.

It DOES take off by the way, just incase anyone was still under the misguided impression it doesnt.

Worth a look if you have time, I did after this thread (actually towards the end as we were debating it). Dont know the link and cant be arsed looking, sorry.

Brainiac didnt get back to us, although we suspect that they have thousands of the same question and its not worth replying.

Post by **Raisin** » 17 Nov 2006, 16:55

If I was standing on the wing of the plane (which I could do since the velocity of the plane and the runway cancel each other out) trying to fly a kite in no wind, would it fly?

If not, how could the plane?

OK, having probably demonstrated my complete ignorance of physics and aerodynamics in my only contribution to this thread, I'll wait to get flamed.

Post by **murf** » 17 Nov 2006, 17:22

Raisin wrote:the velocity of the plane and the runway cancel each other out

That is the incorrect assumption and the crux of the whole thing.....

Post by **uncsimes** » 17 Nov 2006, 17:31

murf wrote:
Raisin wrote:the velocity of the plane and the runway cancel each other out
That is the incorrect assumption and the crux of the whole thing.....

yep - the runway simply serves to hold the 'plane up on its wheels so that it can get up to take off velocity. Whether it's moving or not is irrelevant as the force pushing the plane forwards is the action of the jet engine, and nothing to do with the 'planes interaction with the runway. Once it clicks that a plane is not driven through its wheels, it should be a simple step to realise that the plane will take off (as long as the moving conveyor is as long as a standard runway)

Post by **Alchemist** » 17 Nov 2006, 22:06

Fido wrote:I asked my flatmate who has a degree in aviation. He said "There's no chance in hell it would take off".

Especially since there is no wind.

He may have a degree in aviation but He clearly majored in being a eff..

It took off months ago and will do for ever more.....

Post by **snout** » 17 Nov 2006, 22:21

Oh no not this again...

Post by **theswinger** » 17 Nov 2006, 22:51

The plane must be propelled forward or the wieght stays constant,and so too heavy.Its like jumping up in the air on a moving train,you come back down where you were.not flung into the partition [except on VirginTrains

}

Login • Register

Will it take off ?!

Will it take off ?!