FliFast

AMEN ! The 747 flies great, goes fast, and makes lotsa noise. But taxiing that thing is harder then having a conversation with my ex-wife.

The thing is too dang big for most taxiways.

Flifast

Thedude

I am so parnoid about dropping a wing gear off in the dirt in a turn on some of those dang narrow taxiways or taking out a edge light.

Thedude

Not to re-hash this thread again but....I though the whole point of the belt was so there was no forward movement. Since this is not a blown wing like a t'prop. There is no airflow over the wing. No airflow = no lift. Wheels can turn at a bizzilion knots till the wheel assemblies catch on fire but still no airflow. Better yet lets just get a giant fan and make it hover while tied down.

But if I should put a Saturn V booster on it, we can over power the lift problem with pure thrust.

Show me the airflow

Planespotta

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tj33k...eature=related

. . . it better not be like this.

Thedude

It probably will but defintely less GAY

and by GAY I do mean homosexual

Planespotta

I think they shook hands for more than 8 seconds

ToiletDuck

Dude the only reason this is argued is because the question isn't well explained. Some see it as the plane sitting on a belt that is moving in the direction the plane needs to go which would basically be doing the exact same thing as a catapult on a carrier. Just taking the aircraft forward really fast. At some point as long as it gets going fast enough forward the aircraft would be able to rotate, lift off, then stall relatively fast, then slam back down.

The other direction people are thinking of it is like a treadmill or a dynamo that they test cars on. The plane sits stationary and the belt moves under it. In that situation you could put a piper cub on there and have it moving a million mph and it wouldn't matter. Since the aircraft has no forward movement through the air it would not lift off.

This happens every time this is talked about. Go back through the three pages of this thread quickly and read. You'll see how you are seeing the belt moving one way with the wheels spinning and the aircraft staying stationary while others are saying the parking break is set and the belt is launching the aircraft forward.

When these debates were originally started it was by a young individual who was thinking of it the way you were, with the stationary aircraft on basically a treadmill. They were debating on if you could make an alternative means besides a runway which was foolish. Some people with half a brain read the question the other way and made a nice elaborate post on how it was possible. People spent so much time going back and forth at one another and making personal attacks that none notice they were viewing the initial setup of the belt and the aircraft completely separate.

mike734

Toilet, no offense, but after reading your post it is clear that you have no idea what this riddle is asking. I suggest you review the axiom: Better to remain silent and be thought the fool than to speak up and remove all doubt.

HSLD

Haven't we seen then the conveyor belt riddle argued ad-nauseum?

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/showthread.php?t=1762

Jakob

Yes, the question is not clear. But if you look at it as an "ideal" situation as you usually do when looking at physiks, you will have to assume that there is no friction! This means that the tires on the conveyor and the speed of the conveyer is completely unimportant. All that matters is the thrust of the engines.

Now if you say, that's not realistic and that there is friction, all right, there is, but not enough to make the conveyor stop the plane. It would probably exceed max. tire speed before the plane can take off, but that can't be taken into account.

So, yes, the plane will take off! It simply doesn't matter how fast the belt or the tires are going as the friction loss is small (unless you apply brakes, but that would be stupid...).

Blue skies to you from a really rainy Germany!
-Jakob

P.S. And yeah, it feels nice to be arguing with "real" pilots about something I believe I understood as a lowly glider pilot and airline wannabe...