And tires... Haha.
I also hate the shift knob. Plus what the hell kind of passenger seat is that crazy business?
The Ohio Random Thread... aka We Should Probably Be Working
- Thread starter THE Phen
- Start date
And tires... Haha.
I also hate the shift knob. Plus what the hell kind of passenger seat is that crazy business?
Fiji Mazda3
Member
- :
- 2014 Ford Focus ST
s***, I'd marry her too. Any woman will to ride shotgun while you race is a keeper. My wife won't even come and watch me run!
And you married her so high five! Tessa would like to come to an auto-x but she's always at work or gigs. My mission is to get her to auto-x her Mini though.
I was going through some pics and saw this one from a cookout. Christmas tree!?
I was going through some pics and saw this one from a cookout. Christmas tree!?
It's the wording of the question that he posted. Yes a plane will take off from a conveyor belt because it will just move forward as if the conveyor was not there. The first question said that the wheels are not moving forward (relative to the ground, not the conveyor) therefore the plane will not take off because there is only enough thrust being made to make up for the resistance of the spinning bearings, which is probably less than idle speed. The plane will be stationary according to the rules set in the first question. If it generated enough thrust to take off, the conditions of the first question would no longer be met.
The original question is kinda far up so I'll re post it.
The two questions are not the same. If the rules set in the questions are followed, the plane will not be generating enough thrust to fly. If it was generating enough thrust, the rules set in the scenario are broken. I forget the logic rule that defines this, but it's out there somewhere.
The second scenario, yes the plane will fly because the rules of the hypothetical situation are not preventing the plane from moving forward on the conveyor belt.
So yes, the results are different.
The two questions are not the same. If the rules set in the questions are followed, the plane will not be generating enough thrust to fly. If it was generating enough thrust, the rules set in the scenario are broken. I forget the logic rule that defines this, but it's out there somewhere.
The second scenario, yes the plane will fly because the rules of the hypothetical situation are not preventing the plane from moving forward on the conveyor belt.
So yes, the results are different.
I see an MSP w/ a CF trunk
it's really the same question because the wheels are not powered by the plane just like the rear wheels on your MS3. The wheels are moving at the speed of the plane in both questions with the conveyor belt moving the same speed in the opposite direction.
The propeller is providing the thrust for take off
Last edited:
At this point the questions become logic and word problems, not simply "Will a plane take off on a conveyor belt". Yes a plane will given enough air speed, but not if the conditions set in scenario 1 remain true, since there will be 0 air speed. As soon as the planes wheels starts to move faster than the conveyor the original scenario no longer holds true and its on to scenario #2.
Yep Nate already linked that video. Apparently Anthony either didn't watch it or just doesn't understand that the conveyer is irrelevant... I would've thought the stupid plane/conveyer conversation would've been over 10 posts ago.
Your signature disturbs me. Yet it's oddly hypnotic.
Your signature disturbs me. Yet it's oddly hypnotic.
I have seen the mythbusters video, which demonstrates scenario #2, where the plane will indeed fly. Their experiment does not hold true the rules of scenario #1, which would mean the plane is not moving. Not sure if you're not understanding the rules set in #1. The plane has no forward motion or air speed and cannot take off according to #1.
Original forum post was here: http://www.kcsr.org/showthread.php?t=146093&page=9
You can read the consensus.
Original forum post was here: http://www.kcsr.org/showthread.php?t=146093&page=9
You can read the consensus.
princess peach
Member
- :
- '92 Miata, '06 MS6
Its a word game combined with hypothetical scenarios, I could argue why it would take off and why it wouldn't. However, my time is better spent looking at videos of cars I'll never own.
