our networks
tlcanimal planetthe science channelmilitary channelthe health channel
site search
shop now
 

MythBusters

 
    Forums    MythBusters    MythBusters Episode Discussion    Plane on a Conveyor Belt/Treadmill (aka PoCB/PoaT) Episode - Discuss it Here!
Page 1 ... 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 ... 234

Moderators: mythmod
Go
New
Find
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
roofingguy
Senior Member
Registered: 10-28-07
Posts: 4904
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
don't you mean:
the question, as stated,.....
because what is stated and what is tested is not always the same.


Well, "as per the stated question being tested". The Mythbusters (and everyone else) realizes that the truck/tarp combination is a reasonable approximation of the setup, whether an exact match or not.

quote:
i'm still waiting for you to produce the belt as described in the setup.


I've got better things to do -- I didn't realize you saw me as your lackey.
saintj858
Senior Member
Registered: 04-25-07
Posts: 157
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
So why is anyone arguing with this graham person? It's pretty obvious that he/she/it is just arguing for the sake of arguing.
mythmod
Moderator
Senior Member
Registered: 07-20-07
Posts: 2983
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
graham,

I don't see you coming up with a way to simulate a treadmill/conveyor belt for a full scale test either.

If you guys can't play nice, I'll lock this puppy again and remove every trace of this subject off the entire board (save this thread).

It's amazing that you guys are spending all your time arguing theory and semantics when you can't even discuss this without getting snippy, snide and rude.

I suggest if you can not continue the conversation and ignore the snide comment, you need to walk away. This goes for graham, roofingguy and anyone else that feels it necessary to take jabs.

Got it?

Good. If you have a problem with this, email me. mythmod@gmail.com. I'll most likely be online all day.

MythMod

(Edit - all the arguing and snipping at each other will NOT change the outcome of this show segment. Please refer to this thread - http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/8211994059 and this thread http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/5281906159 and the link contained in it. They are NOT going to revisit this any time soon - MM)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mythmod,
bigcheese
Junior Member
Registered: 04-24-08
Posts: 1
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
It seems to me that the question may have been misinterpreted by the mythbusters team. The question was that if the plane was going the same speed as a treadmill which was going in the opposite direction of the plane, then the plane's engine would be working at the potential it does when it is taking off normally. However, I observed that the airplane was moving relative to it's surroundings, despite the tarp underneath counteracting the propellers thrust. Therefore, I think that the test was not effective and thus the conclusion is inaplicable.
reillyjb
Senior Member
Registered: 10-26-07
Posts: 1377
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
They tested the myth and the treadmill had no affect on the plane.

The treadmill is to the plane as the wind is too your car.
feldspar99
Senior Member
Registered: 06-01-06
Posts: 597
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
It seems to me that the question may have been misinterpreted by the mythbusters team. The question was that if the plane was going the same speed as a treadmill which was going in the opposite direction of the plane, then the plane's engine would be working at the potential it does when it is taking off normally. However, I observed that the airplane was moving relative to it's surroundings, despite the tarp underneath counteracting the propellers thrust. Therefore, I think that the test was not effective and thus the conclusion is inaplicable.


There are two (more or less) problems with that.

Nothing in the myth says the plane is stationary. The plane was going the same speed as the belt if you are using airspeed (which is how you measure the speed of a plane).

Some people insist that they measure the planes speed relative to the belt (or wheel speed), which they think will result in the plane being stationary. There are a number of reasons that does not make sense but the most obvious is that the only way for the plane to be stationary is if the engines are off or barley idling.

If the pilot is applying the same thrust he would normally use to take off there is nothing the conveyer belt can do to stop the plane from moving forward and taking off. It does not matter if the belt is going 25 mph or 1000 mph. The plane will not need any more thrust than it does for a normal takeoff.
lockedkeys
Member
Registered: 04-21-08
Posts: 20
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
The "myth" wasn't about the momentum of a traveling plane on the ground; it was about the acceleration of a suspended aircraft. And since the point of the myth was about preventing a plane from take-off, then the momentum of a plane traveling on the ground is irrelevant.
Subductionzone
Senior Member
Registered: 01-31-08
Posts: 3390
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
What are you talking about lockedkeys? Any idea of "preventing" the plane form taking off is in your head. It has been shown countless times in this thread that the belt cannot apply a force to stop the plane from moving forward and taking off. And rellyjib you are close, the treadmill would have LESS of an effect on the plane than wind resistance does to a car.
lockedkeys
Member
Registered: 04-21-08
Posts: 20
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
Originally posted by Subductionzone:
What are you talking about lockedkeys? Any idea of "preventing" the plane form taking off is in your head. It has been shown countless times in this thread that the belt cannot apply a force to stop the plane from moving forward and taking off. And rellyjib you are close, the treadmill would have LESS of an effect on the plane than wind resistance does to a car.


I should have noted the aircraft to be 'suspended' by landing gears, instead of just saying "a suspending aircraft". And I know a conveyor belt can't stop a "accelerating" plane. I'm just trying to reach a common ground with the "no-flyers".
graham75
Senior Member
Registered: 03-22-07
Posts: 871
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
Originally posted by mythmod:
graham,

I don't see you coming up with a way to simulate a treadmill/conveyor belt for a full scale test either.

If you guys can't play nice, I'll lock this puppy again and remove every trace of this subject off the entire board (save this thread).

It's amazing that you guys are spending all your time arguing theory and semantics when you can't even discuss this without getting snippy, snide and rude.

I suggest if you can not continue the conversation and ignore the snide comment, you need to walk away. This goes for graham, roofingguy and anyone else that feels it necessary to take jabs.

Got it?

Good. If you have a problem with this, email me. mythmod@gmail.com. I'll most likely be online all day.

MythMod

(Edit - all the arguing and snipping at each other will NOT change the outcome of this show segment. Please refer to this thread - http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/8211994059 and this thread http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/5281906159 and the link contained in it. They are NOT going to revisit this any time soon - MM)

theoretical. on paper. (in either case I don't have to simulate a full scale test)

vs

you can't do that in real life.

but the whole point of the request was the 'match exactly' part of the belt setup.
For what the show did their setup was reasonably good.

guess where i have been coming from when talking about a belt that can exactly match the plane speed, whether the plane speed is airspeed or its speed across the belt surface.
i've gone so far as to say that my argument works only for a narrow specific set of circumstances. I've repeatedly spelled those out and they are repeatedly ignored or changed.
roofingguy
Senior Member
Registered: 10-28-07
Posts: 4904
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
i've gone so far as to say that my argument works only for a narrow specific set of circumstances. I've repeatedly spelled those out and they are repeatedly ignored or changed.


No, just repeatedly shown to be wrong. No matter how theoretical or instant, the plane still needs to move for there to be a relative motion between it and the belt surface. 0+0 never gives non-zero or changes in value.
-rational-
Senior Member
Registered: 07-03-07
Posts: 967
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
Originally posted by graham75:
quote:
Originally posted by mythmod:
graham,

I don't see you coming up with a way to simulate a treadmill/conveyor belt for a full scale test either.

If you guys can't play nice, I'll lock this puppy again and remove every trace of this subject off the entire board (save this thread).

It's amazing that you guys are spending all your time arguing theory and semantics when you can't even discuss this without getting snippy, snide and rude.

I suggest if you can not continue the conversation and ignore the snide comment, you need to walk away. This goes for graham, roofingguy and anyone else that feels it necessary to take jabs.

Got it?

Good. If you have a problem with this, email me. mythmod@gmail.com. I'll most likely be online all day.

MythMod

(Edit - all the arguing and snipping at each other will NOT change the outcome of this show segment. Please refer to this thread - http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/8211994059 and this thread http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9401967776/m/5281906159 and the link contained in it. They are NOT going to revisit this any time soon - MM)

theoretical. on paper. (in either case I don't have to simulate a full scale test)

vs

you can't do that in real life.

but the whole point of the request was the 'match exactly' part of the belt setup.
For what the show did their setup was reasonably good.

guess where i have been coming from when talking about a belt that can exactly match the plane speed, whether the plane speed is airspeed or its speed across the belt surface.
i've gone so far as to say that my argument works only for a narrow specific set of circumstances. I've repeatedly spelled those out and they are repeatedly ignored or changed.


You don't have an argument, you don't understand the argument, you don't understand the physics, you don't understand the maths, you don't understand anything.
mb owns all
Junior Member
Registered: 04-26-08
Posts: 2
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
to begin with i wasnt to sure it wwould take off or stay stationary but after watching that episode i started to understand why it took off.



ps:i should have known it was busted because my dad is a pilot
-rational-
Senior Member
Registered: 07-03-07
Posts: 967
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
For those of us in the UK the excitement mounts as this episode is going to be aired this Thursday at 9pm on Discovery. Razz
reillyjb
Senior Member
Registered: 10-26-07
Posts: 1377
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
Originally posted by -rational-:
For those of us in the UK the excitement mounts as this episode is going to be aired this Thursday at 9pm on Discovery. Razz


Shall we take a poll on how many pages get added to this thread from that?
Willgamer25
Senior Member
Registered: 01-06-08
Posts: 63
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
I'd say anywhere from 10 to 40 depending on how stubborn they are. I bet we see 1-3 guys in here who refuse to give up their point.
reillyjb
Senior Member
Registered: 10-26-07
Posts: 1377
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
quote:
Originally posted by Willgamer25:
I'd say anywhere from 10 to 40 depending on how stubborn they are. I bet we see 1-3 guys in here who refuse to give up their point.


Like..
The plane can't fly because it needs air over the wings to generate lift. Roll Eyes
-rational-
Senior Member
Registered: 07-03-07
Posts: 967
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
Please God don't let British members embarrass me!

We probably have quite a fewer number of pilots proportionally in the UK as it is much smaller than the US and England ( rather than the UK ) is the most densely populated country in the world bar Bangladesh and so everyone is close to everyone else anyway, and as it seems pilots equals getting it wrong we might not suffer so much!
Subductionzone
Senior Member
Registered: 01-31-08
Posts: 3390
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
I'm sure that there are going to be a good number of no flies. Bad science with a British accent Wink
ToneyS
Junior Member
Registered: 03-24-08
Posts: 2
Posted   Hide PostReply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post  
Yes, I think I can clarify it better. Yes indeed the plane would be carried backward by the belt before the plane's engine turns on. But once the engine causes the propeller to grab the air, the plane is resisting being dragged backward because now the whole plane is clutching onto the air. So all the belt does from this moment onward is to turn the wheels and cause the wheels to rotate at roughly twice the ground speed as the plane would move forward at take off speed.

However if the plane were not sitting on its wheels, if they plane's legs or body were attached directly onto the belt itself, it would be a different story all together, the belt would indeed be carrying the plane back and thus anti effect the forward motion of the plane and the plane would just sit there unmoved.
Thank you mates ! ToneyS.
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community Page 1 ... 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 ... 234 
 

    Forums    MythBusters    MythBusters Episode Discussion    Plane on a Conveyor Belt/Treadmill (aka PoCB/PoaT) Episode - Discuss it Here!