1,501

(162 replies, posted in General)

> A10 wrote:

> On a conveyor at the planes max speed the plane will turn on it's engines and push against the stationary air. No matter how fast it's wheels are spinning it will move forward relative to the tree. It will take off in it's normal takeoff distance relative to the tree no matter how fast the conveyor is moving. The planes wheels are free moving. By the time the plane takes off the wheels will be spinning twice as fast as the speed of the plane but the plan doesn't move forward by depending on the traction of the wheels. It moves forward by pushing the air which unlike the conveyor is not moving.


i agree, but that wasnt the question. "Imagine a 747 is sitting on a conveyor belt, as wide and long as a runway. The conveyor belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels, moving in the opposite direction. Can the plane take off?" read the OP, NOOB

1,502

(162 replies, posted in General)

it is physically impossible for the wheels on the airplane to be rolling on the treadmill at the same speed but in the opposite direction, and be anything but stationary laterally. if the plane moves forward while on the ground,t he wheels have to be moving faster then the treadmill. so given the condition that the wheels and treadmill are moving at the same speed in oppositte directions, the question is, can the plane take off from a stationary position. no, it cannot, unless  its one of acouple planes that were designed to.

1,503

(162 replies, posted in General)

this is a good example, why i dont bother with intelligent posts in the forums. people dont care what the aerospace engineer says, they believe what they want to believe and totally ignore other people's points.

1,504

(44 replies, posted in Politics)

"The concept that any major nation as we know it will have a civil war, or at least a guns and armies civil war, is stupid. You will have a political civil war, and in the US that has been going on for ages, a complete us v them mentality between democrats and republicans. It seems there is a lot of 'hard-core' people on both sides that are completly blind to the concept of democracy itself and to the truth of some matters. You might not agree with Obama, but you are now a minority, this means there won't be a civil war because what you have now is what the people wanted. I know its hard to accept when you are wrong, but deal with it."

i agree

"What I love about some of you though is your complete disregard for what yo uhave said before. Not to long ago someone could of said how shit Bush had done compared to Clinton, and the standrad type response from the idiotic right wing-ers from here would be "Clinton didn't do good, he ran the economy into the ground, he was given a great economy from Bush sr & Regan then preceeded to ruin it, so that when Bush came in it was shaky and he did his best, and better than a democrat would of done." So the general theme was the economic trend for a president's term(s) came from the one before. Regan/Bush = good times for Clinton, who in tern = bad times for bush. However now we are in the worst economic crises, which has happened at the end of Bush jr's 2nd term and somehow it is Obama's fault? well done guys, prooving us 'left wing weaners' right all along..."

no, what would happen would be, a left wing person would say Democrats are good for the economy, just look at what the economy was like during Clinton's administration. and then moderates and right wingers would say, if Clinton was so good the economy, what exactly did he do that was good for the economy? he didnt do anything, so he wasnt the cause. now if you look at what Obama is doing, he's doing stuff that would harm the economy, and the economy is falling; are we in a recession because of him? no. is what he doing helping the economy? many economists both left anf right would say he's not helping the economy. to say that theres a delay to the next president is a childishly simplistic way to look at the economy. different enviroments and different actions will cause different changes during different time periods.

1,505

(162 replies, posted in General)

> A10 wrote:

> The treadmill moves the wheels at whatever speed it wants. The conveyor still matches the speed of the wheel. The plane pushes air against air to move. It doesn't push against the ground. Thus a plane can take off on a conveyor . . .


there was never a question if a plane can take off from a conveyor. because the conveyor could be going a fraction of a mile per hour and it would be cake. the question is if the conveyor matched the wheel speed, so that the plane would be stationary, if it could take off. and when the plane is moving forward while still ont he ground, it shows that the conveyor isnt matching the wheel speed, so the experiment is void, its no more impressive then taking off from a conveyor moving at a fraction of a mile per hour.

1,506

(162 replies, posted in General)

the question is if it can be airborne while stationary, not if an airplane's engine is powerful enough to overcome the friction of the wheels.

1,507

(162 replies, posted in General)

"The planes wheels are free. Their friction is close to fixed. Once the thrust overcomes that friction the plane takes off regardless of the conveyor's speed."

once the plane overcomes the friction, then the treadmill is no longer able to match the wheel's speed and the experiment becomes void.

1,508

(162 replies, posted in General)

the video shows him have the wheels able to go faster then the treadmill. if the wheels arent going faster then the treadmill, then the plane is stationary. the only thing that the video shows is that its easy for the wheels to go faster then the treadmill. it doesnt show if a plane can take off when the wheels arent going faster then the treadmill, which would mean the airplane is stationary. the treadmill isnt matching the speed of the wheels when plane is moving forward ont he conveyor belt.

> Wild Flower Soul wrote:

> "can you wait for nationalized healthcare? the government is gonna tell us when to die. and if we want to live long lives, we have to live our lives how the government wants us to live them, or they will refuse us care when we are sick with treatable illnesses."

Yup, that's exactly the point tongue

I don't know lad, but countries with a nationalized healthcare are usually doing (in statistics) better than those without...


if you call the government controlling your life as "better" then i guess you're right.

1,510

(162 replies, posted in General)

either the plane is moving forward or it isnt.  if it is moving forward fast enough regardless of whether its by wheels or prop or jet engine, then it will fly. only exception, i guess if the wind is blowing fast enough, the plane wouldnt have to be moving forward to take off.

1,511

(44 replies, posted in Politics)

"
Can you please try to think things through? Your making everyone here think your like 10-12 years old and trying hard to compete with adults."

thats what everyone appears to me, so i give them kiddie responses so they dont get confused.

1,512

(162 replies, posted in General)

> Einstein wrote:

> No it cannot, this is due to lack of drag on the wings


wouldnt it be do to the lack of lift on the wings? i thought drag is one of the things that airplanes try to minimize because too much drag and the plane cant fly.

1,513

(44 replies, posted in Politics)

Western europe will probably collaspe first, then the US. iots hard to say whether Russia or China will crash next, because Russia crashed recently and doesnt have much to fall from and China is going to be the next powerhouse now that the US is becoming hardcore socialist. i guess it just really depends on the future leaders of both countries.

1,514

(77 replies, posted in General)

> [RPA] Arocalex wrote:

> There is some indecent exposure tho tongue


every time you piss theres indecent exposure, dont bitch about nothing.

1,515

(81 replies, posted in Politics)

there is supposed to be a fresh water shortage in the near future. Allowing the company to control a large supply of the scarce resource.

it would also give the company incredably good publicity.

the amount would be much greater then taking water from the water table.

1,516

(81 replies, posted in Politics)

a number of reasons...

1,517

(81 replies, posted in Politics)

if there was seriously enough proof that global warming exists, there would be companies buy land near glaciers and creating trenches to divert melting water into a lake that would give them fresh water they could sell and would prevent sea lvls from rising. the fact that no companies are doing that tells me, no successful companies beleive global warming is a threat.

we need to vote an asian into office, he'll fix everything!

1,519

(77 replies, posted in General)

never read the comics, but previews look pretty good; gonna wait for my friend to come back from work, which should be any minute and see if/when he wants to go.

way to bitch about bitching.

you grow up during Bush and you hear all these horror stories from conservatives of liberals and you think its like the boogy man, just fiction; but one gets elected to president, and its exactly that bad. trillions spent on nothing, even democratic economists saying they havent seen a President destroy this much wealth, ever. movements to nationalize healthcare and raise taxes of everyone who pays for utilities or gas for their car.

can you wait for nationalized healthcare? the government is gonna tell us when to die. and if we want to live long lives, we have to live our lives how the government wants us to live them, or they will refuse us care when we are sick with treatable illnesses.

1. the guy from the libertarian party, i dont remember his name

2. sure. i didnt want like either major candidate and wanted to promote a third party. also, it wasnt close in my state, so my vote had no impact on who won, so cant blame me for Obama winning my state.

1,524

(50 replies, posted in Politics)

The Jimi Hendrix Experiance and Cream come immediately to mind

1,525

(14 replies, posted in General)

> Chris_Balsz wrote:

> if you don't think you did any you just did Pride.



nope