# Plane on a Conveyor - IT TOOK OFF!

Discussion in 'General' started by will., 13 Dec 2007.

?

## Will the plane fly

89 vote(s)
72.4%

34 vote(s)
27.6%
1. ### will.A motorbike of jealousy!

Joined:
2 Mar 2005
Posts:
4,461
20
Last edited: 31 Jan 2008
2. ### SanDmaNMinimodder

Joined:
11 Mar 2004
Posts:
364
9
FINALLY!!!!! A chance to prove to everyone that the damn plane will take off!!!!!

3. ### chrisb2e9Dont do that...

Joined:
18 Jun 2007
Posts:
4,061
46
I was amazed to see that in the end there are still people who dont think that the plane can take off. but if they have done it, then there will be no denying the proof.

Only thing that I am worried about is that mythbusters will screw something up, and get the wrong results.

4. ### crazybobVoice of Reason

Joined:
21 Oct 2004
Posts:
1,123
6
It's actually a really simple question with two answers, one more obvious than the other. The obvious answer, to anyone who knows how airplanes work, is that the plane will take off perfectly if the treadmill is matching the speed of the plane.

The less obvious answer requires a treadmill capable of accelerating indefinitely. If the treadmill is matching the speed of the wheels rather than the fuselage, then the wheels and treadmill will both accelerate at an insane rate and friction in the wheel bearings will prevent the plane from moving relative to the stationary ground. In that case, the plane will not build any airspeed (remember, the wheels are going 10x the speed of light but the fuselage and wings aren't moving) and will not take off. Of course, for a treadmill to be capable of such speeds and accelerations, it would have to be indestructible and either infinitely powerful or massless and frictionless. Because it seems like cheating to apply a normal airplane with all its mass and friction to such a fantastic treadmill, this isn't really an acceptable solution to the problem. It's just something interesting to throw into these discussions.

Due to the difficulty in sourcing unlimited-speed treadmill components, I assume Mythbusters will prove the airplane can take off. I hope so, but I also know Mythbusters has screwed up similarly obvious problems (setting things on fire using mirrors to concentrate sunlight works just fine, but the first time the Mythbusters tried it they failed).

Last edited: 14 Dec 2007
5. ### ClockedYar! It be drivin' me nuts...

Joined:
11 May 2004
Posts:
525
2
Spot on crazybob

The difficulty I see is with keeping the plane "stationary" I just dont think they can match the speed of the plane with it and if the air isn't going over the wings fast enough there won't be enough lift generated.

prediction: the plane will just run down the conveyor belt and off the end with the wheels goin mega fast

6. ### Cabe6403Supreme Commander

Joined:
3 Apr 2007
Posts:
1,205
44
Another thing in a similar vein I'd like to see mythbusters do is build some sort of endless slinky machine to try the whole 'slinky + escalator = endless fun' thing.

Should be interesting either way

7. ### profqwertyWhat's a Dremel?

Joined:
2 Jan 2006
Posts:
1,262
18
The plane would take off. Unless the conveyor was moving so fast the friction of the wheel bearings provided a force backwards equal to the prop's force forwards, whereupon they'd probably friction weld, jam, and send the plane shooting backwards down the conveyor

8. ### will.A motorbike of jealousy!

Joined:
2 Mar 2005
Posts:
4,461
20
Remember, not to discuss whether or not it will take off. That one always ends up in someone writing an essay.

9. ### RambleGinger Nut

Joined:
5 Dec 2005
Posts:
5,595
41
I'll parrot everyone else.
Given frictionless wheels the plane will indeed take off. Anyone else here who disagrees is probably an idiot.

10. ### Jamieex-Bit-Tech code junkie

Joined:
12 Mar 2001
Posts:
8,180
54
It all boils down to the quality of the bearings in the aircrafts wheels.

11. ### Techno-DannDisgruntled kumquat

Joined:
22 Jan 2005
Posts:
1,672
27
And the exact, precise wording of the question. Unfortunately for such a nifty problem, it very quickly comes down to a tiny little difference - does the belt match the plane's forward velocity, or does it match the wheels' rotational velocity?

12. ### VelesDUR HUR

Joined:
18 Nov 2005
Posts:
6,188
34
Wouldn't make any difference because the wheels of the plane don't exert any force on the plane.

13. ### alastorMinimodder

Joined:
6 Sep 2004
Posts:
3,607
59
In a perfect world which obviously doesn't exist...

/hits self for adding to conversation

14. ### KrikkitAll glory to the hypnotoad!Super Moderator

Joined:
21 Jan 2003
Posts:
23,514
392
Jesus Christ. Anyone who even uses 2 brain cells with this problem can see that with standard wheels the plane will definately take off.

Either way, mythbusters will probably say that it's possible... They often don't explore a myth to its logical conclusion, or use wholly inappropriate tests. (Did anyone see the one where they tried to prove the myth about being sucked down with a sinking ship? The tug boat was the size of a postage stamp...)

15. ### chrisb2e9Dont do that...

Joined:
18 Jun 2007
Posts:
4,061
46
yeah I didn't like that one too much. although it was funny watching buddy throwup.

Joined:
18 Apr 2007
Posts:
967
0

17. ### RambleGinger Nut

Joined:
5 Dec 2005
Posts:
5,595
41
The computer you wrote that on was probably made in Taiwan.

18. ### PoisonousIncestuious

Joined:
18 Apr 2007
Posts:
967
0
So it MUST overclock to 47GHz right?

19. ### MoriquendiBit Tech Biker

Joined:
3 Nov 2005
Posts:
1,691
58
profqwerty has it right.

Moriquendi

Joined:
14 Sep 2005
Posts:
9,136