Plane

[SteveW86]

I'm surprised that the general view seems to be no.
I mean if it used it wheels like a car then maybe but.....

How does an aeroplane get it's forward momentum.

From the engines, but the plane isn’t moving so there is no lift caused by the flow of air over the wings.

Any airflow created by the engines would flow into the engine and not over the wings creating any lift.

 

[Red devil]

A question right up my street, love it, but I won't kill the thread just yet - where's the fun in that?

Someone will still say you're wrong

 

[Deleted member 35927]

From the engines, but the plane isn’t moving so there is no lift caused by the flow of air over the wings.

Any airflow created by the engines would flow into the engine and not over the wings creating any lift.

The plane moves forward in the air as a result of the thrust from the jets. That there is a conveyor belt under is of no consequence. The plane will be able to take off.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Someone will still say you're wrong

Only if he is. So far im surpised only I'm right.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Ah the old plane on a conveyor belt

Impossible to prove either way

There was a program a few years back where they got a load of scientists

Half said no because not enough upward lift half said yes because the engines would give enough thrust to get it up

 

[Deleted member 35927]

As he's not started it with "without Googling" we might be safe

What you can hear now is the sound of much googling and deciding if it's worth trying to present obscure scientific theories as fact or just agree it will take off

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Ah the old plane on a conveyor belt

Impossible to prove either way

There was a program a few years back where they got a load of scientists

Half said no because not enough upward lift half said yes because the engines would give enough thrust to get it up

Oh dear , thats not true at all. In no world is this a 50/50 call.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Oh dear , thats not true at all. In no world is this a 50/50 call.

Prove it either way

 

[SteveW86]

The plane moves forward in the air as a result of the thrust from the jets. That there is a conveyor belt under is of no consequence. The plane will be able to take off.

On a normal runway, the thrust from the engine is pushing the plane forward, it moves because the wheels are turning on the ground.

Without the wheels turning that’s a lot of friction to overcome.

On the treadmill, the plane is stationary, the only thing moving is the air getting sucked into the engine.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Prove it either way

On the contrary, show me these scientists who can't decide.

 

[SteveW86]

Prove it either way

I really wish my tee time was before 2:30 so I didn’t have time on my hands to be in here

 

[Deleted member 35927]

On a normal runway, the thrust from the engine is pushing the plane forward, it moves because the wheels are turning on the ground.

Without the wheels turning that’s a lot of friction to overcome.

On the treadmill, the plane is stationary, the only thing moving is the air getting sucked into the engine.

It moves because of the thrust from the jets, planes don't need wheels to take off.

 

[SteveW86]

It moves because of the thrust from the jets, planes don't need wheels to take off.

Why do planes have wheels?

 

[RichA]

It moves because of the thrust from the jets, planes don't need wheels to take off.

Any idea why the 747 needs 2 miles of runway to reach its takeoff speed of 180mph?
If speed relative to the air it's in is irrelevant then surely it could just smash the engines up to full boost and have instant wheels up.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Any idea why the 747 needs 2 miles of runway to reach its takeoff speed of 180mph?
If speed relative to the air it's in is irrelevant then surely it could just smash the engines up to full boost and have instant wheels up.

Because it's heavy, like very heavy.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

Why do planes have wheels?

To use when taking off and landing as it's the most efficient way in general to keep resistance down during take off , but you can use skis or no wheels at all.

 

[SteveW86]

To use when taking off and landing as it's the most efficient way in general to keep resistance down during take off , but you can use skis or no wheels at all.

Yes, you could. But do you think the standard engines on a 747 would provide enough thrust to make it move if it was sat on pads?

 

[RichA]

Because it's heavy, like very heavy.

That does not even remotely address the question asked, in relation to the problem.
We've already established that the wheels are a red herring and you've asserted that relative forward motion through the air is unnecessary for takeoff.

 

[Deleted member 35927]

That does not even remotely address the question asked, in relation to the problem.
We've already established that the wheels are a red herring and you've asserted that relative forward motion through the air is unnecessary for takeoff.

What ? Sorry you've lost me. Not asserted that at all. You're making stuff up my friend.

 

[Hazard]

Here's a clue to the answer:

If it was a car on the conveyor belt then the car speedo would read whatever the belt is doing.

Substitute car for aircraft and the Air Speed Indicator in the cockpit would read zero. Aircraft simply don't give a hoot about wheel speed.