Can A Plane Take Off On A Treadmill?
Neutered, do the skateboard experiment I posted about earlier, it will help you understand that no matter how fast the treadmill is going, the plane on the treadmill will go just as fast as a plane on a conventional runway using the same amount of thrust.
I understand that the plane will take off. I never EVER said that it was impossible. In fact, my first post even states that it will.
I was making the point that there has to be enough thrust to overcome the friction acting on the wheels.
I was making the point that there has to be enough thrust to overcome the friction acting on the wheels.
Originally Posted by KerryF,Feb 14 2008, 05:32 PM
I guess there are two spoons in that pot you two are stirring. Come on now.
But if you want to get down to that kind of symantics, this one can:
http://www.rchobby.co.uk/radio_contr...fire_-_rc.html
And it would take flight off of a treadmill too.

You know my statement is true though. Treadmill or no treadmill you still need proper speed to generate lift.
Unless you are Superman of course.
Originally Posted by Vi37573r,Feb 15 2008, 03:08 AM
Neutered, do the skateboard experiment I posted about earlier, it will help you understand that no matter how fast the treadmill is going, the plane on the treadmill will go just as fast as a plane on a conventional runway using the same amount of thrust.
Originally Posted by Neutered Sputniks,Feb 14 2008, 06:22 PM
It depends on how much friction there is involved (real world).
In a situation with 0 friction between the axles and the wheels, yes, it would take off.
In a situation with 0 friction between the axles and the wheels, yes, it would take off.
Originally Posted by duboseq,Feb 13 2008, 12:28 PM
Have you ever seen a seagull fly head first into the winds of a hurricane?
It does not work. I've actually seen seagulls fly backwards in a storm!
It does not work. I've actually seen seagulls fly backwards in a storm!
It does not work this way with rolling friction. You go faster...friction stays the same. You go twice as fast...friction stays the same. In fact, I think it actually can go down at some point. So the point is that a plane sitting on a 100000mph conveyor sees the same friction as if that conveyor was going 10mph. And since the plane is not actually moving, it sees no friction from the air....
Originally Posted by Neutered Sputniks,Feb 15 2008, 11:32 AM
I understand that the plane will take off. I never EVER said that it was impossible. In fact, my first post even states that it will.
I was making the point that there has to be enough thrust to overcome the friction acting on the wheels.
I was making the point that there has to be enough thrust to overcome the friction acting on the wheels.
Plane < 10 mph
Treadmill > 10 mph
= Plane 0 mph
...and that simply isn't the case. End of story. No semantics, no wordplay. You were incorrect to say that. Own up.
i got what he was saying after he said he meant wheel speed not ground speed, and he was a little unclear about it. but this thread has been so strung out, all we wanted to know is if the plane would take off. YES. why cant the thread end with that.
we don't need someone coming in here rolling their eyes at us telling us he is an engineer from some aeronautical spot that a plane that has 0 groundspeed is not going to take off because that is obvious and completely argumentative at this point in the thread. why even mention that? to prove what, that a plane will not take off with a groundspeed of 0, no kidding, but how likely is that?
this is how i interpret it. he basically says... "you guys suck at physics. sure a plane can take off on a treadmil but you fail to realize that if it is on a treadmill and the plane boosts itself to just overcome the friction of the wheels and has 0 groundspeed its not going to take off." no kidding, but was that necessary to really say at this point?
we don't need someone coming in here rolling their eyes at us telling us he is an engineer from some aeronautical spot that a plane that has 0 groundspeed is not going to take off because that is obvious and completely argumentative at this point in the thread. why even mention that? to prove what, that a plane will not take off with a groundspeed of 0, no kidding, but how likely is that?
this is how i interpret it. he basically says... "you guys suck at physics. sure a plane can take off on a treadmil but you fail to realize that if it is on a treadmill and the plane boosts itself to just overcome the friction of the wheels and has 0 groundspeed its not going to take off." no kidding, but was that necessary to really say at this point?



