Negative The "The (One and Only) '0846' Debate Thread" has been running since 11/11/2003 - over 12 years.
This was only supposed to be 10 pages. Trick question and doesn’t matter. No airspeed as seen by the wings, no flight.
The wing will require lift, for the airplane to achieve flight. With this experiment, by pulling back on the stick will result in the airplane not lifting off of the ground - no flight. The elevator will not be able to pull up the nose of the aircraft.
No such word as "IRREGARDLESS". You can say "regardless", or "irrespective", but don't combine the two.
missed that thread so far, so funny to read some posts LOL Topic was solved on page 1, 1million posts later we're here
Since that question has been solved, here's a new one: How much does gravity play in the descent of an airliner? Or is it 95% flaps and engines still under most throttle until landing? Does gravity play more of a role than wind-direction and air speed for something like a C172?
Yes. The function of flaps is to reduce altitude without increasing air speed. Without gravity, the plane would never land.
Spicedriver answered that. Was the question solved? I saw loads of does and doesn't. Now I don't want to start it off again but other than the voting (suggesting it would not take off) I see no clear answer because it would take off
I realize that without gravity, you are in space. Rephrasing the question, during descent for landing under normal conditions, do pilots throttle-back some and let gravity pull the plane down, or... fly the plane in, using flaps, more than gravity, to drop altitude?
In a small plane, like a 172, the descent is started by reducing engine power. Typical cruise RPM for a 172 would be around 2400 rpm and a descent-to-land might start by reducing the engine rpm's to 1500 or so. The pilot pitches the nose down (or up) for a specific airspeed. Flaps are added as the plane slows down, typically in 3 separate 10-degree increments. A typical flight pattern for landing might have the following 3 legs to it: - 75 knots with 10-degrees of flaps (descending at end of downwind leg) - 70 knots with 20-degrees of flaps (base leg) - 65 knots with 30-degrees of flaps (final) The airspeed is maintained by pitching the nose down a bit more as you add flaps.
until the treadmill or airplane goes into motion, the plane on the stationary treadmill has no motion, hence no airflow over the foils, no airflow over foils, no flight headwind can substitute for forward motion, create enough headwind a plane can lift off and land without any forward motion like a helicopter or consider a kite on tether no forward motion, yet with air flow there is flight
If it was a car on a treadmill yes, there would be no forward motion. Because the forward motion of a car is produced by spinning the wheels. However with an airplane, the forward motion is produced by a propeller, or turbofan engine moving air.
So, a rear propeller plane like a Rutan VariEze would not take off? Like a car on a treadmill, there would be no movement of air where the wings are (because the wings are ahead of the prop). .
I think what's he's saying is two step... 1) prop moves plane 2) that creates air over the wings. that would be same for pusher.
But, the only way the plane can move forward is if the treadmill does not speed up quickly enough to compensate for the forward speed increase. And, this is not what the premise says, it says the treadmill speeds up exactly fast enough to keep the plane in a single position. (I'm sure a similar point was made probably about 2500 posts ago in this never-ending thread. ) .
I was just talking about user's point pull pusher doesn't have anything to do with it. I think 99% agree plane needs movement to fly, the division comes from defining bounds around an unbounded question. treadmill really doesn't have anything do with it, wheels reduce friction, but a ski plane could still take off on pavement or a treadmill.
This. The question wording. Reality is a moving conveyor will only affect a 'vehicle' that has power passed through the wheels which are in contact with the road or stupid conveyor as in this case. An aircraft does not have drive through the wheels.
the original question is posed with misdirection, it is amazing how many don't get it and use interesting totally unrelated concepts in search for support of their answers... obviously everyone slept through their basic physics class :=)
