|
Fuckin' Rican...I miss that loon.
|
OK, now let's talk about the seaplane taking off in a current:dancegay:
|
I call :bsflag:on this one.
But it *was* funny.
Originally Posted by samnavy
(Post 63051)
All right, we have a real world test.
I went in to my Airframes shop this morning and told a couple 2nd Class Petty Officers the I bet they couldn't erect a 100ft wide treadmill the entire length of the runway. They laughed and said "come back after lunch, sir." <snip> The three Mazda dealerships in town have been blacklisted. The non-believers won't talk to me and are screaming about a conspiracy. Popular Mechanics called and wanted to talk to the SeaBees about the runway they built, but they'd already disassembled it and had made a barbeque out of the engine they'd stolen. I'm not allowed down in the Airframes shop anymore. But at least i was right.:bigtu: |
Originally Posted by braineack
(Post 63059)
you can save the flash chat convos, i re-read our steamy chats everynight before i go to bed.
Jay |
Originally Posted by bripab007
(Post 63063)
The good thing is we don't typically deal with magical conveyor belts in our discussion of turbocharging Miatas ;-)
Besides it doesn't have to be related. |
Originally Posted by Ben
(Post 63030)
If the wheels/bearings are capable of "freewheeling" about the aircraft, then the unpowered aircraft would remain stationary on the treadmill, relative to the fixed point of reference, as the wheels spin.
Your argument was otherwise convincing, but this is a contradiction. |
And as I realized that, I also realized that wheel speed isn't relevent. The comparative amount of friction is so low, it's not relevent either.
Perhaps a few of the other people who thought the plane would remain stationary will also understand that.
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 63070)
But you're right in that a totally frictionless wheel and hub would result in the aircraft remaining stationary.
|
what you guys need to do is google the "airplane belt teaser" go on some of the 1000page threads on it and have fun discussing this for 10 more years.
|
Originally Posted by samnavy
(Post 63051)
All right, we have a real world test.
I went in to my Airframes shop this morning and told a couple 2nd Class Petty Officers the I bet they couldn't erect a 100ft wide treadmill the entire length of the runway. They laughed and said "come back after lunch, sir." |
Yeah, I realize that wheelspeed isn't relevant unless you don't have magical wheel bearings that can withstand such high speeds.
But, if there's one thing I learned, if you have magical conveyor belts, you have to have magical bearings...no ifs, ands or but(t)s. Man, what I wouldn't give for a giant, remote-operated conveyor belt...underneath my house...with my house mounted on rollerblade wheels...then the house tied to a tree...then... Okay, I'm done...for real...I promise... I guess I keep writing because I'm trying to get the last word in before Philip swoops in here, gives some smart-ass comment and locks the thread :D IBTL!!!! :gay: |
Right :bigtu:
|
holy hell I leave for one day and this thread gets another 4 pages
I was kidding about the engines not running... lol |
Originally Posted by bripab007
(Post 63076)
I guess I keep writing because I'm trying to get the last word in before Philip swoops in here, gives some smart-ass comment and locks the thread :D
IBTL!!!! :gay: |
Originally Posted by Philip
(Post 63050)
minor detail :ugh:
|
Hey guys, I went out a tried it with my Harrier, took off without a hitch.
|
Sweet, we all agree.
:ughug: |
Glad we have all come to aggrement on this one... :vash:
Originally Posted by olderguy
(Post 63065)
OK, now let's talk about the seaplane taking off in a current:dancegay:
It will fly. The moving water will actually help the plane in the first part of the takeoff. The hardest part of a takeoff in a seaplane, from the airplanes perspective, is getting on step (planing out in boat speak or getting on top of the water in simple terms) In pictures, from here: http://us.airliners.net/photos/middle/7/5/2/1120257.jpg to here: http://us.airliners.net/photos/middle/4/0/1/1138104.jpg Once the seaplane is on the step, very little of the float is actually touching the water (a foot on length or so) and it will accelerate to flying speed very quickly. The water moving the opposite direction to the floats will tend to slow the airplane, but it will also lift the float higher out of the water, thereby reducing drag. As airspeed increases, more and more of airplanes weight will be supported by the wing, reducing friction and allowing the plane to accelerate to flying speed. I can illustrate with an example also. Cessna 172 seaplane, flaps to 20 degrees, full power will get airborne at just over 30 knots and fly in ground effect. With this treadmill example, at 30 knots for the seaplane the water will be moving at 60 knots. I could take the same airplane get it on step and let it accelerate to 60 knots on non moving water. Would not be a problem. I will say though that being in a seaplane travelling across water that is moving at 60 knots would be quite a rough ride..... cheers |
Originally Posted by Starsky
(Post 63240)
I will say though that being in a seaplane travelling across water that is moving at 60 knots would be quite a rough ride.....
|
The aerodynamics of an airplane moving backwards at 750knots would bother me a little....
|
It's a magical plane.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:06 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands