Yes, Madman - I posted on page 37 at the start of the post that I made an error in the previos 3 posts.... :rolleyes:

Um, you can't say you pointed that out, because I pointed it out for you by posting that I made a mistake...

Then, after saying ignore those previous posts (that statement is in in the part you quoted), I made the argument about why the plane has to move on the conveyor.

Where is the flaw in the argument I make after I admit I made a mistake in my previous posts.... the ones I say to ignore because they I screwed them up and created a totally different scenario than the original one. :rolleyes:

You haven't shown where that argument is flawed - but let me tackle your argument becuase it is flawed...

This is the flaw in your argument, NYMaman and BlueskyIn the original scenario you are assuming the airplane remains in one spot relative to the ground.That is the flaw in your argument

However, the original scenario does not say that the plane remains in one spot relative to the ground, only that the conveyor and the airplane have the same speeds in the opposite directions.


The original scenario does not say that the plane causes the conveyor to move, but that the conveyor is moved by some other control to match speed of the plane.

So in that scenario, if the plane is taken off of the conveyor and placed onto hard ground and then beings moving towards the conveyor at 10mph, then the conveyor is still going to move at 10mph in the opposite direction of the planes motion...

Now, if you want to claim the plane remains stationary to a 3rd person observer on the conveyor, but not on solid ground, I bring you back to the argument I make after the admission of making an error in the previous posts. (read just below the part you quoted)

Show me the flaw in that argument:
Repeating myself a bit here:
Going back to the scenario of the plane with the front wheels on the conveyor and the rear wheels on solid ground, because it is related to the plane having all of its wheels on the conveyor.

The wheels on solid ground have to move in relation to the ground and the wheels on the conveyor are argued by you to remain stationary in relation to the ground, if that is true then when the airplane has the front wheels on the conveyor and the rear wheels on the ground how do the rear wheels move forward while the front wheels remain stationary since the distance between the front and rear wheels remains a constant?

I'll answer this question for you (and Bluesky) - The answer is that the front wheels do not remain stationary in relation to the ground, they move in relation to the ground.

Why?

That is because the rear wheels are moving in relation to the ground (otherwise planes wouldn't be able to take off of a normal runway) and because the distance between the wheels remains constant the front wheels would have to move forward in relation to the ground on the conveyor to maintain the constant distance. Now (this is important)unlike a car, the front and rear wheels of a plane are all the same in that they are free spinning and do not create the forward motion of the plane, they mearly react to the forward motion of the plane. Since the free spinning front wheels move in relation to the ground on the conveyor this means the rear wheels (being constructed identically) will also move forward in relation to the ground on the conveyor. That means the conveyor does not cancel out the forward motion of the plane! That means with all the wheels on the conveyor the plane will move forward in relation to the ground, even if the plane starts with all of the wheels on the conveyor.

Since the plane is moving in relation to the ground on the conveyor, then the plane has a groundspeed and a windspeed, and does in fact take off.
_________________________
Jeffrey
I'm just trying to put my tires on the rocks of life.