WAIT! IT'S NOT FLAWED! the plane moved forward and took off, but the wheels were spinning at a higher velocity than the would be without the backward-pulled conveyor belt. the speed at which the wheels were spinning was the only thing that changed.
This is stupid. Dice the wheels have nothing to do with the speed of the plane, as long as the prop can overcome the sum total of the forces holding the plane back it will build enough speed to lift off. The fact that the wheels are spinning twice as fast is almost irrelevant. If you want the plane to remain stationary tie a freaking chain to it. Obviously it wont lift off then unless you force air under the wings
I just saw this episode on tv. The way the experiment was implemented is flawed. the result is incorrect... and the myth is not busted. the airplane DID move on the track, thus there was forward motion, thus being still on treadmill did not apply, and typical aerodynamics did get in place.
@StarIessNight The point in this myth was that the plane and the conveyor belt actually did move at the same speed, and even then the plane could take off.
That's largely because the plane builds speed from the propellers.
But yeah I see your point, I was also kind of hoping that they could make the plane stand still the first time I saw this.
@Laurelindo Incorrect. The airplane does not fly because it builds speed from propellers. Propellers move airplane forward. If the airplane is on conveyer built making it stand still, the airplane will not have forward motion. What makes airplane fly is not what the propeller generates on the wing, its the air and pressures that form on the wings due to traveling from point A to B. if you are on the spot and there is strong wind with propeller off it will lift a little then fall.
But the thing is that the plane isn't moving because of friction with the ground but because of the propellor which gets advantage of the air's resistance. A plane has loose wheels, so whether there is a conveyor belt or not is irrelevant.
Speeds aren't matching, if they were the plane would be stationary... Look at it like a kid going down an electric stair going up at the same speed, movement vectors are simply opposed, and there is no pulling upwards force by the air. Inertia does the rest, the plane doesn't take off.
@wildly3 sorry, you're wrong. your electric stair analogy is wrong. to use your analogy, it would be like someone on an electric stair in a wheelchair, who is pulling themselves with a rope. if the stairs are going down at 5mph, and they pull themselves along the rope at 5mph, they will still go up the stairs at 5mph, but the WHEELS of their chair will be moving twice as fast.
Can't believe people still argue. It's a simple case of 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'... basic school physics. If the belt was travelling at 1000 mph the aircraft would still remain in the same position if you took friction out of the equation. All that is needed in this case is slight extra power from the propellors to overcome the friction in the wheels to move forward. If you think the aircraft takes off while stationary you're looking at it wrong.
everything thinks the plane will NOT take off while being stationary. Because that is what the mythbusters said the experiment was about. plane being stationary.
Free moving wheels does not mean the plane is weightless!!!! Until liftoff, the wheels push off the ground to move the plane. The fact that the propeller is not connected to the wheels is irrelevant. Problem with this video is that they used some flimsy ribbon where the wheels' friction with the actual ground quickly took over. That and there was nothing to control that they could just use the engine to overpower the conveyor effect.
@Tw0DrinkMike The wheels do not push off the ground to move the plane. Wheels on an airplane are free spinning and not connected to any kind of motor, similar to a skateboard. Ask yourself this.. would a conveyor belt hold a hovercraft stationary in this same situation? Why or why not?
@YairGeva7 its impossible to make the plane stationary, coz the engine powers the propeller and the wheels just drag along. no matter how fast they pull the belt the wheels will just speed up by itself and the relative speed of the plane stays the same allowing it to take off. they didnt really explain it that well in the end but its hard to get ur head around the idea nyway
@laufin03 Wrong, this experiment was simply badly executed, the fact that the engine is not sending power to the wheels is true but also irrelevant, just because the wheels are free moving doesn't mean that the planes weight doesn't apply a lot of pressure on the wheels/gears and therefore creatingg drag.
If the plane was stationary while the belt is moving with its engine OFF, then i'd agree about why its moving forward, in realty the belt was not moving fast enough to be a factor.
@YairGeva7 what ur saying about inertia and the weight of the plane does apply but its not gonna be enough against the engine. coz its free spinning wheels. Like Bradleyland said the propulsion acts of the air not the ground in this case. My physics professor also discussed this experiment in one of my lecs
@YairGeva7 No one said the plane could not or would not move forward, only that the belt matched the speed of the wheels. The fact that the plane will move forward despite how fast the belt is moving is exactly why the plane will still take off. The plane will not remain stationary.
@YairGeva7 You're an idiot. the wheels are free moving, it doesn't matter how fast the conveyor belt is moving because the engine, as stated near the end of the video, sends power to the propeller not the wheels. If the strip was moving at a million miles an hour, the plane would still move forward at normal takeoff speed with the wheels moving at that plus a million miles per hour.
@hurrdurr117 wrong wrong wrong, your the idiot here, before calling people names you should stop and think, this isn't some prefect universe where wheels and gears don't create any friction, the wheel touching the ground and the gears that connect them to the plane all apple drag that would have caused the plane to move backwards, BUT, even if the wheels created no drag, it would still roll back with the engine off because of a little something called Inertia. look it up.
@HeatherMeadow I do not think you understand how an airplane works, they are not bloody cars a car would do what you said but an airplane does not because the wheels are not what is making it go foward.
Steve181 comment should of been enough but apparently not
I thought the whole point of this whole debate was to see if an apparently stationary plane could take off, the groundspeed of the belt matching the groundspeed of the plane? Surely this would prevent the plane acquiring any airspeed (the engine does not create airspeed) This plane was moving at quite a significant speed as it took off, I don't get what the big deal of this video is...
Once this question is posed to someone, that get their answer in their head, and nothing you can say or do will change it. they can twist the logic to fit their answer.
and even if they see it before their eyes they still wont believe it. I think that's why
People see the 2nd and 3rd experiment done wrong because that isn't what mythbusters stated they were going to do in the beginning of the show. You don't see people arguing about the 1st experiment.
When you have a myth, you follow through with the experiment. You don't change the experiment or the myth. That is what you are doing and what mythbusters did in the other half of the show. Thats why everyone is upset about this myth. People know the physics already
If the belt would match the speed of the airplane with unparalleled precision, the plane would remain stationary, and will not have enough lift to take off.
the original myth is about matching the wheel speed, some say air speed or ground speed, it don't matter which one the conveyor belt could not stop it from moving foward or taking off, even if it were to tripple the reverse speed the belt would have no effect on the plane. you could move it backwards at 1,000,000 mph it would'nt matter.
air speed and wheel speed are two different things and makes a huge difference.
and just like you just stated "matching wheel speed" that means the plane stays stationary because the wheels always match treadmill speed assuming no rolling resistance.
@taledarkside yes air speed and wheel speed air two different thing, but to the plane it's no difference.
but here is where we disagree, even those are two different #s the results are the same. If you match the air speed let's 100 mph the conveyor runs 100 mph rev the wheels run 200mph the plane still takes off.
If you match the wheel speed which will be inifinte the plane takes off.. The point is there is nothing a treadmill can do to keep the plane from moving foward nothing and taking off.
if you put skids on the airplane, the plane would go backwards and not fly. you're increasing the resistance to the point where the plane can no longer move forward.
@taledarkside the conveyor can't stop the plane from moving foward at all, so why include it in the myth if it is the myth, why not say if you tied a rope to a plane can it take off.
it's like this If a rooster layed an egg in the center of a A roof which way would it roll?
we know roosters can't lay eggs but the question is if a rooster layed an egg.
we know a conveyor can's stop a plane from moving foward don't we?
@taledarkside and yes a v22 can take off from a 0 mph wheel speed or air speed, it is a plane
and it will take off from stationary. and with a large enough prop and engine a normal will too.
but it is MO this is not the myth, please show me the wording of the original myth I read it years and years ago.and as i remember it, the conveyor is too match the speed in which the plane moves foward but reversed. as far as i'm concerned your saying a plane wont take off. i'm saying it will.
because mythbusters mentioned it. and thats the experiment.
you arguing why mythbusters calls it a myth is why this is such an issue. The myth is a plane staying stationary on the treadmill and FLY. DONE, nothing else.
if myth busters did a MYTH on a plane can move on a treadmill, then no one would care.
I don't think mythbusters claimed this is a 60 year old myth. And people know airplanes take of from moving objects since the US navy has been doing it in the 40s.
@taledarkside one last time, the wording goes like this, You place a plane on a conveyor belt as long as a typical runway, a tracking device tracks the planes speed and moves the conveyor the same speed but in reverse will the plane take off? we all know it will take off. no ifs ands or buts. i'm sorry if you don't see it this way.
The myth is no matter what you hear at the start of this clip, and i repeat is
If you put a airplane on a conveyor belt and run the belt in reverse the same speed the plane moves foward, will the plane be able to move foward and take off.
That's what the myth has always been. The myth is the plane won't move therefore it wont take off.
Mythbusters did it right, even though they might not even understand it their selfs.
The myth is if you put a air plane on a conveyor belt, and moved the belt
backwards same speed the plane is moving foward the plane would not move therefor not take off. if the myth were true then the plane would never move therefor the conveyor would never move either. however the conveyor has no effect on the plane moving foward and no effect on it taking off. the plane takes off at 100mph the conveyor moves rev at 100mph the planes wheels move at 200mph who cares about the planes wheels.
mythbusters cares about the planes wheels. since that was what the myth is all about. will a plane take off staying stationary while the treadmill is going the speed of the planes takeoff.
we already know a plane can take off from a moving object. This has been going on since the 1940s with the navy having an aircraft carrier.
you can go on all day about a plane can move forward, everyone knows that. But mythbusters experiment is can a plane take off from a stationary point.
@taledarkside the myth is not that, I watched the whole show, and it is how i stated it, however even if it were how you stated, why would you need the belt? and we've all see planes take off from 0 with a head wind.
just put a bigger prop and engine on it, it would still take off. you could put Britany Spears panties under it, it would still take off. the original myth is what they're testing here, you can find it anywhere.
if that was true, they wouldn't have used a jogging treadmill, if they knew the plane took 'X' amount of feet to take off
And even in the animation in the beginning, they use a jogging treadmill, shorter than the length of the RC airplanes takeoff. And then they show the plane staying in one spot relative to the ground, and "will it take off"
@taledarkside ok i understand your reasoning, but the myth is not if a plane remained still will it take off.
the myth is, the conveyor belt is to match the speed the plane moves foward, in your thoughts if the plane never moves foward then the conveyor belt will never move. the question to you is this. If you put a airplane on a conveyor belt and match the speed the plane moves foward with the speed of the conveyor moving in reverse will the plane take off? You already know my answer.
we dont care about if a plane can move forward or not on a treadmill.
the point is mythbusters did the 2 other experiments wrong. because the myth is according to how they described it while showing the animation of the plane on a jogging treadmill.
and their first experiment proves their myth. plane doesn't take off. the RC airplane never took off from a jogging treadmill.
@taledarkside I would like to see the original wording from 1940 or whenever? however as i understand it.
a conveyor can not stop a plane from taking off.that is my opinion on the myth.Stated the other way is just foolish.we all know it wont hold a plane stationary no matter what happens to the wheels.if the plane don't
move it's wheels won't move therefore the converor won't move either?if the plane,conveyor or wheels don't move it's not a myth just foolishness,not worthy of discussion.
whatever a v22 is or any RC airplane. many of them have powerful motors that can take off from someones hand but that gets into different type of a discussion
so you insult people when you claim they don't know how a plane works(like your friend) when in reality, they see mythbusters doing the experiment WRONG according to what the myth MYTHBUSTERS TOLD.
@taledarkside i am thankful for your arguements, and no i mean to insult noone, however it is my belief that the myth is old, and yes i read it in the 80s, and as i remember it. the question is can a conveyor stop an airplane from taking off? i answered no then, and no today.
if the myth is different than that i do not know of it.
However i'm off to tour 0300 tommarrow will not have time for this, I may continue the arguement in a couple of years, if we're both still alive. respectfully Jo.
@kingluke2 That's the entire point. It is a physical impossibility for the treadmill to prevent the plant from moving forward, because the force that drives the plan acts on the air, not the ground.
@bradleyland Huh - seems like they presented the myth differently - e.g. in the animated graphics, they showed a plane stationary on a conveyor rising straight into the air. I guess I just don't get the whole myth - seems obvious that the lift is based on airspeed, regardless of what the conveyor / wheels are doing. If there was a 25 mph headwind that ultralight could rise straight off the ground. Not sure why the pilot was surprised, flight school teaches all this stuff.
The myth is screwed up. The myth was supposed to be if a plane would take off if the wheel speed of the plane matched the conveyor belt. Like a car on a conveyor belt. The real myth was NOTHING to do with airspeed. Again take the car on the conveyor belt, it has zero airspeed. The plane took off because the pilot was able to achieve takeoff speed, the wheels exceeded the speed of the conveyor belt (until it left the ground).
@detectiveinspekta no, the plane took off because there is no way the conveyor belt could stop it from moving relative to the air.
imagine standing on a treadmill with rollerblades on. you could hold yourself there pretty easily no matter how fast the treadmill was going because there is a maximum frictional force in the wheels. if the treadmill was going at 500mph, you could still pull yourself forwards with the same amount of force youd need if the treadmill was going at sprinting pace.
people who say the plane won't take off are extremely narrow minded, especially after seeing this video. i remember arguing about this in my high school physics class when i was 14. i'm not saying i'm a genius but to me this just seems so simple as to why the place WOULD take off.
All planes do this all the time, the earth is just a giant conveyer belt moving west to east at around 1000 mph....to the non mechanical minded people the plane also couldn't land on a running conveyer belt either..,..that's funny right there....I enjoyed this mythbusters episode....my friend did not..he/he...
@taledarkside d myth was the plane would not move therefore would not take off, mythbusters job was
2 find out if it's true or not, I knew before they tried it not only would it move it would have no effect on it...
I don't need mythbusters to test it, for me to know the answer, however my friend said it wd not move
it wd not take off. i grasp the idea. some can't. it's simple the propeller moves the plane foward the plane then takes off, there's nothing a converor belt can do to stop it.
Right. It's kind of a tricky myth, because the most important part of the myth itself (that a conveyor belt could keep a plane stationary) is actually impossible.
Ok, I've got an even better example that even a complete moron should be able to visualize. Put a plane on a really long conveyor with its engine OFF. Start the conveyor going. Set it so it is pulling the plane back at 10,000 miles per hour. Now start the plane and try to take off. The plane will accelerate and take off just as if it were on a runway. Why? Because the wheels are not driving the plane forward, the PROPELLOR is.
Look at it this way. Lets say a plane is traveling at 200 miles per hour through the air. Now a conveyor belt turning backwards at 200 miles per hour on a hover platform traveling under the plane is raised up underneath the plane until it makes contact with the wheels. Would the plane suddenly stop and go backwards off the conveyor belt? No, the conveyor belt would simply turn the wheels. That's exactly what is happening on the ground.
Obviously if the plane remains stationary, its not going to take off. Duh. The problem is that a conveyor belt CANNOT keep a plane stationary! That is why the plane takes off and the myth is busted! Tell me HOW a conveyor belt, which just turns the wheels, is going to stop a propellor from pulling a plane forward.
If the prop's forward force matched the conveyor belt's backwards frictional force, the plane would remain stationary, and there would only be air from the prop passing through the wings, thus little difference in pressure created and thus little upward force and thus no take off.
@SpiderWaffle - right, but they are not trying to match the frictional force of the conveyor. They are accelerating to take off speed, that's the myth. The plane is trying to take off, not just taxiing at a slow speed.
@Submariner75 I thought the myth was that the plane would have zero velocity relative to ground and takeoff velocity relative to the conveyor belt. If the plane has takeoff velocity relative to ground it's obviously going to take, the mere fact that there's a belt under it moving in the opposite direction doesn't change anything. Why would that ever be a myth?
Or was the myth more so, could a plane reach takeoff velocity given that's on an opposing conveyor belt? I guess the key there is...
@juggleknot The plane will still take off. The conveyor cannot negate the thrust from the propellor, no matter how fast you move it. The reason that the conveyor pulls the plane back when it is at rest is because of inertia and friction between the wheels and the conveyor. Once the engine starts, the wheels start rolling and friction is broken, meaning the conveyor is no longer pulling back on the plane. Then the plane just moves forward and takes off like the conveyor is not there.
This could be a really innovative invention for airports and runways.... The could literally launch planes from small takeoff zones and not have the lame delays and waiting times for taxi and takeoff.
Obviously the plane did not match the speed of the belt, Mythbusters is for entertainment only and has no real scientific basis. It is really simple. If the plane produced enough thrust to remain stationary then it would be matching the speed of the belt and there would be no airflow over the wings. No airflow over the wings = no fly. I can't believe the Mythbusters can't get theirhead around it.
@TomARowly it matters not where the thrust comes from. If the prop was not turning at all andthe plane was on the conveyor belt it would move backwards with the conveyor belt, would it not? of course it would. If the prop produces enough thrust to keep the aircraft from moving backwards on the conveyor but not enough thrust to move the plane forward it will have zero airflow over the wings and no lift.
@unapro3 Consider a simple system force balance. You have air, your plane, and a conveyor system (say, a treadmill). Now, the propeller accelerates the air, generating a total force on the system -- something has to move forward. If there is no friction between the conveyor and it, the plane accelerates alone and that's that. With perfect friction (say it's glued to the conveyor), the conveyor-plane system must accelerate. SOMETHING must accelerate. It is impossible to have a stationary system!
@Gamemako I'm not sure where you get your formulaes from, simply put, if you have an aircraft on a treadmill and you start the treadmill, the aircraft does not have an engine, it will roll off the back of the treadmill, follow me so far? now to stop the a/c from going backwards with the treadmill some thing is needed to hold the plane in position, hence the thrust from the prop. It won't need much to keep the plane stationary, probably idling will suffice. There is no lift generated!!
Right. But that is when the propeller is not moving the plane forwards, the friction generated from the treadmill is the only force acting on it, but it would be ignorant to suggest that the plane would move backwards at the same speed as the treadmill, as its wheels are free moving.
Here, they are trying to see if the plane takes off when the propeller is pushing the plane forward at the same speed as the treadmill is going backward. Surely you can see that these will not cancel out.
the plane could not remain stationary relative to the air even though the ground was going backwards because it wasn't connected to the ground firmly and honestly if it was it wouldn't be an airplane...The airplane doesn't work like a rocket but more like a car in the air... The airplane pushes air behind it, it does not push the ground, rockets work in space airplanes don't The myth is totally busted, a heavier plane may not be able to take off from the conveyor belt though
THE VIDEO IS INCONCLUSIVE . MYTH NOT BUSTED AT ALL .!!!!
A) THERE HAS TO BE A RELATIVE MOTION BETWEEN THE PLANE AND THE WIND HAS TO BE EQUIVALENT TO THE TAKE OFF SPEED OF THE AIRCRAFT , FOR IT TO BE AIRBORNE. THE WHOLE TREADMILL IS POINT LESS .
THE AIRCRAFT WOULD BE AIRBORNE EVEN IF A 55 KNOT WIND (HEAD WIND) WAS BLOWING AT THE RUNWAY , AND THE AIRPLANE HAD ITS ENGINE OFF!!!
B)SECONDLY THE TARP WASNT ACTING AS A TREADMILL AT ALL ... THE PLANE WAS CLEARLY OVING PAST THE CONES
The propeller pushes back against the air, not the ground. It pulls itself forward through the air regardless of how fast/slow the wheels are going.
It's like asking if you'd be able to SWIM over a conveyor belt underwater; you're pushing against the water (just as the plane pushes against the air), NOT the belt.
@LittleBigTimi The myth is testing if a conveyor belt can stop an airplane from moving. The test proved it cannot. It was a very good test. It is ironic you say its pointless when you obviously thought the conveyor should be holding an airplane stationary, which is impossible. They explained throughout the whole episode that the plane would NOT be held stationary.
pt 1. If everyone read this there would be no confusion. Imagine if you had roller skates on your feet and were standing on a treadmill holding a stationary rope that outstretches in front of you. As the treadmill tries to push you backwards, your grasp on the rope keeps you stationary and your wheels spin. Now, someone begins to reel that rope in. The treadmill can try and compensate, but it only means your wheels spin faster, you will move forward in relative space.
@Steve181 steve you can't explain this to people that don't get it, no matter how hard you try, they get mad and you get a good laugh, because they don't get it. it is fun to try to explain it to them and watch them this and that about it, but when they get mad you just got to laugh. that makes them that much more angry...
i say to them if a plane can't take off from a conveyor then it also can't land on one either right?? that usually gets 'em.
The only point of this would be if the airplane was in the same place in relation to the ground (not treadmill), and that's what the treadmill was for. It wouldn't take off, of course, since there would be no movement in relation to the air surrounding the wings, thus no uplift...
The whole argument is if the forward speed of the plane is matched by a treadmill the plane will either:
1) Take off.
2) Not take off.
The power is being sent to the propeller which pushes air behind itself and under the wings to create lift. So the plane should take off as the air from the propeller is forced back under the wings anyway.
However they didn't show that in this video. They just showed a plane accelerating whilst on the treadmill before taking off. The treadmill wasn't accurate.
@VacuumLogic it wasent ment to be stationary, they where matching the speed that it goes when it normally takes off.
exactly what rkr1995 said. the resistance that the plain put up was able to push it forward. the wheels simple just rolling at the rate of the belt + plains new take off speed. making it no different
Because that would be physically impossible. The plane's is putting out the force that would require the normal take off speed, not more. The wheels will just spin twice as fast.
If the strip was moving at a million miles an hour, the plane would still move forward at normal takeoff speed with the wheels moving at that plus a million miles per hour.
@KyouTGD Well that's if the plane can't go back. If you fix the plane and let the wheels freespin, they'll move that fast. but if you let the plane loose at a million miles an hour, it would slowly start going back.
@KyouTGD the only problem i have with this is EVENTUALLY at a high enough speed (which would be absolutely ridiculously fast) the wheels wouldn't be able to turn fast enough and the plane would go backwards, but yes the wheels dont really matter for shit when it comes to a plane taking off
@VacuumLogic That's the point of debunking the myth! A treadmill, no matter how fast it goes in the opposite direction, cannot prevent a plane from moving forward because the plane's propulsion mechanism acts on the air, not the ground.
2: Let me repeat: Once the pilot fires up the engines, the plane moves forward at pretty much the usual speed relative to the ground--and more importantly the air--regardless of how fast the treadmill is moving backward. This generates lift on the wings, and the plane takes off. All the treadmill belt does is, as you must conclude, make the plane's wheels spin madly.
1: Cars and planes don't work the same way. A car's wheels are its means of propulsion--they push the road backwards (relatively speaking), and the car moves forward. In contrast, a plane's wheels aren't motorized; their purpose is to reduce friction during takeoff (and add it, by braking, when landing). What gets a plane moving are its propellers or jet turbines, which shove the air backward and thereby impel the plane forward. What the wheels, treadmill, etc, are up to is largely irrelevant.
The cones moving by the plane mean they did it WRONG! This show has always annoyed me with its poor methods. Clearly the plane is moving faster than the conveyor belt making the belt moot. Every time they call a myth busted my jaw hangs as I think of all the ways they failed to rigorously test it. I like the guys and they clearly have fun but this is not scientifically sound methodology at all.
I think what everyone is missing is the two sides are arguing over different points.
The people that think the conveyor will stop it are wrong because the engine moves air, not the ground. They are right in saying "if the plane is stationary, it will not fly" which is entirely right. The wind speed is 0 over the wings, there is no lift., the plane does not fly.
The people that say it will fly are right/wrong for the opposite reasons as above .
This is stupid. I don't see how they can assume the plane and the belt are moving at the same speed if the plane is obviously moving forward. I'm never been so ashamed to like mythbusters.
Exactly the plane was accelerating and moving forward therefore air was passing over the wings which means of course its ganna take off....this is dumb.
no, because the wheels of the plane are on a flywheel, its the propellor that pulls it forward, therefore the " conveyor belt" isn't pulling it backwards at all
If there is enough wind under the wings to make it fly, you could even be moving it backwards and it WILL fly. The ground has nothing to do with the speed of the wind. This is how pelicans glide at the beach waiting for fish.
Typing before viewing... The physics on this are very simple. The driving force of the prop is not in any way correlating with its wheels turning. A conveyor belt will not make any difference
I like it how people here write as if they were masters in physics or some shit, like you. It's actually not that simple. Think of the paper planes we all used to do when little. You had to push them so wind can flow under them and thus they would fly. Anyways, I'm still perplexed as to how that damn thing took off without wind under its wings. It's not like the propeller (being that small) blasts a bunch of air under the wings... Maybe it was windy that day?
why does mythbusters do these terrible experiments
DrKrail 1 month ago 2
WAIT! IT'S NOT FLAWED! the plane moved forward and took off, but the wheels were spinning at a higher velocity than the would be without the backward-pulled conveyor belt. the speed at which the wheels were spinning was the only thing that changed.
wrestles4food 1 month ago
Ugh stupid auto correct. Since not dice...
MrApollo141 1 month ago
This is stupid. Dice the wheels have nothing to do with the speed of the plane, as long as the prop can overcome the sum total of the forces holding the plane back it will build enough speed to lift off. The fact that the wheels are spinning twice as fast is almost irrelevant. If you want the plane to remain stationary tie a freaking chain to it. Obviously it wont lift off then unless you force air under the wings
MrApollo141 1 month ago
I just saw this episode on tv. The way the experiment was implemented is flawed. the result is incorrect... and the myth is not busted. the airplane DID move on the track, thus there was forward motion, thus being still on treadmill did not apply, and typical aerodynamics did get in place.
StarIessNight 1 month ago
@StarIessNight The point in this myth was that the plane and the conveyor belt actually did move at the same speed, and even then the plane could take off.
That's largely because the plane builds speed from the propellers.
But yeah I see your point, I was also kind of hoping that they could make the plane stand still the first time I saw this.
Laurelindo 1 month ago
@Laurelindo Incorrect. The airplane does not fly because it builds speed from propellers. Propellers move airplane forward. If the airplane is on conveyer built making it stand still, the airplane will not have forward motion. What makes airplane fly is not what the propeller generates on the wing, its the air and pressures that form on the wings due to traveling from point A to B. if you are on the spot and there is strong wind with propeller off it will lift a little then fall.
StarIessNight 1 month ago
But the thing is that the plane isn't moving because of friction with the ground but because of the propellor which gets advantage of the air's resistance. A plane has loose wheels, so whether there is a conveyor belt or not is irrelevant.
wildly3 1 month ago
Speeds aren't matching, if they were the plane would be stationary... Look at it like a kid going down an electric stair going up at the same speed, movement vectors are simply opposed, and there is no pulling upwards force by the air. Inertia does the rest, the plane doesn't take off.
wildly3 1 month ago
@wildly3 sorry, you're wrong. your electric stair analogy is wrong. to use your analogy, it would be like someone on an electric stair in a wheelchair, who is pulling themselves with a rope. if the stairs are going down at 5mph, and they pull themselves along the rope at 5mph, they will still go up the stairs at 5mph, but the WHEELS of their chair will be moving twice as fast.
VADwellingPlace 1 month ago
the UK narrator is much better
Tragamin06 1 month ago
That was dumb.
ajuk1 2 months ago
Surely the plane wouldnt go past hte cones if they were going at the exact same speed?
brothertwinz 4 months ago
@brothertwinz ur dumb think about what they did
SeanneryConnery 2 months ago
Can't believe people still argue. It's a simple case of 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'... basic school physics. If the belt was travelling at 1000 mph the aircraft would still remain in the same position if you took friction out of the equation. All that is needed in this case is slight extra power from the propellors to overcome the friction in the wheels to move forward. If you think the aircraft takes off while stationary you're looking at it wrong.
wurdup354 4 months ago
@wurdup354
everything thinks the plane will NOT take off while being stationary. Because that is what the mythbusters said the experiment was about. plane being stationary.
taledarkside 3 months ago
Free moving wheels does not mean the plane is weightless!!!! Until liftoff, the wheels push off the ground to move the plane. The fact that the propeller is not connected to the wheels is irrelevant. Problem with this video is that they used some flimsy ribbon where the wheels' friction with the actual ground quickly took over. That and there was nothing to control that they could just use the engine to overpower the conveyor effect.
Tw0DrinkMike 5 months ago
@Tw0DrinkMike The wheels do not push off the ground to move the plane. Wheels on an airplane are free spinning and not connected to any kind of motor, similar to a skateboard. Ask yourself this.. would a conveyor belt hold a hovercraft stationary in this same situation? Why or why not?
mitchio83 4 months ago 6
How stupid are they to even try ?
K0lsyr4 5 months ago
What would be much more interesting would be if they said "Can a plane at takeoff power take off from a standstill" instead of on a conveyor belt
PINGASFIST 7 months ago
They messed up. The plane was moving.
funnycatsvid 8 months ago
Are they Blind throughout this entire thing? the plane was obviously moving forward what kinda shit is this?
1.make a test to see if it works,
2.fuck up the test by not pulling the belt fast enough
3.moves forward like normal takeoff not giving 2 shits about that belt
4.MYTH-BUSTED
No it isn't, we have eyes you dumb shits.
YairGeva7 8 months ago
@YairGeva7 its impossible to make the plane stationary, coz the engine powers the propeller and the wheels just drag along. no matter how fast they pull the belt the wheels will just speed up by itself and the relative speed of the plane stays the same allowing it to take off. they didnt really explain it that well in the end but its hard to get ur head around the idea nyway
laufin03 8 months ago
@laufin03 Wrong, this experiment was simply badly executed, the fact that the engine is not sending power to the wheels is true but also irrelevant, just because the wheels are free moving doesn't mean that the planes weight doesn't apply a lot of pressure on the wheels/gears and therefore creatingg drag.
If the plane was stationary while the belt is moving with its engine OFF, then i'd agree about why its moving forward, in realty the belt was not moving fast enough to be a factor.
YairGeva7 2 months ago
@YairGeva7 what ur saying about inertia and the weight of the plane does apply but its not gonna be enough against the engine. coz its free spinning wheels. Like Bradleyland said the propulsion acts of the air not the ground in this case. My physics professor also discussed this experiment in one of my lecs
laufin03 2 months ago
@YairGeva7 No one said the plane could not or would not move forward, only that the belt matched the speed of the wheels. The fact that the plane will move forward despite how fast the belt is moving is exactly why the plane will still take off. The plane will not remain stationary.
hunt318 7 months ago
@YairGeva7 You're an idiot. the wheels are free moving, it doesn't matter how fast the conveyor belt is moving because the engine, as stated near the end of the video, sends power to the propeller not the wheels. If the strip was moving at a million miles an hour, the plane would still move forward at normal takeoff speed with the wheels moving at that plus a million miles per hour.
hurrdurr117 6 months ago
@hurrdurr117 wrong wrong wrong, your the idiot here, before calling people names you should stop and think, this isn't some prefect universe where wheels and gears don't create any friction, the wheel touching the ground and the gears that connect them to the plane all apple drag that would have caused the plane to move backwards, BUT, even if the wheels created no drag, it would still roll back with the engine off because of a little something called Inertia. look it up.
YairGeva7 2 months ago
Wtf? They didn't do it right! The plane was moving faster than him! If they were going the same speed, the cones would have stayed in the same place!
HeatherMeadow 8 months ago
@HeatherMeadow I do not think you understand how an airplane works, they are not bloody cars a car would do what you said but an airplane does not because the wheels are not what is making it go foward.
Steve181 comment should of been enough but apparently not
2897241 8 months ago
I thought the whole point of this whole debate was to see if an apparently stationary plane could take off, the groundspeed of the belt matching the groundspeed of the plane? Surely this would prevent the plane acquiring any airspeed (the engine does not create airspeed) This plane was moving at quite a significant speed as it took off, I don't get what the big deal of this video is...
Benjamin241 9 months ago
@Benjamin241 exactly what you said.
FOFballer 5 months ago
Once this question is posed to someone, that get their answer in their head, and nothing you can say or do will change it. they can twist the logic to fit their answer.
and even if they see it before their eyes they still wont believe it. I think that's why
this myth has such a controversy?
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
People see the 2nd and 3rd experiment done wrong because that isn't what mythbusters stated they were going to do in the beginning of the show. You don't see people arguing about the 1st experiment.
When you have a myth, you follow through with the experiment. You don't change the experiment or the myth. That is what you are doing and what mythbusters did in the other half of the show. Thats why everyone is upset about this myth. People know the physics already
taledarkside 9 months ago
If the belt would match the speed of the airplane with unparalleled precision, the plane would remain stationary, and will not have enough lift to take off.
Spyez 9 months ago
the original myth is about matching the wheel speed, some say air speed or ground speed, it don't matter which one the conveyor belt could not stop it from moving foward or taking off, even if it were to tripple the reverse speed the belt would have no effect on the plane. you could move it backwards at 1,000,000 mph it would'nt matter.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
air speed and wheel speed are two different things and makes a huge difference.
and just like you just stated "matching wheel speed" that means the plane stays stationary because the wheels always match treadmill speed assuming no rolling resistance.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside yes air speed and wheel speed air two different thing, but to the plane it's no difference.
but here is where we disagree, even those are two different #s the results are the same. If you match the air speed let's 100 mph the conveyor runs 100 mph rev the wheels run 200mph the plane still takes off.
If you match the wheel speed which will be inifinte the plane takes off.. The point is there is nothing a treadmill can do to keep the plane from moving foward nothing and taking off.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1 and we should not talk about bearings tire ratings or any other such things,
because even if they did not do it right, the test showed the conveyor had no effect on the plane,
no effect at all. it took off normal. if it slowed the plane even10% it would've had a noticeable effect.
in my opnion the myth is can a conveyor belt stop a plane from taking off? Not can a stationary plane
take off?, and even if that were it the v22 has no problem taking off from a stationary point.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
I flew planes since I was 13 years old and have a university education. and yes, wheel speed and airspeed are two different things.
and for a airplane it is a huge difference. because the only thing that will make the plane fly is what shows on the air speed indicator in the plane.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside one more thing if you took the wheels off and put skids on i'll betcha it'd still take off.
also i'm thankful for the respect you show in your post.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
if you put skids on the airplane, the plane would go backwards and not fly. you're increasing the resistance to the point where the plane can no longer move forward.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside the conveyor can't stop the plane from moving foward at all, so why include it in the myth if it is the myth, why not say if you tied a rope to a plane can it take off.
it's like this If a rooster layed an egg in the center of a A roof which way would it roll?
we know roosters can't lay eggs but the question is if a rooster layed an egg.
we know a conveyor can's stop a plane from moving foward don't we?
joracer1 9 months ago
@taledarkside and yes a v22 can take off from a 0 mph wheel speed or air speed, it is a plane
and it will take off from stationary. and with a large enough prop and engine a normal will too.
but it is MO this is not the myth, please show me the wording of the original myth I read it years and years ago.and as i remember it, the conveyor is too match the speed in which the plane moves foward but reversed. as far as i'm concerned your saying a plane wont take off. i'm saying it will.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
the videos are on youtube.
the plane doesn't take off in the mythbusters 1st experiment when the RC airplane was on the jogging treadmill.
its common sense that we know a conveyor can't stop a plane from moving because it has wheels.
that why the myth states a plane that stays stationary.
the myth isn't can a plane or a hovercraft move up and down on a runway. NO!
its can a plane take off from a treadmill being relative to the ground in 1 spot.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside so why even mention a conveyor belt? why not just ask will a stationary plane take off?
the myth would have to say if a conveyor could hold a plane stationary would it take off, thats just foolish.
and as i stated i don't think people were that foolish 60 years ago. but maybe they were just dumb and
lucky back then.
I've never read any where in this myth that the plane is held stationary. i've never read what type of plane
what engine or even if the engine would be running.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
because mythbusters mentioned it. and thats the experiment.
you arguing why mythbusters calls it a myth is why this is such an issue. The myth is a plane staying stationary on the treadmill and FLY. DONE, nothing else.
if myth busters did a MYTH on a plane can move on a treadmill, then no one would care.
I don't think mythbusters claimed this is a 60 year old myth. And people know airplanes take of from moving objects since the US navy has been doing it in the 40s.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside one last time, the wording goes like this, You place a plane on a conveyor belt as long as a typical runway, a tracking device tracks the planes speed and moves the conveyor the same speed but in reverse will the plane take off? we all know it will take off. no ifs ands or buts. i'm sorry if you don't see it this way.
joracer1 9 months ago
The myth is no matter what you hear at the start of this clip, and i repeat is
If you put a airplane on a conveyor belt and run the belt in reverse the same speed the plane moves foward, will the plane be able to move foward and take off.
That's what the myth has always been. The myth is the plane won't move therefore it wont take off.
Mythbusters did it right, even though they might not even understand it their selfs.
joracer1 9 months ago
The myth is if you put a air plane on a conveyor belt, and moved the belt
backwards same speed the plane is moving foward the plane would not move therefor not take off. if the myth were true then the plane would never move therefor the conveyor would never move either. however the conveyor has no effect on the plane moving foward and no effect on it taking off. the plane takes off at 100mph the conveyor moves rev at 100mph the planes wheels move at 200mph who cares about the planes wheels.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
mythbusters cares about the planes wheels. since that was what the myth is all about. will a plane take off staying stationary while the treadmill is going the speed of the planes takeoff.
we already know a plane can take off from a moving object. This has been going on since the 1940s with the navy having an aircraft carrier.
you can go on all day about a plane can move forward, everyone knows that. But mythbusters experiment is can a plane take off from a stationary point.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside the myth is not that, I watched the whole show, and it is how i stated it, however even if it were how you stated, why would you need the belt? and we've all see planes take off from 0 with a head wind.
just put a bigger prop and engine on it, it would still take off. you could put Britany Spears panties under it, it would still take off. the original myth is what they're testing here, you can find it anywhere.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
if that was true, they wouldn't have used a jogging treadmill, if they knew the plane took 'X' amount of feet to take off
And even in the animation in the beginning, they use a jogging treadmill, shorter than the length of the RC airplanes takeoff. And then they show the plane staying in one spot relative to the ground, and "will it take off"
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside ok i understand your reasoning, but the myth is not if a plane remained still will it take off.
the myth is, the conveyor belt is to match the speed the plane moves foward, in your thoughts if the plane never moves foward then the conveyor belt will never move. the question to you is this. If you put a airplane on a conveyor belt and match the speed the plane moves foward with the speed of the conveyor moving in reverse will the plane take off? You already know my answer.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
we dont care about if a plane can move forward or not on a treadmill.
the point is mythbusters did the 2 other experiments wrong. because the myth is according to how they described it while showing the animation of the plane on a jogging treadmill.
and their first experiment proves their myth. plane doesn't take off. the RC airplane never took off from a jogging treadmill.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside Your right, they did it wrong. as they do with alot of things they try at first.
and their anamation is so so at best. and they do fall short as mythbusters, budget i guess.
joracer1 9 months ago
@taledarkside if a plane can move foward as it did, then nothing can stop it fropm taking off.
and yes the anamation is wrong, i guess it's easier to draw that way. and they were just testing on the tread mill.
it's there, it's cheap, it proved it had not alot to do with the plane.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
but the experiment isn't if the plane can move forward, and we don't care about the "physics" if the plane can move forward.
the animation isn't wrong because thats what the myth is all about. the plane staying stationary and relative to the ground in one position.
you cant say, this is the myth, then later change it. like you and mythbusters are doing
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside I would like to see the original wording from 1940 or whenever? however as i understand it.
a conveyor can not stop a plane from taking off.that is my opinion on the myth.Stated the other way is just foolish.we all know it wont hold a plane stationary no matter what happens to the wheels.if the plane don't
move it's wheels won't move therefore the converor won't move either?if the plane,conveyor or wheels don't move it's not a myth just foolishness,not worthy of discussion.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
whatever a v22 is or any RC airplane. many of them have powerful motors that can take off from someones hand but that gets into different type of a discussion
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside v22 is a full size air plane that take off from a stationary pos. kinda like a jump jet but with props.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
so you insult people when you claim they don't know how a plane works(like your friend) when in reality, they see mythbusters doing the experiment WRONG according to what the myth MYTHBUSTERS TOLD.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside i am thankful for your arguements, and no i mean to insult noone, however it is my belief that the myth is old, and yes i read it in the 80s, and as i remember it. the question is can a conveyor stop an airplane from taking off? i answered no then, and no today.
if the myth is different than that i do not know of it.
However i'm off to tour 0300 tommarrow will not have time for this, I may continue the arguement in a couple of years, if we're both still alive. respectfully Jo.
joracer1 9 months ago
@taledarkside if you like this myth you'll love this question. If you took 2 of the same bullets shot one from a gun
aimed parallel to the ground, and droped the other bullet held the same distance at the same time which would hit the ground first?
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
they hit the ground at the same time assuming air resistance is the same
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside Right!
joracer1 9 months ago
all the treadmill done was spin the wheels faster.
oliverjamescarr 10 months ago
Meh. The plane was moving forward relative to the ground, so I'm not sure what they proved here. It was obviously going by the cones.
kingluke2 10 months ago
@kingluke2 That's the entire point. It is a physical impossibility for the treadmill to prevent the plant from moving forward, because the force that drives the plan acts on the air, not the ground.
bradleyland 10 months ago
@bradleyland Huh - seems like they presented the myth differently - e.g. in the animated graphics, they showed a plane stationary on a conveyor rising straight into the air. I guess I just don't get the whole myth - seems obvious that the lift is based on airspeed, regardless of what the conveyor / wheels are doing. If there was a 25 mph headwind that ultralight could rise straight off the ground. Not sure why the pilot was surprised, flight school teaches all this stuff.
kingluke2 10 months ago
The myth is screwed up. The myth was supposed to be if a plane would take off if the wheel speed of the plane matched the conveyor belt. Like a car on a conveyor belt. The real myth was NOTHING to do with airspeed. Again take the car on the conveyor belt, it has zero airspeed. The plane took off because the pilot was able to achieve takeoff speed, the wheels exceeded the speed of the conveyor belt (until it left the ground).
detectiveinspekta 10 months ago
@detectiveinspekta Sorry should be zero airspeed.
detectiveinspekta 10 months ago
@detectiveinspekta no, the plane took off because there is no way the conveyor belt could stop it from moving relative to the air.
imagine standing on a treadmill with rollerblades on. you could hold yourself there pretty easily no matter how fast the treadmill was going because there is a maximum frictional force in the wheels. if the treadmill was going at 500mph, you could still pull yourself forwards with the same amount of force youd need if the treadmill was going at sprinting pace.
RoddersK 10 months ago
people who say the plane won't take off are extremely narrow minded, especially after seeing this video. i remember arguing about this in my high school physics class when i was 14. i'm not saying i'm a genius but to me this just seems so simple as to why the place WOULD take off.
MrBrandonRTR 11 months ago
@MrBrandonRTR
because the myth is the plane to stay in one spot, which it will never gain any airspeed. Hence it doesn't take off.
the myth isn't can a plane have the ability to move on a treadmill.
taledarkside 9 months ago
All planes do this all the time, the earth is just a giant conveyer belt moving west to east at around 1000 mph....to the non mechanical minded people the plane also couldn't land on a running conveyer belt either..,..that's funny right there....I enjoyed this mythbusters episode....my friend did not..he/he...
joracer1 1 year ago
Me and a friend argued about this for days, he just don't get it...there's nothing a
conveyor belt can do to a plane to keep it from taking off......He said the mythbusters show didn't do it right...
he gets mad every time you mention an airplane on a conveyor
belt, and that's funny ..it's simple if your mechanical minded you get it, if not you don't.....
joracer1 1 year ago
@joracer1
Maybe he gets it because mythbusters claimed the airplane will stay still and it is a test to see if it takes off or not.
the myth wasn't can a plane move up or down a treadmill.
taledarkside 9 months ago
@taledarkside d myth was the plane would not move therefore would not take off, mythbusters job was
2 find out if it's true or not, I knew before they tried it not only would it move it would have no effect on it...
I don't need mythbusters to test it, for me to know the answer, however my friend said it wd not move
it wd not take off. i grasp the idea. some can't. it's simple the propeller moves the plane foward the plane then takes off, there's nothing a converor belt can do to stop it.
joracer1 9 months ago
Right. It's kind of a tricky myth, because the most important part of the myth itself (that a conveyor belt could keep a plane stationary) is actually impossible.
Submariner75 1 year ago
Ok, I've got an even better example that even a complete moron should be able to visualize. Put a plane on a really long conveyor with its engine OFF. Start the conveyor going. Set it so it is pulling the plane back at 10,000 miles per hour. Now start the plane and try to take off. The plane will accelerate and take off just as if it were on a runway. Why? Because the wheels are not driving the plane forward, the PROPELLOR is.
Submariner75 1 year ago
Look at it this way. Lets say a plane is traveling at 200 miles per hour through the air. Now a conveyor belt turning backwards at 200 miles per hour on a hover platform traveling under the plane is raised up underneath the plane until it makes contact with the wheels. Would the plane suddenly stop and go backwards off the conveyor belt? No, the conveyor belt would simply turn the wheels. That's exactly what is happening on the ground.
Submariner75 1 year ago
Obviously if the plane remains stationary, its not going to take off. Duh. The problem is that a conveyor belt CANNOT keep a plane stationary! That is why the plane takes off and the myth is busted! Tell me HOW a conveyor belt, which just turns the wheels, is going to stop a propellor from pulling a plane forward.
Submariner75 1 year ago 2
The point being that's not the myth. The myth is if a conveyor belt went backwards at the plane's takeoff speed, it would not be able to take off.
Submariner75 1 year ago
If the prop's forward force matched the conveyor belt's backwards frictional force, the plane would remain stationary, and there would only be air from the prop passing through the wings, thus little difference in pressure created and thus little upward force and thus no take off.
SpiderWaffle 1 year ago
@SpiderWaffle - right, but they are not trying to match the frictional force of the conveyor. They are accelerating to take off speed, that's the myth. The plane is trying to take off, not just taxiing at a slow speed.
Submariner75 1 year ago
@Submariner75 I thought the myth was that the plane would have zero velocity relative to ground and takeoff velocity relative to the conveyor belt. If the plane has takeoff velocity relative to ground it's obviously going to take, the mere fact that there's a belt under it moving in the opposite direction doesn't change anything. Why would that ever be a myth?
Or was the myth more so, could a plane reach takeoff velocity given that's on an opposing conveyor belt? I guess the key there is...
SpiderWaffle 1 year ago
@Submariner75 ...that the wheels are independently free-spinning with little friction while the prop provides a forward force on the plane.
SpiderWaffle 1 year ago
This all boils down to a simple question: Can a conveyor hold back a plane from moving forward? The answer is NO.
Submariner75 1 year ago
this is so fucking retarded... The plane was supposed to stand completely still! OFC it takes off when it moves foreward
haablaust 1 year ago
@haablaust That's because the conveyor CAN'T keep it standing still! It has a propellor! That's why the myth is busted, because it DIDN'T stay still.
Submariner75 1 year ago
What would happen if the truck was moving twice the speed of the plane? Does the speedometer of a plane measure speed the same way as a land vehicle?
juggleknot 1 year ago
@juggleknot The plane will still take off. The conveyor cannot negate the thrust from the propellor, no matter how fast you move it. The reason that the conveyor pulls the plane back when it is at rest is because of inertia and friction between the wheels and the conveyor. Once the engine starts, the wheels start rolling and friction is broken, meaning the conveyor is no longer pulling back on the plane. Then the plane just moves forward and takes off like the conveyor is not there.
Submariner75 1 year ago
Crazy how so many people can be so confused. It's like "why don't the astronauts float off the moon? They wear heavy boots!".
Stormwern 1 year ago
The plane did not remain stationary because they matched the airplanes speed with that of the trucks, trying to create a large conveyor belt.
TheKeyboardKitty 1 year ago
0:59 runaway segway
ANAN0M0US 1 year ago
WHAT !?!? THE PILOT IS SURPRISED !??!?! HE IS NOOB THEN, he doesnt know what a plane is, HE MUST NOT FUCKIN FLY!!!
94valeRa01 1 year ago
the propeller pushes air towards the wings
jrocboy111 1 year ago
I'd like to see them try this with a huge fan pushing the air in front of the plane backwards :D
TomARowly 1 year ago
This could be a really innovative invention for airports and runways.... The could literally launch planes from small takeoff zones and not have the lame delays and waiting times for taxi and takeoff.
staphinfection 1 year ago
@staphinfection wrong, it would actually make no difference.
unapro3 1 year ago
Obviously the plane did not match the speed of the belt, Mythbusters is for entertainment only and has no real scientific basis. It is really simple. If the plane produced enough thrust to remain stationary then it would be matching the speed of the belt and there would be no airflow over the wings. No airflow over the wings = no fly. I can't believe the Mythbusters can't get theirhead around it.
unapro3 1 year ago
@unapro3
I thought this at first, but:
The wheels are not providing the thrust, they are just acting as the front wheel on a bike.
The propeller is causing the plane to move forwards relative to whatever the propeller is pushing against (the air).
Because the plane is moving relative to the air, and not the tarp, the plane moves forwards.
This causes the wheels to spin faster, but seeing as they are only there passively, this does not affect the forward movement of the plane.
:)
TomARowly 1 year ago 3
@TomARowly it matters not where the thrust comes from. If the prop was not turning at all andthe plane was on the conveyor belt it would move backwards with the conveyor belt, would it not? of course it would. If the prop produces enough thrust to keep the aircraft from moving backwards on the conveyor but not enough thrust to move the plane forward it will have zero airflow over the wings and no lift.
unapro3 1 year ago
@unapro3 Consider a simple system force balance. You have air, your plane, and a conveyor system (say, a treadmill). Now, the propeller accelerates the air, generating a total force on the system -- something has to move forward. If there is no friction between the conveyor and it, the plane accelerates alone and that's that. With perfect friction (say it's glued to the conveyor), the conveyor-plane system must accelerate. SOMETHING must accelerate. It is impossible to have a stationary system!
Gamemako 1 year ago
@Gamemako I'm not sure where you get your formulaes from, simply put, if you have an aircraft on a treadmill and you start the treadmill, the aircraft does not have an engine, it will roll off the back of the treadmill, follow me so far? now to stop the a/c from going backwards with the treadmill some thing is needed to hold the plane in position, hence the thrust from the prop. It won't need much to keep the plane stationary, probably idling will suffice. There is no lift generated!!
unapro3 1 year ago
@unapro3
Right. But that is when the propeller is not moving the plane forwards, the friction generated from the treadmill is the only force acting on it, but it would be ignorant to suggest that the plane would move backwards at the same speed as the treadmill, as its wheels are free moving.
Here, they are trying to see if the plane takes off when the propeller is pushing the plane forward at the same speed as the treadmill is going backward. Surely you can see that these will not cancel out.
TomARowly 1 year ago
@unapro3
They are not trying to see if the plane takes off when stationary, just when on a moving surface.
TomARowly 1 year ago
The whole debate is about the belt going at the same speed as the planes wheels to cause it to remain stationary relative to the ground.
This plane is moving, and therefore causing an up-thrust through the air it passes through. This isn't 'busted'.
TinySlayer 1 year ago
the plane could not remain stationary relative to the air even though the ground was going backwards because it wasn't connected to the ground firmly and honestly if it was it wouldn't be an airplane...The airplane doesn't work like a rocket but more like a car in the air... The airplane pushes air behind it, it does not push the ground, rockets work in space airplanes don't The myth is totally busted, a heavier plane may not be able to take off from the conveyor belt though
kkonstantinosss2 1 year ago
THE VIDEO IS INCONCLUSIVE . MYTH NOT BUSTED AT ALL .!!!!
A) THERE HAS TO BE A RELATIVE MOTION BETWEEN THE PLANE AND THE WIND HAS TO BE EQUIVALENT TO THE TAKE OFF SPEED OF THE AIRCRAFT , FOR IT TO BE AIRBORNE. THE WHOLE TREADMILL IS POINT LESS .
THE AIRCRAFT WOULD BE AIRBORNE EVEN IF A 55 KNOT WIND (HEAD WIND) WAS BLOWING AT THE RUNWAY , AND THE AIRPLANE HAD ITS ENGINE OFF!!!
B)SECONDLY THE TARP WASNT ACTING AS A TREADMILL AT ALL ... THE PLANE WAS CLEARLY OVING PAST THE CONES
ahandfullofearth 1 year ago
@ahandfullofearth "the whole treadmill is pointless" lol
The debate is over. They proved it.
Honestly people saying it would be held in place defeats THE POINT!
StargateMunky 1 year ago
@ahandfullofearth You missed the point completely.
Erverino 1 year ago
The propeller pushes back against the air, not the ground. It pulls itself forward through the air regardless of how fast/slow the wheels are going.
It's like asking if you'd be able to SWIM over a conveyor belt underwater; you're pushing against the water (just as the plane pushes against the air), NOT the belt.
HelplessVictim 1 year ago
wtf...are these guys idiots? the plane WAS MOVING ON THE GROUND...it was not stationary....
this test is therefore pointless. it's like testing if a planet can take off...that's it...people have known this since the Wright brothers....
LittleBigTimi 1 year ago
@LittleBigTimi The myth is testing if a conveyor belt can stop an airplane from moving. The test proved it cannot. It was a very good test. It is ironic you say its pointless when you obviously thought the conveyor should be holding an airplane stationary, which is impossible. They explained throughout the whole episode that the plane would NOT be held stationary.
mitchio83 1 year ago 2
pt 2. The same is true for the plane, only instead of grabbing a rope, the plane grabs the still air in front of it
Steve181 1 year ago 3
pt 1. If everyone read this there would be no confusion. Imagine if you had roller skates on your feet and were standing on a treadmill holding a stationary rope that outstretches in front of you. As the treadmill tries to push you backwards, your grasp on the rope keeps you stationary and your wheels spin. Now, someone begins to reel that rope in. The treadmill can try and compensate, but it only means your wheels spin faster, you will move forward in relative space.
Steve181 1 year ago 10
@Steve181 steve you can't explain this to people that don't get it, no matter how hard you try, they get mad and you get a good laugh, because they don't get it. it is fun to try to explain it to them and watch them this and that about it, but when they get mad you just got to laugh. that makes them that much more angry...
i say to them if a plane can't take off from a conveyor then it also can't land on one either right?? that usually gets 'em.
joracer1 9 months ago
@joracer1
And the plane in the first experiment didn't take off. It rolled right off the jogging treadmill.
taledarkside 9 months ago
How can they be so exited about that? It is simple logic that the plane would take off.
dude2106 1 year ago
im so excited u can tell by my jumping
z0rgz0rg 1 year ago
@z0rgz0rg
How the fuck can we see your jumping?
neofaktion 1 year ago
@neofaktion its the internet. he is tryin to describe how you could tell if you where next to him. he could have worked it better.
like... * im so excited, you could tell by my jumping*
justsumnewb123 1 year ago
so does that mean that the plane took less distance to take off?
practically speaking, maybe aircraft carriers could be shorter if they had conveyor belts on them?
DannyMac100 1 year ago
I always assumed the question involved the plane remaining stationary on the ground while the treadmill and wheels moved.
ClownVonDavid 1 year ago
The only point of this would be if the airplane was in the same place in relation to the ground (not treadmill), and that's what the treadmill was for. It wouldn't take off, of course, since there would be no movement in relation to the air surrounding the wings, thus no uplift...
Completely pointless.
Kyuubi840 1 year ago
This is wrong, the plane wouldn't go up , the only reason it flew it's because they are not the travelling at the same speed.
llKaiserx0ll 1 year ago
take off the wheels from a plane and see if it lifts off only using a propeller... same concept, eliminating opposing forces problem altogether lol
fleiteh 1 year ago
The whole argument is if the forward speed of the plane is matched by a treadmill the plane will either:
1) Take off.
2) Not take off.
The power is being sent to the propeller which pushes air behind itself and under the wings to create lift. So the plane should take off as the air from the propeller is forced back under the wings anyway.
However they didn't show that in this video. They just showed a plane accelerating whilst on the treadmill before taking off. The treadmill wasn't accurate.
1234ilovemarinecore 1 year ago
Misleading myth.
Any idiot with a brain could've said this would work. Propeller isn't affected by the moving ground.
langerCAN 1 year ago
what the fuck? UR DOIN IT WRONG
shatterjack 1 year ago
Mythbusters sure fucked this one up.
joezilla29 1 year ago
all that matters is the friction limit of the bearings
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
this was common sense
the wheels just have to spin faster
dudrhkd7 1 year ago
The plane did not remain stationary.
VacuumLogic 1 year ago 60
@VacuumLogic it wasent ment to be stationary, they where matching the speed that it goes when it normally takes off.
exactly what rkr1995 said. the resistance that the plain put up was able to push it forward. the wheels simple just rolling at the rate of the belt + plains new take off speed. making it no different
justsumnewb123 1 year ago 2
@VacuumLogic the plane is not required to remain stationary
pannic2010 1 year ago
@VacuumLogic exactly
JimBean0587 1 year ago
@VacuumLogic Exactly, it took off, which is why the myth is busted.
Submariner75 1 year ago
@VacuumLogic
Because that would be physically impossible. The plane's is putting out the force that would require the normal take off speed, not more. The wheels will just spin twice as fast.
If the strip was moving at a million miles an hour, the plane would still move forward at normal takeoff speed with the wheels moving at that plus a million miles per hour.
KyouTGD 11 months ago 12
@KyouTGD Well that's if the plane can't go back. If you fix the plane and let the wheels freespin, they'll move that fast. but if you let the plane loose at a million miles an hour, it would slowly start going back.
AdamsTeinz 6 months ago
@KyouTGD the only problem i have with this is EVENTUALLY at a high enough speed (which would be absolutely ridiculously fast) the wheels wouldn't be able to turn fast enough and the plane would go backwards, but yes the wheels dont really matter for shit when it comes to a plane taking off
xdoods 4 months ago
Comment removed
StarIessNight 1 month ago
@VacuumLogic That's the point of debunking the myth! A treadmill, no matter how fast it goes in the opposite direction, cannot prevent a plane from moving forward because the plane's propulsion mechanism acts on the air, not the ground.
bradleyland 10 months ago 8
isnt it basically like the catapult on an aircraft carrier?
Godsjudgement12 1 year ago
2: Let me repeat: Once the pilot fires up the engines, the plane moves forward at pretty much the usual speed relative to the ground--and more importantly the air--regardless of how fast the treadmill is moving backward. This generates lift on the wings, and the plane takes off. All the treadmill belt does is, as you must conclude, make the plane's wheels spin madly.
Onypop2 1 year ago 2
1: Cars and planes don't work the same way. A car's wheels are its means of propulsion--they push the road backwards (relatively speaking), and the car moves forward. In contrast, a plane's wheels aren't motorized; their purpose is to reduce friction during takeoff (and add it, by braking, when landing). What gets a plane moving are its propellers or jet turbines, which shove the air backward and thereby impel the plane forward. What the wheels, treadmill, etc, are up to is largely irrelevant.
Onypop2 1 year ago 2
@Onypop2 Okay, your explanation makes this make more sense to me now. So, the propeller pushes air past the wings to generate lift, right?
temp16k 1 year ago
@temp16k Yes. It also pulls the airplane forward which makes air flow under the wings
Onypop2 1 year ago
The cones moving by the plane mean they did it WRONG! This show has always annoyed me with its poor methods. Clearly the plane is moving faster than the conveyor belt making the belt moot. Every time they call a myth busted my jaw hangs as I think of all the ways they failed to rigorously test it. I like the guys and they clearly have fun but this is not scientifically sound methodology at all.
icntsywhtiwnt2 1 year ago
@icntsywhtiwnt2 no u ARE WRONG the prop on the plane pulls the plane forward not the wheels u retard
skittlepower95 1 year ago
I think what everyone is missing is the two sides are arguing over different points.
The people that think the conveyor will stop it are wrong because the engine moves air, not the ground. They are right in saying "if the plane is stationary, it will not fly" which is entirely right. The wind speed is 0 over the wings, there is no lift., the plane does not fly.
The people that say it will fly are right/wrong for the opposite reasons as above .
itbeshowinlikeamotha 1 year ago
This is stupid. I don't see how they can assume the plane and the belt are moving at the same speed if the plane is obviously moving forward. I'm never been so ashamed to like mythbusters.
vesper777 1 year ago
This is stupid. Ofcourse it won't work, the wheels arn't driven.
TomClark2 1 year ago
It's a little worrying that the pilot himself didn't get this!
brainflakes 2 years ago
this is lame, if the plane and the treadmill were moving at the same speed it should cancell eachother out and not even move
roberthemsley2 2 years ago
@roberthemsley2
Exactly the plane was accelerating and moving forward therefore air was passing over the wings which means of course its ganna take off....this is dumb.
JuDge118 2 years ago
no, because the wheels of the plane are on a flywheel, its the propellor that pulls it forward, therefore the " conveyor belt" isn't pulling it backwards at all
lilshortys309 1 year ago
That fastes and easiest way to explain this:
If there is enough wind under the wings to make it fly, you could even be moving it backwards and it WILL fly. The ground has nothing to do with the speed of the wind. This is how pelicans glide at the beach waiting for fish.
videojunkieMAN 2 years ago
Typing before viewing... The physics on this are very simple. The driving force of the prop is not in any way correlating with its wheels turning. A conveyor belt will not make any difference
rkr1995 2 years ago 4
yes the driveing force is correlating with the blah blah blah, but it is very little
xLikeMeOrDontx 2 years ago
@rkr1995
I like it how people here write as if they were masters in physics or some shit, like you. It's actually not that simple. Think of the paper planes we all used to do when little. You had to push them so wind can flow under them and thus they would fly. Anyways, I'm still perplexed as to how that damn thing took off without wind under its wings. It's not like the propeller (being that small) blasts a bunch of air under the wings... Maybe it was windy that day?
videojunkieMAN 2 years ago
I know what I'm talking about. The propeller pulls the airplane forward... how do you not get that? It's really simple.
rkr1995 2 years ago 35