The plane and the conveyor belt, pt. 2



Like I said, I did a bunch of reading about this riddle after I thought about it for a while. My brain ended up hurting pretty badly, but a few key quotes helped me significantly. One of the best (and, ironically, simplest) explainations was by a commentor named Jason on kottke’s post. He says:

The point of the riddle is that the motion of the wheels exerts only a minor frictional force opposing the forward movement of the plane. The major force being supplied is from the plane engine, and that force is a forward force. The net force is equal to the forward force minus the negligible frictional force. This obviously produces a net forward force. Therefore, the plane moves forward, regardless of how much the wheels are spinning. The plane is not remaining stationary on the conveyor belt becasue there is a force acting on the plane that is not dependent on the motion of the conveyor belt.

Another good explaination of why the plane will take off can be found here. An excerpt:

The difference between a car and a grounded airplane is that a car uses its wheels to propel itself forward, and an airplane moves itself forward by moving air. They assume that the runway moving backwards would move the plane backwards. This is what would happen with a car (that is in gear), so why not for an airplane? Well, because an airplane’s wheels are free rolling. There is obviously some friction, so there would be some small backwards force, but it would be infinitely small as compared to the forward thrust of the airplane.

Yet another place explains why the plane will take off, although it would initially seem otherwise:

A thought experiment commonly cited in discussions of this question is to imagine you’re standing on a health-club treadmill in rollerblades while holding a rope attached to the wall in front of you. The treadmill starts; simultaneously you begin to haul in the rope. Although you’ll have to overcome some initial friction tugging you backward, in short order you’ll be able to pull yourself forward easily.

So, now do you believe?


Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed to have articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always sign up for email updates and have fresh content delivered daily to your inbox.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

No trackbacks/pingbacks yet.

Comments

I still disagree. If the riddle is as it was initially explained, and the conveyor belt can apply a speed of negative X, where speed X is the groundspeed of theplane at any given time, it is, in effect, exerting a negative force equal to the positive forward force applied by the engines.

While the point of the riddle seems to be to explain that the rotational velocity of an aircraft’s wheels has no bearing on its relative ability to achieve flight, none of those explanations do a good job of addressing the issue of airspeed. While IANAAE (I Am Not An Aerospace Engineer), I still believe that my grasp of Bernoulli’s Principle is strong enough that I’m still certain that the plane will not fly, as long as the speed of the conveyor increases with increased engine power to move groundspeed (and thus airspeed) of the aircraft to zero.

Keep noodling it over, Ryan! I initially didn’t see how the plane could take off, but now it is clear as day to me.

Heck, if the plane were on casters, the treadmill could be moving left to right and the plane would *still* blast in a straight line down the runway and take off.

Because the casters turn freely, they transfer no significant force from the treadmill to the body of the aircraft.

i still dont think it will take off. but im not all that smart… sooo…. hmmm…. ??

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)