Quickshift asked to prevent the wheels from turnig. Therefore the belt must move in the same speed and direction as the tires normally do.
I think there must be a very good engineer to design the governor needed, and at least one nuclear power plant to provide the energy.
Depending on different meaning of the question i see an alternate solving of this problem:
In the case of compensating the moving of the wheels in forward direction the belt has to do nothing. The part of tire in contact with the runway has no relative speed to ground.
No detected relative speed between stand (contact) area and the concrete means there is no need to move the belt. Usual take off.
Onra
P.S.: Rockets lift off even without wheels. How can this happen? 😀
Onra
I think there must be a very good engineer to design the governor needed, and at least one nuclear power plant to provide the energy.
Depending on different meaning of the question i see an alternate solving of this problem:
In the case of compensating the moving of the wheels in forward direction the belt has to do nothing. The part of tire in contact with the runway has no relative speed to ground.
No detected relative speed between stand (contact) area and the concrete means there is no need to move the belt. Usual take off.
Onra
P.S.: Rockets lift off even without wheels. How can this happen? 😀
Onra
Amazing.....I't's still going!
I thought it was going to be buried by silence....but NO!
Summary:
x = Y = Z
where x = flawed question and Y = flawed answer
The resultant conclusion: Z = Don't bother loosing sleep over it!
Oh, and Chris...stop feeding the fire you trouble maker!
Yours ever so sincerely Lee
I thought it was going to be buried by silence....but NO!
Summary:
x = Y = Z
where x = flawed question and Y = flawed answer
The resultant conclusion: Z = Don't bother loosing sleep over it!
Oh, and Chris...stop feeding the fire you trouble maker!
Yours ever so sincerely Lee
Yeah - I know - Sorry Wintermute 😀
Oi, Vikash, don't ban me. PPLLEEAASSEE. I won't be able to tell you about the new near massless driver I have invented using room temperature gas plasma. OK, maybe not but don't ban me anyway 😀
Oi, Vikash, don't ban me. PPLLEEAASSEE. I won't be able to tell you about the new near massless driver I have invented using room temperature gas plasma. OK, maybe not but don't ban me anyway 😀
Oh ****.... now everybody is back on-line...can I say that?
Dont ban me ban HIM that gezza with THE question!
Right now everybody....say after me....
I WILL NOT POST ON THIS THREAD ANYMORE...........
come on just a few words.....not much to request of the spawn of DEEP THOUGHT.........you're not going to like it....but maybe 42rpm is the answer...OH my god that's it...ahaahhhhhhhhh.....
edit
You were in pretty quick with those ***'s Vikash.......
Dont ban me ban HIM that gezza with THE question!
Right now everybody....say after me....
I WILL NOT POST ON THIS THREAD ANYMORE...........
come on just a few words.....not much to request of the spawn of DEEP THOUGHT.........you're not going to like it....but maybe 42rpm is the answer...OH my god that's it...ahaahhhhhhhhh.....
edit
You were in pretty quick with those ***'s Vikash.......
Hi Lostcause,
LOL
Okay, I won't post anymore in this thread ...
... unless someone else does too
-Chris 😀
LOL
Okay, I won't post anymore in this thread ...
... unless someone else does too -Chris 😀
we used conveyor belts at UPS...
...but that was in another lifetime. I like all the little ways that this can be got wrong, and it's as funny to see the frustrations of guys who get it, and want to bash the heads of those who don't. Now, forgive me for dredging this up, and for being late on this, and I think my thinking is unscientific but physical-modelling sound, if that makes sense.
The walking machine is not a good way to consider the question, for the reason that a plane's wheels don't drive it: it don't matter how fast you turn the belt, so long as the gear holds up and can still hold the plane straight, it's forward speed through the air, upon which the engines (those hair dryers under the wings, or the ceiling fan in the front) act. Also, I think, a belt to shorten a runway would only add more stress to any braking done by the wheels on landing, if there is any, if it's turning towards the plane; it's still the air brakes and reversing the engines that do most of ther stopping. So the belt matches the speed of the wheels: they're only there to hold the plane up. As long as the forward speed of the wings is enough to produce lift, relative to the ground, you fly, right?
You should turn the plane around and use it like a catapault.
Pardon me if this is inserted someplace in the thread after the same point was made. I wish I'd discovered this a long time ago, it's a gas. Can I go back to the eBow thread now?
J
...but that was in another lifetime. I like all the little ways that this can be got wrong, and it's as funny to see the frustrations of guys who get it, and want to bash the heads of those who don't. Now, forgive me for dredging this up, and for being late on this, and I think my thinking is unscientific but physical-modelling sound, if that makes sense.
The walking machine is not a good way to consider the question, for the reason that a plane's wheels don't drive it: it don't matter how fast you turn the belt, so long as the gear holds up and can still hold the plane straight, it's forward speed through the air, upon which the engines (those hair dryers under the wings, or the ceiling fan in the front) act. Also, I think, a belt to shorten a runway would only add more stress to any braking done by the wheels on landing, if there is any, if it's turning towards the plane; it's still the air brakes and reversing the engines that do most of ther stopping. So the belt matches the speed of the wheels: they're only there to hold the plane up. As long as the forward speed of the wings is enough to produce lift, relative to the ground, you fly, right?
You should turn the plane around and use it like a catapault.
Pardon me if this is inserted someplace in the thread after the same point was made. I wish I'd discovered this a long time ago, it's a gas. Can I go back to the eBow thread now?
J
Hi jkratz,
Someone is going to find you and give you a spanking for bringing this thread up to the top again! 😀 It won't be me since I think it's hilarious too.
-Chris
Someone is going to find you and give you a spanking for bringing this thread up to the top again! 😀 It won't be me since I think it's hilarious too.
-Chris
anatech said:
Crikey Chris you were quick off the mark..........
I saw that gezza on the bike the other day, he's upgraded to a tandem....I'm sure it was you on the back.........
Hey Lostcause,
You weren't very far behind either! I responded to the mailer.
I guess this means all the usual suspects will be back for a go!
-Chris
You weren't very far behind either! I responded to the mailer.
I guess this means all the usual suspects will be back for a go!
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.