Skill's weekend teaser

[Skill Leverage]

Unbelievable.

Yeah, it really, really is.

You are telling me that you actually believe that the brakes on two tiny wheels on a plane can overcome the thrust of four jet engines??????!!!

ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFL.

 

[Skill Leverage]

Great idea. Rip off the wheels. Put a float under the mother.

Put it in a stream that can be made to flow against the forward thrust of the plane so that it exactly cancels out forward movement. No wheels. OK? Logically same teaser. OK with that?

Where does the airspeed come form?

Rip off the wheels and stick a plane on a runway.

Does it take off? YES IT DOES.

Putting a plane IN WATER against the current is completely different to having it on a conveyor belt... why? A stream pushing against a plane's hull DIRECTLY OPPOSES the thrust of the engines.

A CONVEYOR BELT ON THE WHEELS DOES NOT.


JEEEEEEEEEEEEEESUS

 

[MrGecko]

Unfortunately (for you) my answer was correct and it is based on experential knowledge (as a pilot) and an educational background in aerodynamics.

What sort of "pilot" are we talking about here - Have you flown 747's? Have you been a commercial or military pilot? Or did you just treat yourself to a PPL...

 

[Skill Leverage]

Oh, and if it was on a frictionless float, it would still take off as normal.

 

[Skill Leverage]

What sort of "pilot" are we talking about here - Have you flown 747's? Have you been a commercial or military pilot? Or did you just treat yourself to a PPL...

Do Red Letter Days do flying lessons?

 

[MrGecko]

Do Red Letter Days do flying lessons?

Message for Arabian: PNMP!

 

[Skill Leverage]

Must remember to be nice....

You're clearly not going to budge, and neither are we. Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?

I'm right though.

 

[TheBramble]

Yeah, it really, really is.

You are telling me that you actually believe that the brakes on two tiny wheels on a plane can overcome the thrust of four jet engines??????!!!

ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFL.

There are 16 brakes on a 747 and when engaged each is fastened with 3000 PSI. This will easily hold the quarter-million HP output.

Skills, check your facts and do your research. Basically, engage your brain. If you're as wishy-washy in your trading as you come across in this thread I suspect you haven't been trading long or if you have, you're back to a demo account. Again. LOL.

 

[Skill Leverage]

Mate, you are wrong, and have been proved wrong. I might not know the PSIs of brakes on a plane, but I can tell you that they are completely, and utterly, irrelevant to this problem.

If you're as reluctant to accept that you're wrong in your trading as you come across in this thread, then I suspect you are, in fact, Nick Leeson.

 

[TheBramble]

What sort of "pilot" are we talking about here - Have you flown 747's? Have you been a commercial or military pilot? Or did you just treat yourself to a PPL...

NO. Never flown multi-engine. I just 'treated myself' to a PPL 7 years ago and fly fairly regularly still. I reckon that puts me in the 5% most likely to at least be aware of the physical realities and practicalities of aerodynamic flight.

 

[Skill Leverage]

There are 16 brakes on a 747 and when engaged each is fastened with 3000 PSI. This will easily hold the quarter-million HP output.

Isn't Wikipedia terrific?

 

[Skill Leverage]

NO. Never flown multi-engine. I just 'treated myself' to a PPL 7 years ago and fly fairly regularly still. I reckon that puts me in the 5% most likely to at least be aware of the physical realities and practicalities of aerodynamic flight.

Bramble, OK, seriously... you may be a pilot, you might be John bloody Travolta for all I care; this isn't a problem that can be solved through practical knowledge. How many times have you, or any of the other 5%, taken off from a conveyor belt?

This is a theoretical question involving concepts within physics and engineering; concepts which you do not understand, thus you are making yourself look foolish. Seriously mate, I'd just quite while you're behind. Come to the drinks in London, I will show you this problem, in a textbook written by several very clever professors.

Real world knowledge means nothing here. Period.

 

[TheBramble]

You're clearly not going to budge, and neither are we. Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?

No. That's never really worked for me. It's important that some learnings occur from this. Either for you or for me. And anyone else watching of course.

Just letting it drop without conclusive and definitive proof would have been a waste of time for all of us.

Compromise would not get the plane off the conveyor nor keep it on it. It has to do one or the other, doesn't it. Just a case of me finding sufficiently convincing evidence (for you) for me to prove my point.

 

[Skill Leverage]

I have definitive proof, and there is no evidence you can give, because you are WROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG!

Jesus, seriously are you for real?!

 

[Claudia123]

A Harrier has a 50/50 chance of taking off, I thought you knew that?

lol it would wouldn't it

 

[Skill Leverage]

OK, at the end of the day I know I am right. Gecko has confirmed this, as have several others. You are standing alone, arguing a case by changing the subject to brake pressures and rivers, NONE OF WHICH are applicable in this situation.

I've offered to give you the proof of this next Friday; either this is a damn good trolling or you are just too stupid to understand basic, BASIC mechancis, and right now I have better things to do than spoonfeed you GCSE Physics.

Go back and read what we have written, and see if any of it settles in your head. Otherwise, I'll see you next Friday.

 

[TheBramble]

Go back and read what we have written, and see if any of it settles in your head. Otherwise, I'll see you next Friday.

I will do as you advise. Thank you for sticking with me. Discipline. Structure. Yes.

 

[Skill Leverage]

Sometimes you have to cut a loss mate. If only someone had told you that before you blew up Barings eh...

 

[TheBramble]

Imagine a 747 sitting on a very large conveyor belt. The belt has the same dimensions as a runway at an airport*, and is set up to exactly match the speed of the plane's wheels, moving in the opposite direction.

If the conveyor is set up to exactly match the speed of the plane's wheels, does that mean that regardless of the speed of the conveyor, the plane will not be moving relative to the ground upon which the conveyor sits? Is my analysis, so far, correct?

 

[Skill Leverage]

Sigh...

If the engine is switched off, yes. If not, no.

Since you cannot get past this basic point, seriously, I am leaving.