It's been a while - and we have new blood...

[flounderbout]

the ball has attained speed, but no velocity

You mean this wasn't said seriously Bob?

[Mork]

Righto.
Here's one for the crowd then.
If a motorbike has its handlebars fixed so they can't turn, can it still turn corners by leaning?

[Maverick]

Righto.
Here's one for the crowd then.
If a motorbike has its handlebars fixed so they can't turn, can it still turn corners by leaning?

Countersteering

[flounderbout]

Righto.
Here's one for the crowd then.
If a motorbike has its handlebars fixed so they can't turn, can it still turn corners by leaning?

If the wheels are fixed along with the handlebars, then no. If the handlebars are fixed but not the wheel, then yes.

[Predictable Bob]

You mean this wasn't said seriously Bob?

It was totally serious BUT I suspect his intent was to confuse the issue by the introduction of FACTS

[flounderbout]

It was totally serious BUT I suspect his intent was to confuse the issue by the introduction of FACTS

The only FACT likely to turn up in here is the Federation Against Copyright Theft.

[TonyN]

Righto.
Here's one for the crowd then.
If a motorbike has its handlebars fixed so they can't turn, can it still turn corners by leaning?

Powerslides.

[Koi]

I'm sorry to say you have missed a fundamental point of the riddle.
(or you are just playing the wind-up game)
The whole point of the riddle is that the airplane is moved by the propellers not the wheels.

For example.
A piece of glass is suspended over a conveyor 3 foot in front of a car.
The conveyor belt moves backwards at the same speed as the car moves forwards. would the car ever hit the glass.
The answer is of course, NO.
Everyone knows that cars and conveyors cancel each other out.

But the reason a plane is used in the riddle is because the planes movement is not determined by the wheels.

Consider this
A plane is flying above a conveyor a mere 2 foot above the ground.
The plane is flying at 50mph, the conveyor is moving the other way at 50mph.
If the plane lowers it's wheels then the wheels will spin at 100mph, but the plane and conveyor will continue to move at 50mph.
(bearings resistance and aerodynamics accepted)

The conveyor has no impact on the movement of the plane.
It just has an impact on the rotation of the wheels.

Oh I did, I thought it said the conveyor matched the planes speed, it didnt say matches the planes wheel speed, just the planes speed
to take off a plane needs speed, after all they take off and fly at a measured speed called mph its speed is still measured at mph when the wheels are up and not turning so wheel speed is irrelevant - so what ever that mph is the conveyor matches it in reverse so plane travelling forward 1000mph, conveyor belt backwards matching the planes not the wheel speed 1000mph = static on the conveyor

[Mork]

Oh I did, I thought it said the conveyor matched the planes speed, it didnt say matches the planes wheel speed, just the planes speed
to take off a plane needs speed, after all they take off and fly at a measured speed called mph its speed is still measured at mph when the wheels are up and not turning so wheel speed is irrelevant - so what ever that mph is the conveyor matches it in reverse so plane travelling forward 1000mph, conveyor belt backwards matching the planes not the wheel speed 1000mph = static on the conveyor

Hmmm.

You're either playing the wind up game by doing a very good impression of an idiot.
Or, you've spent a little bit too long sniffing petrol, you're a few bananas short of a fruit basket, you're not the sharpest tool in the draw, you're as bright as two short planks, you're one savant short of being an idiot savant, etc.

Bearing in mind you're apparently quite a good mechanic, you manage to keep the forum running, and you seem to be able to type coherently without just banging your Neanderthal forehead on the keyboard I'm going to assume the former.

I will congratulate you on putting forward some truly brilliant pieces of flawed logic though, and a wonderful display of missing the point completely, not to mention a wind up ability that's not been seen since Heinrich Von Clockenmaker single handedly wound up all the watches and clocks in his father clock warehouse in just one night while sleepwalking.

[Vultch]

Come on chaps ...its a bit of fun...

[schrodingers-cat]

My computer broke, i faffed around for days then fixed it and still the thread goes on Classic
Here`s a vid of a plane going nowhere but still flying. Its the speed of the air over the wings that matters Watch

[Mork]

Come on chaps ...its a bit of fun...

Of course it is.
I hope you didn't think I was insulting Mr Koi.
I said he was doing and impression of an idiot, not that he is one.

It's like playing the piano badly. To play it badly in an amusing way, one needs to know how to play it very well.

I'm sure than in order for Mr Koi to be amusingly dense on the subject of planes and conveyor belts he actually understands the principles in great depth. But it's more fun to act the fool and deliberately miss the point.

[Vultch]

My computer broke, i faffed around for days then fixed it and still the thread goes on Classic
Here`s a vid of a plane going nowhere but still flying. Its the speed of the air over the wings that matters Watch

Ahem ..see my first statement.. yes I agree with if it was already flying 5m above the belt, buts it as it tries to get airborne thats interesting.
When myth busters did it..if memory serves me right the aircraft did not move forward relative to the surroundings ..it did get in to the air but that was caused by the prop pushing directly over the wing ..

[Mork]

My computer broke, i faffed around for days then fixed it and still the thread goes on Classic
Here`s a vid of a plane going nowhere but still flying. Its the speed of the air over the wings that matters Watch

I can't watch that here (firewalls), but I think I've seen it before.
It's a fantastic bit if science.

But, it's got bugger all to do with the plane/conveyor question.
Although, it could easily make people thing it's the same bit of science and be used to confuse matters more.

[Mork]

Ahem ..see my first statement.. yes I agree with if it was already flying 5m above the belt, buts it as it tries to get airborne thats interesting.
When myth busters did it..if memory serves me right the aircraft did not move forward relative to the surroundings ..it did get in to the air but that was caused by the prop pushing directly over the wing ..

The plane would still move relative to its surroundings and take off even if was a jet.