<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;Mythbusters&#8217; takes on blogging debate</title>
	<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/</link>
	<description>Wii, iPod, DVD, TV, and So Much More</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Various and Sundry: DVDs, Tech, HDTV, and More &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Mythbusters &#8212; TONIGHT!</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-148801</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:13:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-148801</guid>
					<description>[...] Here, let me quote me for a second, from last November: I think I have it. The plane WILL take off. The power of the plane’s movement come not from how fast the wheels are going. That’s what a car does. A plane catches air from the propulsion in its wings — prop place or jet place. The fact that the wheels are negated in the distance they travel doesn’t matter one bit. The whole plane is moving above it. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Here, let me quote me for a second, from last November: I think I have it. The plane WILL take off. The power of the plane’s movement come not from how fast the wheels are going. That’s what a car does. A plane catches air from the propulsion in its wings — prop place or jet place. The fact that the wheels are negated in the distance they travel doesn’t matter one bit. The whole plane is moving above it. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Various and Sundry: DVDs, Tech, HDTV, and More &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Mythbusters Update</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-141565</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-141565</guid>
					<description>[...] Bad news &#8212; tonight&#8217;s episode was dedicated to airplane myths, but none of them had anything to do with a plane on a conveyor belt. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Bad news &#8212; tonight&#8217;s episode was dedicated to airplane myths, but none of them had anything to do with a plane on a conveyor belt. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Scott Beeler</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136419</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 17:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136419</guid>
					<description>I don't think the prop or jet would have anything to do with it -- they move the plane predominantly *forward*, not *up*.  If there was sufficient *up* force generated by the prop or jet alone then planes could take off directly from a standing start without a run-up.

I still think what's needed for takeoff is the airflow past the wings generating lift, and that's not going to be there if the plane is stationary with respect to the air (and the Earth, and everything except the treadmill).

It'll be an interesting episode to watch, anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think the prop or jet would have anything to do with it &#8212; they move the plane predominantly *forward*, not *up*.  If there was sufficient *up* force generated by the prop or jet alone then planes could take off directly from a standing start without a run-up.</p>
<p>I still think what&#8217;s needed for takeoff is the airflow past the wings generating lift, and that&#8217;s not going to be there if the plane is stationary with respect to the air (and the Earth, and everything except the treadmill).</p>
<p>It&#8217;ll be an interesting episode to watch, anyway.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Augie De Blieck Jr.</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136355</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 02:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136355</guid>
					<description>I think I have it.  The plane WILL take off.  The power of the plane's movement come not from how fast the wheels are going.  That's what a car does.  A plane catches air from the propulsion in its wings -- prop place or jet place.  The fact that the wheels are negated in the distance they travel doesn't matter one bit.  The whole plane is moving above it.

Hmm, that sounded good when I started writing it, then sounded stupid by the time I finished.

Nevermind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I have it.  The plane WILL take off.  The power of the plane&#8217;s movement come not from how fast the wheels are going.  That&#8217;s what a car does.  A plane catches air from the propulsion in its wings &#8212; prop place or jet place.  The fact that the wheels are negated in the distance they travel doesn&#8217;t matter one bit.  The whole plane is moving above it.</p>
<p>Hmm, that sounded good when I started writing it, then sounded stupid by the time I finished.</p>
<p>Nevermind.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Scott Beeler</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136350</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 02:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136350</guid>
					<description>I would think the obvious answer would be that it could not take off:  if the belt speed and plane speed are exactly opposite, then the plane will be going nowhere with respect to the air, and it's the airspeed past the wing which gives the plane lift.  The moving belt isn't going to move the air, it just moves the particular part of the "ground" the plane is on.

What's throwing me is the quote that the whole flight club got it wrong, and I find it hard to imagine that they would not think of what I thought of.  So maybe there's some trick to it that my brain is missing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would think the obvious answer would be that it could not take off:  if the belt speed and plane speed are exactly opposite, then the plane will be going nowhere with respect to the air, and it&#8217;s the airspeed past the wing which gives the plane lift.  The moving belt isn&#8217;t going to move the air, it just moves the particular part of the &#8220;ground&#8221; the plane is on.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s throwing me is the quote that the whole flight club got it wrong, and I find it hard to imagine that they would not think of what I thought of.  So maybe there&#8217;s some trick to it that my brain is missing.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Josh Herndon</title>
		<link>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136316</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.variousandsundry.com/2007/11/02/mythbusters-takes-on-blogging-debate/#comment-136316</guid>
					<description>Wow, this sounds like a fantastic episode.  I am definitely intrigued as to what will happen now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, this sounds like a fantastic episode.  I am definitely intrigued as to what will happen now.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
