Disappointing! Anyway the novice landing was surprisingly easy.

Sorry Tom; Mythbusters didn't show it yet... :-)But I think it might be on the viewer's submitted idea show.All the article said was that the show would air sometime in December. The 12th was an assumption...Best Regards, Donald T.:-waveFLYing? It's cool. Trillions of birds and insects can't be wrong.

Nope! It was suppose to be on today!http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-schedules/seri...9.25369.3913.94

>Guess, they couldn't figure out how to test it. Yeah, but why in the #### did they advertise it?. Don't they tape those programs months before actual air time? I suspected right away that something like that will strain their budget and technical abilities - it is so much cheaper to rent a few hours in a simulator or arrange for some skydiving at local airport. So I sat down to watch the program for one reason only - to see how they managed to do it and it turned out to be one big faux :-8Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

I heard 2nd hand from the Discovery forums that it was filmed and will be aired... supposedly now on Jan 30th...So, turn those treadmills off for now!

No need to wait for the show... This guy and a his son so a great job of testing it at home(yes the aircraft accelerates just fine on a treadmill):

I am not sure why this is even up for debate.

>No need to wait for the show... This guy and a his son so a>great job of testing it at home(yes the aircraft accelerates>just fine on a treadmill):>>

>>I am not sure why this is even up for debate. >>The reason this one gets debated is because in the original question, there is a statement that says the treadmill will always match the speed of the aircraft's wheels. Obviously, if it was just a normal treadmill, there is no debate, the plane will takeoff, but the question was designed to generate debate by proposing a theoretical treadmill that does something that is impossible. Some people focus on that part of the question while some people ignore that part of the question. That is why there is debate.Unless the guy and his son actually built this impossible treadmill instead of buying one from the store, they haven't answered the question.

I am not going to get sucked any further into this silly debate. The treadmill (any treadmill and at any rate) is irrelevant unless you can find an aircraft that transfers its propulsion through its wheels while on the ground.

>The reason this one gets debated is because in the original>question, there is a statement that says the treadmill will>always match the speed of the aircraft's wheels.Kevin,Not sure which one is the "original" question but in the one that started this whole thread at the top there is no such thing. The subject has been discussed above - the version with the "wheels" is simply a wrong (uninteresting) version - most likely a result of someone twisting the story when it was passed from one person to another.Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Well, that settles it, I guess we've finally found the last word to this one!

>The reason this one gets debated is because in the original>question, there is a statement that says the treadmill will>always match the speed of the aircraft's wheels. No, that is not the way the problem is stated. When it is stated clearly, it says airspeed. Sometimes it just says "forward speed' but to me that implies forward airspeed. Again, people get on wheel speed because they get the wrong answer first, then try to shape the problem to make their answer work. If any version of the problem states wheel speed, it is incorrect, or it is a completely different discussion.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060203.htmlApparently, there are versions out there that use the word "wheelspeed."

>http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060203.html>>Apparently, there are versions out there that use the word>"wheelspeed."Well, from the thread I saw here, that is something completely different. The version where the treadmill matches wheel speed... well I'll leave that for people with far more degrees and far more time on their hands.

>http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060203.html>>Apparently, there are versions out there that use the word>"wheelspeed."I checked my vision recently - I see no such thing, not in the link above *:-*Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Towards the bottom of the page, he addresses that version of it in his last paragraph.The "clearly" worded question is easy. Of course the plane takes off. There is no cause for debate there. But there are plenty of smart people on the board here, a lot smarter than the ones at the pilot boards. What would be truly interesting is to see the "wheelspeed" paradox version addressed with an answer other than declaring it a poorly worded paradoxical question.