Conveyor belt controversy put to rest :-)

[Guest mikevanisland]

Manny reveals his errors of logic in his own words:"Now, imagine another aircraft hooked to this one was pulling it at the same speed in the opposite direction (The force of the conveyor belt). the IAS = 0 and ..it would fall."Of course, the conveyor belt is not anything remotely equivilent to something "hooked" to the airframe, and thus this mistake leads to another wrong assumption:"If he was sitting on a True Conveyor belt, that is moving the aircraft backward at the same speed the properler thrust is moving the aircraft forward, the RAM air/IAS = 0. Hence no fly."No conveyor belt "true" or otherwise would move the aircraft backward at the same speed as the propellor thrust. Some of you are imagining the aircraft doing this, and then using this product of imagination to justify your then-reached conclusion of zero forward airspeeed. Imagination will not win over physics. Only by imagining (wrongly) that the aircraft is being moved backward can you imagine (wrongly) that the aircraft thus does not attain sufficient forward airspeed. The belt affects the only thing against which it bears contact: the WHEEL speed.Obviously the physicist is the one who identified himself as such, and not the ones attempting to ridicule him.