• Geobloke@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well, I could’ve said male seahorses if that makes you feel better? Are they still submarines if you put them in an aquarium on a plane, but the plane crashes into the ocean?

  • Fleur_@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Be human.

    Have billions of tons of atmosphere directly above you

    Don’t explode

    Make it make sense

  • Leviathan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This person’s grasp of physics is like halfway there. Like one more module and they’d calm the fuck down.

  • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The funniest thing is that the aerospace engineers who made this possible are just as much hopeless dysfunctional wrecks as the rest of us.

    • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well… When you put one of those huge tankers in the water, it will move a LOT of water out of the way.

      As long as the tanker weights less than the weight of all that water it displaced, it will float.

      As you keep loading up the tanker with more cargo, it will go deeper into the water right? But this means that it is pushing more water out of the way (the water that used to be where the boat now is), which balances out the weight because that creates more buoyancy.

      A rock, on the other hand, is heavier than the water that it displaces, so it sinks like a tanker whose front fell off.

      • dwindling7373@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Metal is heavier than water. Virtually every containber is fille to the brim with products, now I don’t know you but most everything we buy is heavier than water.

        It’s clear they have some kind of extra propulsion in those, most likely magnetic anti gravitation.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        As long as the tanker weights less than the weight of all that water it displaced, it will float.

        But steel is heavier than water

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Since we are pedantic, what you say isn’t true.

        The tanker weights exactly as much as the weight of the water that it displaces. They are in balance. You describe it yourself. The tanker sinks deeper if it becomes heavier and swims more up as it becomes lighter.

        The measure of “boat swims” is not the weight of the displaced water. It is wether there is some boat wall left sticking out of the water to keep more water from entering and displacing the air that keeps the submerged volume in weight balance with the water.

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      And they WOULD break, eventually, if they weren’t engineered to a statistically determined inspection interval and replaced/repaired at the determined overhaul time.

      • dave@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Any type of glue is fine. Just stay away from the cardboard derivatives.

        • Comment105@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          And if the wings should fail, unlikely as that may be, do be a dear and try to steer it away from the environment.

          • Comment105@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            It is gluing, but it helps that the glue is hot enough to also melt the glued materials a little bit.

            Soldering and brazing really are pretty much gluing, though. Fancy hot glue metal with fine tuned properties for penetration and beading.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    My faith in humanity is so low that I 100% believe there are planes are not real truthers that’s out there.

    • fibojoly@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, I mean, those flat earth idiots clearly have never flown, so I wouldn’t be surprised if their digging down attitude would include planes. They already think the moon landing is fake, don’t they?

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Actually that’s something I don’t understand, they think the moon is a sphere about 100 miles across about 1000 miles above the flat Earth. Why couldn’t humans have flown that short distance?

        • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          it depends on your flavor of flat-earther. for the religious types, the firmament is supposed to be in the way. for secular flat-earthers, I think they just like being contrary?

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Anon, it took one hundred years of trial and errors in design and mechanical failures, resulting in hundreds of deaths, to perfect the dark arts of aviation.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Aye, good sir, I do most heartily concur; for 'tis a truth well settled that the tongue of man is fixed, unyielding, and shall ne’er be altered.

  • Match!!@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    at takeoff i like to imagine that the plane is going into a massive underground subway network with really nice screens along the sides

    • Leon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I would be worried if the aeroplane goes down rather than up during takeoff.

  • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s not pressure under the wings, it’s fucking Bernoulli sucking on top of them.

    (So, yes, sure, it is gay, but it’s not fake.)

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The absolute maximum that Bernoulli can suck is 14.7PSI at sea level. Not even your mother can generate a greater vacuum.

      There is no fundamental limit to the pressure that can be generated under the wing.

      With sufficient thrust and proper angle of attack, a brick can produce sufficient pressure underneath it to generate lift.

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Fair enough, yet unless I’m mistaken most planes don’t rely on people throwing bricks at them (which would be quite risky anyway, for unless they throw them faster than escape velocity they’re bound to come back down eventually).

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m 100% convinced this was never a battle of airframes and manufacturers and simply was down to: “No, sir/ma’am, I will not fly the derpy plane into combat. Can’t do it. YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND THE REST OF THE PILOTS WILL LAUGH AT ME”

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Flaps. (As in, the hinged bits at the back edge of the wings, that essentially change the shape of the wing as required, not by flapping the wings; that’d be an ornithopter, as in Dune, not a plane.)

        • Salamand@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          But… right-side-up, the plane fights gravity, has upward lift, according to Bernoulli principle. And even if we angle the flaps to decrease altitude, it’s still not dropping like a rock, the wings still generate lots of upward lift.

          400 ton plane, wings w 400 ton lift = flight

          Now (before engaging flaps) those same wings upside down would be generating downward “lift” PLUS pull of gravity. So now the 400 ton plane is like an 800 ton plane. Can the flaps alone lift that? Or, said another way, if we gave the plane flat wings, no Bernoulli, and stacked another plane on top of it (to make 800 tons), could it fly right-side-up just using flaps?

          • ExtraPartsLeft@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m not a geologist, but I think the planes that typically fly upside down, are significantly lighter than 400 tons.

  • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Next time you see a plane imaging two hooks in the middle of the wings, a crane lifting up the plane with these two hooks and shaking it.

    This give you a good approximation of what the forces in the plane are, and once you picture that you might think that there is no way the plane can hold up in this situation. Yet it does.