does a twin engine lose its gyroscopic properties of inertia?
 

once in a physics forum from which now im permabanned i was brought down an argument which would violate conservation of moment by the main thinking head of the forum on the basis that two counterotating gyros as can be a planes lose their increased resistance to spin since theyre counter rotating

i feel he scammed as ive seen him lying another time not to disprove certain dogma

so my question:

a two propeller plane offers the same resistance to yaw when at full revolutions that when stopped?

What, you mean this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter...ing_propellers

really that doesnt answer my question

precesions certainly eliminated, but what about inertia, that is resistance to yaw?

edit:

well this proves that guy right:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzbVw...layer_embedded

edit:

here creating huge momentum from zero just as the universe does, hey but you can destroy momentum two if you go from to to one:

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2...-09_202631.jpg

And here we have another typical Raaaid thread. First the question, which isn't really a question anyway as it's half-baked, that has apparently already been discussed, so there is no point in discussing it.

Secondly, and more importantly, someone replies giving him a BS excuse for posting a youtube clip and some crappy drawing that doesn't mean anything, plus some mystic-scientific babble that is more written diarrhoea.

SSDD sums it up.

Hood

He doesn't even understand his own question lol.

Inertia is the tendency to resist change in motion, as described by Newton. He is referring to torque, which doesn't affect yaw, but affects roll due to the third law of motion that every action has an equal and opposite reaction; hence a prop spinning left will make the aircraft roll right.
When a prop affects yaw, this is the corkscrew slipstream effect, of which is corrected by angling the keel on some aircraft.

And a diagram just to help you:
http://www.hagenheckel.de/bilder/prop2.jpg
http://www.hagenheckel.de/bilder/prop1.jpg

:rolleyes:

But, counter-rotating and contra-rotating (to some extent) cancel out these effects, at least under my understanding of physics.

conservation of angular momentum debunked:

you are in a bimotor with both propellers at full revolutions:

total monetum zero since they conter rotate

now you aim the right propeller to the right and the left propeller to the left

now you HAVE CREATED a huge angular momentum

science is a lie, bernuilli, friction, conservation of momentum, relativity..., the new church whose dogmas hide free energy or time travel

Sir

With all due respect!

You might want to talk to your Physician, I believe that your medication might not be effective. :-P

I think it is time for 1C to provide raaaid his own sub section in this forum..

The only question is what should 1C call it?

I have a few ideas..

1) Hair Club for Men
2) Black Hole
3) Warning time spent here will be a waste of time

Anyone else got any ideas as to what to call it?

Maybe we should start a poll on this? :confused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_RhISgoXUs


http://www.youtube.com/user/minuteph...&view=0&page=2



BAM!

can we ban this muppet for good please?! :evil:

No more medication testing put him in a straitjacket!

4. The raaaid lounge (only to enter properly sedated and at own risk )
5. Discovery channel for weirdos
6. OMFG he did it again
7. Annoying idiots lounge
8. Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
9. The nothing really worth to read thread
10. Dantes inferno and raaaids home

Those are some good candidates!

So here is the updated list of potential names for the raaaid forum

1. Hair Club for Men
2. Black Hole
3. Warning time spent here will be a waste of time
4. The raaaid lounge (only to enter properly sedated and at own risk .
5. Discovery channel for weirdos
6. OMFG he did it again
7. Annoying idiots lounge
8. Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
9. The nothing really worth to read thread
10. Dantes inferno and raaaids home

Most probably just the opposite, a single spinner induces a yaw during a stall, having hence more tendency to spin rather than preventing it doing so.

That can be seen in the sim, when you roll over 180° then pull back on the sticker hardly, the aircraft does not just half loop straight away, it also yaws.
If you violently pull in a straight and level flight, you will also notice that yaw coming in as soon as the pitch rapidly changes. I would assume that this comes from the spinner effect. This effect induces a spin. cr-spinners aircraft does'nt have such effect has and so would stall rather than spin under same circumstances.

That's something rather easy which you seem to make complex. The forces are held by the airframe with contra rotating spinners, the airplane forces are in equilibrum, that's why they designed such things, even a Spitfire in the 40's had such a duplex propeller.

There's no secret lying behind that if you try to understand with something more serious than a witch drawing, you'll probably understand why this is so.

Yeah, sorry about that. I tried to understand what he meant before giving an answer, but then I gave up.
First spin, then yaw...then raaaid...:|

does a twin engine lose its gyroscopic properties of inertia?

Always, when you run out of fuel.;)

and? Where do we go from here? You know, your arms have done the momentum change. Which are powered by muscles. And your muscles recieve daily fuel input in the form of your favorite froot loop!

Some slight hint perhaps to add:
There are 7 billion people on this planet. The total number of human beings that have ever existed should exceeed 100 billion. Don't you think that anyone would have already thought about the more trivial things, not sniffing a world sensation each time because they aren't, like you, afflicted with a messias complex who must bring new science to man...?
Let's face it, man. You're profoundly lacking in the very basics of... well, every science there is out there. But that doesn't really mean that those sciences are beneath you and you must save us from their conspriracy - actually, it's quite the opposite.

conservation of energy and aconservation of momentum are independent principles

and yeah millions of smokers cant be wrong ;)

That does not mean much. I think you speak before you understand and further you are not clear about what you talk so no one can really understand except you.
If you can stop talking to yourself and imagine people struggle with your posts 'd be a first step.
Some of us have done their best to try to clear out your questions, make sense out of little sense.

I think he's 'high' when he writes these anyway. That would explain A LOT.

you have two flagged propellers aiming forward with opposite sense

you move them to the sides so now they have THE SAME SENSE

this works in space as well so momentum can be created

whats wrong with this?

Everything. It's gibberish as normal.

saying everything is like saying nothing

the concept cant be simpler at least you dont pretend not to understand

edit:

you know the story of the emeperors clothes?

why should i trust a system that made whole countries into camps?

in fact i should belive from it opposite of what it tells me

you trow a ball nw YU HAVE MOMENTUM! HOW CAN TIS BE? PHYSICS ARE ALL WRONG!

Because there are forces and moments which are not really the same thing in that sense. You have strong forces between the propellers when the plane (read direction) of rotation changes, but the forces are in opposite direction through the physical structure and cancel each other.

You have not eliminated the forces, it goes through somewhere, even on diffeent wings for contrarotating, the airframe absorbs the forces through wings and structure, in some cases the forces are equal and in opposite directions.

Nothing disappears, nothing wrong. You get to look into what's happening in a gyro more in details. Don't see any question really.

nope you get pushed backwards with identical momentum the ball acquires but opposite sense, so net momentum remains zero as it started

my point is pretty clear in this drawing:


take the mass of the wizard neglectable(what brings down your point) compared with the propellers

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e2...-09_202631.jpg

Unless you make or write something clear no point to go further

the wizard has two counterorating flaged propellers aiming up while he floats in space

he puts the arms in cross so now the propellers have same sense

momentum has gone from zero to a big amount in an isolated system

if you dont understand this i will know youre pretending

This is very basic. If you don't have further questions let this topic end here.

Last time I checked this I was not thrown back by even a micron. Maybe it's that I'm not a rigid, lifeless body.