does a twin engine lose its gyroscopic properties of inertia?

[raaaid]

conservation of energy and aconservation of momentum are independent principles

and yeah millions of smokers cant be wrong

[jf1981]

Originally Posted by raaaid

conservation of energy and conservation 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.

[Verhängnis]

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

[raaaid]

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?

[Hood]

Originally Posted by raaaid

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.

[raaaid]

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

[Redroach]

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

[jf1981]

Originally Posted by raaaid

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?

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.

[raaaid]

Originally Posted by jf1981

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.

my point is pretty clear in this drawing:


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

[jf1981]

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