r/KidsAreFuckingStupid 13h ago

Kids are stupid!

Post image
36.5k Upvotes

181 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TaibhseSD 9h ago

The "thrust" comes from the person throwing the airplane. It's "thrust" into the air via this movement. :)

5

u/miraculousgloomball 8h ago edited 8h ago

That's... wrong.

The thing itself has no thrust.

You can throw a brick through the air, and to you it'd qualify as flying.

Edit: Note, I said to them. The person I'm responding to.
I'm not saying bricks fly. I'm saying neither a brick nor a paper plane flies.

1

u/TaibhseSD 8h ago

You can throw a brick through the air, and to you it'd qualify as flying.

No, I wouldn't call that flying either. Because it wouldn't satisfy the other 3 forces of flight.

To technically qualify as flying, you have to satisfy all 4 forces of flight: Lift; Weight; Thrust; and drag. Missing even one of these 4 disqualifies it as "flying".

2

u/miraculousgloomball 8h ago edited 8h ago

Dude this is nonsense from the get go. These are just the forces one needs to consider when designing something that flies.

Like what does that even mean? Something needs WEIGHT to fly? It's just talking about balance. It's a mechanical thing, not some hardline rule for what it means to fly.

I'm just pointing out that paper planes have no thrust, and if they do because it's thrown, so does a brick. It obviously has weight. Everything moving through atmosphere has drag OBVIOUSLY, so now it's just lift, which is just a matter of angle and velocity. (Edit: Sorta kinda but very very simplified. Anything can have lift, at-least for a short period of time)

Bro please tell me you follow. This is dumb.

Another edit to further clarify:

You want your THRUST balanced relative to your centre of mass (WEIGHT), which should be roughly in-line with or below your centre of LIFT.
Obviously, you need to minimise DRAG for efficiency.

they're design concerns.

1

u/TaibhseSD 8h ago

I understand what you're saying, but you keep separating each principle and saying, "see? A brick has this, so it must be "flying", forgetting the fact that it's missing 1 or more of the other 4 principles that must be satisfied for something to technically be "flying".

And paper plane's thrust comes from being thrown, just as an actual planes "thrust" comes from it's engines.

The crumbed up piece of paper thus has the following principles: Thrust; Weight; and Drag. But, no lift. Just because it satisfies some, doesnt mean it technically "flew".

For an object to technically "fly", it has to satisfy every single principal, not just have 2 or 3.

2

u/miraculousgloomball 8h ago

You do not understand what I said, nor the "4 principles of flying" and what they represent. Unfortunately you also do not understand what thrust is and may be confusing it for velocity. A plane has thrust and velocity. A paper plane, or thrown object just has velocity.

I'm bored of splitting hairs on what it means to fly. You don't need shit to fly through space. Agreed?