Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.
Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/
Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.
Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/
Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026
Is outdoor running > treadmill running?
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
I believe that Vinny Jones holds the world record* for the longest golf putt. Probably something along the lines of several miles as he did it whilst aboard Concorde and the distance was calculated as the ground covered. I suspect there was very minimal effort needed to actually push the ball that far forward as the plane was providing most of the effort for him.
Terry Wogan has the record for the longest putt actually on a golf course.
* Might be unoffical.
and if vinnie played the putt back down the aile toward the tail of the concord...the ball would go in the opposite direction to the direction in which he played it!
lol 0 -
-
You also have to take into account power generated to ensure optimum forward momentum as well as height of the stride. I know a runner who has one of the most fluid strides i have ever seen however his times dont add up to the effort he puts into training simply because he gets great height with very little forward momentum in his running as such he is more bobbing along than running. However translate this to a treadmill and it would compensate for the lack forward momentum he would be unstoppable
yeah i get what you are saying alright.
but if i was to hop up and down on a threadmill in a purely vertical motion, i would be brought to the back of the threadmill and would fall off and get busted wouldnt i?, now if i hopped using a slightly forward motion i would still be moving toward the back of the threadmill only slower. so if your friend wanted to maintain a static position on the threadmill he must maintain forward propulsion, well that just how i understand it but i could be wrong, might try it out in the gym, but better wait till after the marathon...dont need thread burn all over my face on monday
0 -
bart simpson wrote: »yeah i get what you are saying alright.
but if i was to hop up and down on a threadmill in a purely vertical motion, i would be brought to the back of the threadmill and would fall off and get busted wouldnt i?, now if i hopped using a slightly forward motion i would still be moving toward the back of the threadmill only slower. so if your friend wanted to maintain a static position on the threadmill he must maintain forward propulsion, well that just how i understand it but i could be wrong, might try it out in the gym, but better wait till after the marathon...dont need thread burn all over my face on monday
Your right and i agree but the effort needed in forward propulsion would be alot less to achieve the kinds of paces they lack in the outdoor if you get me?0 -
Advertisement
-
ThisRegard wrote: »Therefore it's harder on the road due to friction required to get forward momentum, none if required on a treadmill. This is a job for Mythbusters.
This is friction between your foot and the road. On a treadmill there will be equivalent friction between your foot and the belt.I think you are missing the point here. The stride length becomes arbitrary on the treadmill because it is set to a certain speed so therefore dictated by the treadmill not the runner they no longer have to generate as much power from their push off as possible but rather put as little effort into staying on the treadmill as possible. The upper body comes into effect here as a person must use the upper body to help generate power through the swinging motion of the arms. On the treadmill this becomes less important as you are no longer trying to propel yourself as far forward in order to cover as much ground as possible
I'm sorry, but this is wrong. The speed is dictated by the treadmill, but it is up to the runner to decide a combination of stride-length and stride-rate that will make up this speed. Try to think about the situation I described above about the treadmill being pulled along the road so that the top of the belt is stationary relative to the road.No, it won't. If you're doing 25 mph on a bike on the road, you will feel a lot of wind. If you're doing 25 mph on an exercise bike in a gym, you won't.
In practice it would be impossible to balance the forward thrust and the treadmill speed, but if you could, the plane would be stationary relative to the air, so there'd be no lift.
The point is that the treadmill speed will have no impact on the plane's speed, as the plane's acceleration doesn't come from it's wheels. Planes can take off from water as well, and they don't do it by paddling really fast 0 -
The point is that the treadmill speed will have no impact on the plane's speed, as the plane's acceleration doesn't come from it's wheels.
But if there is an equal and opposite acceleration, then the net speed relative to the air is zero.
The direction of the acceleration provided by engines is straight ahead. The force lifting a plane comes from air moving at speed around the wings. If the air isn't moving at speed around the wings, there's no upwards force.Planes can take off from water as well, and they don't do it by paddling really fast
No, but they move fast relative to the surrounding air...0 -
But if there is an equal and opposite acceleration, then the net speed relative to the air is zero.
The direction of the acceleration provided by engines is straight ahead. The force lifting a plane comes from air moving at speed around the wings. If the air isn't moving at speed around the wings, there's no upwards force.
No, but they move fast relative to the surrounding air...
if a plane was on a thread mill and reached full thrust it would not take off, but it would reach a speed on the threadmill speedometer to the speed of what it would in the air( excluding the wheel friction and more dense air at sea level)
what does take off got to do with it? the plane would still achieve speed against threadmill ,just would not be moving through air so could not take off.....if i didnt maintain forward porpulsion the threadmill would move it backwards....is this a taper madness thread 0 -
bart simpson wrote: »is this a taper madness thread
oooh yes
The important thing is not
"how fast are the plane's wheels moving on the surface of the treadmill"
which is very fast, but
"how fast is the air moving over the plane's wings"
If the engine is pushing it forward at 200mph, and the treadmill moving it back at 200mph, the wings aren't going anywhere. No movement in the air means no lift.
If you changed the experiment around, so that you had an airplane on a treadmill in a wind tunnel :rolleyes: and there was a giant fan blowing air at 200mph while the treadmill was moving forward, to keep the plane in the same place (but the engines were switched off... then you would have lift.
The plane would be lifted into the air, move backwards while in the air, and fall off the back of the treadmill.0 -
-
There's even a web site
http://www.airplaneonatreadmill.com/A) If the plane remains stationary relative to the ground, it will not take off.
If the plane moves relative to the ground, it will take off.0 -
-
A stationary wing does not take off. If a plane is on a treadmill then it's wings are stationary to the air, therefore it does not take off. What the engine is doing is irrelevant as far as the lift is concerned.
Why are its wings stationary relative to the air? The treadmill can be going backwards or forwards at any speed, and the plane can still take off (there might be some burning rubber though...).
Anyway the plane on a treadmill analogy isn't particularly relevant here. What is more relevant is a plane in a wind tunnel, which can fly but remain stationary compared to objects outside the wind tunnel!
By the way, in the mythbusters episode, the plane took off 0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
If the engines are pushing it forward at 200mph, then the plane is moving at 200mph. no
If the engines are pushing it forward at 200mph, but the plane has been sunk into concrete/is nose to face with a big wall/is being held back by a really big rope then the plane isn't moving.
Just because there is a force acting on it, doesn't mean it's moving.
In the mythbusters episode, did the plane remain stationary with respect to the ground below the treadmill?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 23711
Why are its wings stationary relative to the air? The treadmill can be going backwards or forwards at any speed, and the plane can still take off (there might be some burning rubber though...).
Anyway the plane on a treadmill analogy isn't particularly relevant here. What is more relevant is a plane in a wind tunnel, which can fly but remain stationary compared to objects outside the wind tunnel!
By the way, in the mythbusters episode, the plane took off
Well it's not on the treadmill then, it's driven off the end of it.0 -
What lifts an aeroplane up it the lower pressure created by the air moving over the curved top surface of the wing. So you need the air movement to make the plane lift off.
Now, if you use a harrier on vertical lift that would be a different matter.
If Johnny is running on a treadmill on a train heading from Dublin to Cork and the Treadmill is at 12km per hour and the Train doesnt stop. And Vinney Jones hits a ball with a putter on Concorde on a treadmill travelling in the opposite direction, What gets to Urlingford first? Jonny or the golf ball?
Yep, definitely taper madness.0 -
-
-
-
If Johnny is running on a treadmill on a train heading from Dublin to Cork and the Treadmill is at 12km per hour and the Train doesnt stop. And Vinney Jones hits a ball with a putter on Concorde on a treadmill travelling in the opposite direction, What gets to Urlingford first? Jonny or the golf ball?.
Concordes don't fly any more, and the train doesn't go through Urlingford, so that's a tough one to answer :PWhat if the treadmill was going at 500kph, and the engine's weren't switched on? Would you still be able to hold the plane in place?
Yes (ignoring friction).
If you have a something with free running wheels, put it on a treadmill and try move it forward and back with the treadmill set to different speeds to see how it works.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
Oisin11178 wrote: »OMG my poor thread you animals:D
Question was if you could do say 39.30 for 10k on a treadmill with maybe 90% put in, is it reasonable to assume with the tank emptied and taper and race adreniline that you would go under 40 mins for 10k on a reasonably flat course with no brutal headwind?
Sorry
I'd say there's a good chance that you could. Keep your pace constant, and hope that the treadmill was accurately reporting distance.
And also get two friends to cycle along beside you, to simulate holding onto the rails on a treadmill
0
Advertisement