Actually the question makes sense, at least to the non-aviation public,
because the normal use of a treadmill suggests the opposite, ie a
person walking on the treadmill remains stationary, yet he burns energy
as if he were walking on solid ground. The same would be true if it
were a car, except it would burn slightly less fuel because of the lack
of wind resistance (same is true for a person walking too, but the wind
resistance is even more negligible for walking).

A better way to pose the airplane question would be " what would
happen if the airplane is landing on a treadmill that is moving in the
opposite direction and speed?"






Peter Duniho wrote:
"Ray" wrote in message
...
Looks like airplane treadmill problem, regularly a spark for flame wars on
R.A.P., has made it into the mainstream.

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/

And handled with every bit as much intelligence and consideration as we've
seen here. Which is to say, there's no shortage of people convinced that
the airplane won't take off, even though it will.

Let the arguing begin!

Why? Haven't you had enough by now?