So why arent you weightless when flying in a plane?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flying Plane
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of why passengers do not experience weightlessness when flying in an airplane, contrasting this experience with the conditions of free fall, such as those experienced by the moon in orbit. Participants explore the principles of flight, the forces acting on an aircraft, and the concept of weightlessness in different contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that aircraft do not fly by the same principles as celestial bodies due to their lower speeds and the need for aerodynamic lift.
  • Others argue that the force keeping the plane aloft is the pressure difference over the wings, which translates to a sensation of weight for passengers.
  • A participant mentions that to achieve free fall, an aircraft would need to travel at approximately 17,000 mph, which is significantly higher than typical flight speeds.
  • Some participants discuss the effect of speed on weight, suggesting that a Concorde might result in a slight decrease in weight due to its speed, with calculations indicating a change of around 0.5% to 2% depending on direction and location.
  • One participant introduces the concept of a "vomit comet," a type of flight path that can provide a weightless experience, suggesting that weightlessness does not require extreme speeds.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of discussing steady-state flight, where the aircraft maintains constant speed and altitude, as opposed to the weightlessness experienced in ballistic flight.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of "weightlessness," with some participants clarifying that it typically refers to zero apparent weight.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that airplanes do not provide a weightless experience in steady-state flight, but there are multiple competing views regarding the definitions of weightlessness and the conditions under which it can be experienced. The discussion remains unresolved on some technical nuances and definitions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about flight dynamics, the definitions of weightlessness, and the specific conditions under which weight changes might occur. Some mathematical steps and calculations are not fully verified or agreed upon.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
When ever your flying in a plane, doesn't it go by the same principles as, say, the moon orbiting the earth? Wouldnt the plane be in free fall and just accelerating forward to keep it up? I realize this is wrong but why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Aircraft don't fly by the same principles that keep the moon in orbit - they aren't going nearly fast enough. While in theory, it would be possible (ignoring aerodynamic drag), it would require the aircraft to go about 8 km/s, while in reality, they go about 0.2-0.25 km/s. What keeps them in the air is the force from the air over the wings, and as a result, they are not in freefall, but instead are basically in equilibrium - the weight of the aircraft is balanced by the upwards force from the air, and thus when you are inside, it feels the same as if you were sitting on the ground.
 
The force holding the plane away from the Earth is the air pressure difference between the top and bottom of the wing. This force is transferred to your body through the seat, therefore you feel the seat pushing up on you.

If the airplane were in orbit there would be no aerodynamic lift (no air). The force holding the plane in orbit away from the ground is centrifugal force, which is another way of saying inertia. The other force affecting your space plane is gravity. Since you are in orbit you have achieved a balance between inertia and gravity. Both inertia and gravity affect the plane and your body identically. Therefore, there is no difference in acceleration between you and the plane, and therefore no need for the plane to apply any force to you.
 
As has been said, you need to go around the Earth about 17,000 mph in order to be in free fall. Airplanes, even the fastest ones, travel at just a small fraction of that.

That said, even that small fraction has an effect on your weight. I believe you (used to) weigh 1-2% less on a Concorde at full speed, for example, than on the earth.
 
Lsos said:
As has been said, you need to go around the Earth about 17,000 mph in order to be in free fall. Airplanes, even the fastest ones, travel at just a small fraction of that.

That said, even that small fraction has an effect on your weight. I believe you (used to) weigh 1-2% less on a Concorde at full speed, for example, than on the earth.
Without verifying your 1-2% values, I'll just mention that it would be less only if the plane is traveling eastward. Traveling westward should result in an increase, since then the plane would be traveling slower -- in a nonrotating frame -- than a plane that is sitting still w.r.t. the ground.
 
I've never actually verified the 1-2% values myself (until now), and I'm not sure where I got them from. But you do bring a very good point.

So I in fact did calculate the value now, and indeed just the speed of the Concorde only brings about a ~.5% change in weight. However, due to the fact that centrifugal force is a squared function of speed, the change DOES approach 2% when flying east (at the equator, of course).
 
A plane can be flown on a ballistic path which will provide a weightless ride.

Vomit comet

Years ago I was given a brief ballistic ride in a small private plane so it does not need to be a "special" plane.
 
Integral said:
A plane can be flown on a ballistic path which will provide a weightless ride.

Vomit comet

Years ago I was given a brief ballistic ride in a small private plane so it does not need to be a "special" plane.

I'm pleased you brought that one up... saved me doing so.
Lsos forgot about that easily attained situation ...
one doesn't need to be traveling at 17,000mph to attain weightlessness

Dave
 
davenn said:
I'm pleased you brought that one up... saved me doing so.
Lsos forgot about that easily attained situation ...
one doesn't need to be traveling at 17,000mph to attain weightlessness

Dave

I didn't forget. In fact, I live on the 3rd floor so weightlessness is literally right outside my window (for a few moments). No need for airplanes whatsoever.

I wanted to discuss what happens to an airplane in steady-state flight, which is what I understood OP to be asking.
 
  • #10
Lsos said:
I wanted to discuss what happens to an airplane in steady-state flight, which is what I understood OP to be asking.
That was my understooding too, if by steady-state you meant constant speed and altitude, i.e. a circular trajectory centered on the center of Earth.

Hmm, post number 1 of the thread said:
When ever your flying in a plane,..."​
 
  • #11
Sure, but I rather suspect that none of us have ever been in a vomit comet. In either case, that sentence is written as an affirmative declaration. Paraphrase: we are NOT weightless when we fly in planes. Why not?
 
  • #12
If the plane and passenger had no weight, it wouldn't be able to fly. The Earth is ultimately what foots the load of an airfoil and it's passengers.

Apparent weight during a red-out in an airplane(while much more noticeable) is the same feeling you get while on roller coaster or speeding over a hump in a vehicle, or in an fast elevator that starts to descend or come to a stop while moving upwards.
 
  • #13
Russ: yes, put that way, that was surely the OP's intent. And it was answered in posts 2 and 3; the rest of the thread is just discussing nuances or related phenomena.

Jupiter6: Most (hopefully all?) of us do mean zero apparent weight when we say "weightless". It's pretty standard usage of that term.
 
  • #14
Redbelly98 said:
Jupiter6: Most (hopefully all?) of us do mean zero apparent weight when we say "weightless". It's pretty standard usage of that term.

I know. I just never cared for the term because it confuses people.
 
  • #15
Jupiter6 said:
I know. I just never cared for the term because it confuses people.
No argument here. :smile:
 

Similar threads

High School Time to fall from 200 miles
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School Normal force in case of inclined plane and banked turn
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Finding proper value for centripetal acceleration in a plane rising up
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
810
Graduate Coriolis effect, Conservation of Angular Momentium, Planes
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
Undergrad When would a rocket return that was at escape velocity
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
10K
Undergrad On whether the motion of a Foucault pendulum bob is comparable to ballistics
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Graduate Lift: Probably my last question
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
High School Airplanes Landing & Altitude Problem
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Do Birds Flying in a Truck Affect Its Weight?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Undergrad Why don't we "fly up" in an accelerating elevator?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K