wiggyrichard Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Got an interview tomorrow, nervous and excited all at the same time. Havnt done an interview for some 10 years now so my brain is working over-time at the moment with regards things not to do, keywords etc. Any tips from you guys that could help me out? make sure to ask about annual leave entitlement, ask about how much sick leave people generally take and tell them you've got a holiday booked for October which you presume won't be a problem other than that, just make sure you know a little bit about the company, what they do, how big they are and how the economy might be effecting them for the general 'what do you know about us?' bit of the chat best of luck Cheers, think i'll ignore the first paragraph of your post! :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted September 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2012 1) Take your cock out. 2) Staple it to the table. 3) Shout: "I'm not **** leaving, till I've got the job." Weep uncontrollably.That might work when applying for a job on Dirty Sanchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 A thought experiment! An airplane is sitting on an enormous conveyer belt. You control the speed the conveyer belt turns. Can you prevent the airplane from taking off by running the conveyer belt underneath it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 No, you can't stop it taking off. Regardless of what the belt and wheels were doing, the engines are would still propel the plane forward and ultimately take off. All that would happen is the wheels would just spin ridiculously fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lammy123 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 A thought experiment! An airplane is sitting on an enormous conveyer belt. You control the speed the conveyer belt turns. Can you prevent the airplane from taking off by running the conveyer belt underneath it? I would have thought it will just take of as normal, the force propelling the plane is pushing on the air not the ground. The wheels would spin twice as fast so it may cause a bit of a problem on the bearings, so it may just crash horribly but it certainly would move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 No, it wouldn't take off. The aircraft relies on air speed over the wings being different above and below the wing creating lift. If you run the conveyor belt at the right speed to prevent the aircraft moving forward, you deny it the chance to push air over the wing at different sppeds and create lift. I have no idea if that's really true, but I do have several friends that work in an aircraft engine repair shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted September 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2012 The point is that the conveyor belt has no influence on the forward speed of the plane once you engage the jet engines, because the engines are pushing against the air, not the conveyor. Effectively the wheels just keep the fuselage from rubbing off the ground, they don't help it to move forward. If it was the wheels powering the plane forward then the conveyor could stop it taking off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 what if the conveyor belt is really really sticky? like it was from Asda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted September 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2012 what if the conveyor belt is really really sticky? Ah, good old VT When all else fails ... You're on the list btw. Only because I know I'm already on yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Is that my good list or my bad list? Seriously, there are only two people on my bad list, the newer of the two names being John Redwood added in the 1980's. I'm all loved up with every VT OT contributor, it's a very special place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted September 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2012 It was definitely a bad list around the time you were planning your utopia and you didn't like the cut of my jib. Something about being first in front of a firing squad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 It was definitely a bad list around the time you were planning your utopia and you didn't like the cut of my jib. Something about being first in front of a firing squad? 'kin 'ell nothing like a memory for grudges. I'll have to go back now and see why I found you worth a bullet. I'll let you know if I've added you, I'm sure I was just being butch..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 The point is that the conveyor belt has no influence on the forward speed of the plane once you engage the jet engines, because the engines are pushing against the air, not the conveyor. Effectively the wheels just keep the fuselage from rubbing off the ground, they don't help it to move forward. If it was the wheels powering the plane forward then the conveyor could stop it taking off. If you assume that the engines only work in a horizontal direction, you could (only theoretically) set the conveyor belt at such a speed that it acts on the plane (via the wheels) with exactly the same force going backwards as the jets are propelling the plane forwards. With the net force acting horizontally on the plane now at zero, it would not move on the horizontal axis and therefore not take off. This model has a fair few problems though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Is that my good list or my bad list? Seriously, there are only two people on my bad list, the newer of the two names being John Redwood added in the 1980's. I'm all loved up with every VT OT contributor, it's a very special place. Why John Redwood though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Is that my good list or my bad list? Seriously, there are only two people on my bad list, the newer of the two names being John Redwood added in the 1980's. I'm all loved up with every VT OT contributor, it's a very special place. Why John Redwood though? because he's an evil vindictive c unt that enjoyed making people's lives a misery. The sort of guy that masterbates over unemployment figures but finds he needs the number to be bigger and bigger to keep getting off. Apologies, you should never start a sentence with 'because'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted September 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted September 5, 2012 The point is that the conveyor belt has no influence on the forward speed of the plane once you engage the jet engines, because the engines are pushing against the air, not the conveyor. Effectively the wheels just keep the fuselage from rubbing off the ground, they don't help it to move forward. If it was the wheels powering the plane forward then the conveyor could stop it taking off. If you assume that the engines only work in a horizontal direction, you could (only theoretically) set the conveyor belt at such a speed that it acts on the plane (via the wheels) with exactly the same force going backwards as the jets are propelling the plane forwards. With the net force acting horizontally on the plane now at zero, it would not move on the horizontal axis and therefore not take off. This model has a fair few problems though Given that the wheels are putting approximately zero resistance on the plane's forward momentum (as they are essentially free-wheeling and the only resistance is the resistance that the well-lubricated wheel bearings are providing) you'd need an impossible amount of conveyor speed to affect something that it is not really affecting in the first place. Which I assume is what you're getting at with your "This model has a fair few problems though" remark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 It was definitely a bad list around the time you were planning your utopia and you didn't like the cut of my jib. Something about being first in front of a firing squad? Nah, that was an attempt at lining somebody up with an open goal for a joke. You're going in the book, what's your name?.....the hope was somebody would jump in with '....don't tell him Pike!' But it fell flat, I think I failed to convey the German accent I thunked it in. Perhaps if I'd gone for 'vot iss your name'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Yeah I'd imagine the total force of the conveyor belt would have to be several times the magnitude of the jet engines in order to balance the force of the jet engines on the horizontal axis (due to the inefficiency of the manner it is applied to the plane). I imagine the rubber would burn off well before this was met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa_chemist Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 A thought experiment! An airplane is sitting on an enormous conveyer belt. You control the speed the conveyer belt turns. Can you prevent the airplane from taking off by running the conveyer belt underneath it? Great! I'm going to use that with my year 11 Physics class tomorrow. So now, not only are you paying my wages, you're also writing my lesson plans!! Cheers, Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Is that my good list or my bad list? Seriously, there are only two people on my bad list, the newer of the two names being John Redwood added in the 1980's. I'm all loved up with every VT OT contributor, it's a very special place. Why John Redwood though? because he's an evil vindictive c unt that enjoyed making people's lives a misery. The sort of guy that masterbates over unemployment figures but finds he needs the number to be bigger and bigger to keep getting off. Apologies, you should never start a sentence with 'because'. I know someone who sees Redwood a few times a year at various collegiate dinners. He'll find that amusing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts