cq_1_221

#$&*

phy121

Your 'cq_1_22.1' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.

** CQ_1_22.1_labelMessages.txt **

An airplane traveling to the northwest is exerting just enough force to overcome wind resistance. It encounters a sudden wind gust which is directed at 30 degrees south of east, which results in a net force in that direction.

• During the half-second before the pilot has time to react to the gust, does the airplane speed up, slow down or maintain constant (or very nearly-constant) speed?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> :

The airplane would slow down because southeast is the complete opposite of northwest, which means the wind is acting straight against the airplane.

@&

The wind is to the south, not the southeast, so it isn't directly opposite to the plane's direction of motion.

However the component of the gust's direction along the line of motion is counter to the motion of the plane, so it would indeed slow down.

*@

#$&*

• Does it veer a bit to the right, a bit to the left or does it continue traveling along a straight line?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> :

Since NW is 45 degrees in the second quadrant and the wind is coming from SE at 30 degrees, the wind will push the plane from the left making it veer to the right a little.

#$&*

** **

10 minutes

** **

&#See any notes I might have inserted into your document, and before looking at the link below see if you can modify your solutions. If there are no notes, this does not mean that your solution is completely correct.

Then please compare your old and new solutions with the expanded discussion at the link

Solution

Self-critique your solutions, if this is necessary, according to the usual criteria. Insert any revisions, questions, etc. into a copy of this posted document. Mark any insertions with &&&& so they can be easily identified.

If your solution is completely consistent with the given solution, you need do nothing further with this problem. &#

@&

Good.

See also the discussion at the link, but no revision is necessary.

*@