Go Back  AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community > Off Topic Discussion > AcuraZine's Hall of Fame
Reload this Page >

Will the Plane Take-Off - Merged with MythBusters Show Thread

Notices

Will the Plane Take-Off - Merged with MythBusters Show Thread

 
 
Old 08-19-2006, 12:39 PM
  #281  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Newtons 3rd law states: Every action has an equal an opposite reaction. I don't know exactly how you say I am violating it. If you meant what I think you mean than the force of the engines has to do something... And that would be countering the backward force applied by the treadmill through the resistance in the wheel bearings...

Can you explain how the first law of Thermodynamics should apply?

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 01:17 PM
  #282  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by crazymjb
Newtons 3rd law states: Every action has an equal an opposite reaction. I don't know exactly how you say I am violating it. If you meant what I think you mean than the force of the engines has to do something... And that would be countering the backward force applied by the treadmill through the resistance in the wheel bearings...

Okay, here's a quote about wheel bearings in aircraft design from Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Daniel P. Raymer (this was the book from my undergrad aircraft design course):

"For most aircraft gear systems, the torque required to put the bearings into motion from rest is higher than that required to keep the bearing running once wheel rolling starts. However, both starting and rolling bearing friction is negligible compared to skin friction, and thus can be neglected in determining minimum required take-ff thrust."

OK, so let's say by Newton's 3rd, when the engines start up, the rising thrust by the engines is matched (in an equal and opposite way) by the friction in the bearings. Based on the above information. the friction in the bearings will decrease as soon as the wheels start to roll on the treadmill (which will happen almost instantaneously by the way).

So the bearing friction decreases, but the engine thrust doesn't decrease. So what is counteracting the thrust by Newton's 3rd? Well, the engines are creating a force on the air outside the plane, and the air outside the place is creating a force on the plane in return. The engines force the air backwards and the air forces the plane forward, which moves the plane.

Can you explain how the first law of Thermodynamics should apply?

Mike
The first law of thermo is basically the conservation of energy. You had said that the friction of the bearings would keep increasing until they wheels seized (which is wrong according to Raymer's book). But if the wheels seized and nothing moved, then how would the energy of the system be converted or dissipated?
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 02:27 PM
  #283  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ok... I think Raymer is trying to apply Newtons First Law to wheel bearings.

Anywho... according to how I am thinking about this(the treadmill instantly matching wheel speed, which makes it theoretically impossible for the aircraft to move forward) the bearings would be going infinitly fast, resulting in their failure in siezure. The bearings would eventually seize and fail because even if the resistance was constant, the higher speed would multiply that friction. THink about it, you know if you spin an axle within bearings faster and faster it will get hotter and hotter.

Also, the resistance applied by bearings though a constant is still resistance. So if you multiply that constant times a super high speed, you get a super high amount of total resistance which the engines can not overcome. I again want to make it clear that I agree that if the conveyer speed matches the actual aircraft speed the aircraft will take off.

As for conservation of energy, the energy from the engines would to to the heat output by the bearings spinning at some rediculously high speed, or whatever else fails, rubs, and creates heat.

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 02:43 PM
  #284  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by crazymjb
Ok... I think Raymer is trying to apply Newtons First Law to wheel bearings.

??? Explain this

Originally Posted by crazymjb
Anywho... according to how I am thinking about this(the treadmill instantly matching wheel speed, which makes it theoretically impossible for the aircraft to move forward) the bearings would be going infinitly fast, resulting in their failure in siezure. The bearings would eventually seize and fail because even if the resistance was constant, the higher speed would multiply that friction. THink about it, you know if you spin an axle within bearings faster and faster it will get hotter and hotter.
(a) The resistance of the bearings goes down, it doesn't remain constant once the wheels start to spin. (b) solid-to-solid friction is nearly independent of velocity. What is your reference for your statement that it depends on velocity? Lastly, the reason why something heats up under friction is because it can't dissipate heat fast enough, not necessarily because the friction is increasing. In this case, the friction is certainly not increasing.


Also, the resistance applied by bearings though a constant is still resistance.
Wrong. And still ignoring what I wrote before. A very Water-S type statement.

So if you multiply that constant times a super high speed, you get a super high amount of total resistance which the engines can not overcome. I again want to make it clear that I agree that if the conveyor speed matches the actual aircraft speed the aircraft will take off.
Again, solid-to-solid friction is isn't going to vary much with speed.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 02:53 PM
  #285  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
OK, I'll use crazymjb's logic to answer this question.

The plane will take off because:

(a) treadmills or conveyor belts use bearings too, and those bearings are definitely not aerospace grade, so they will fail and the conveyor will seize up before the plane's wheels will.

(b) even if the treadmill or conveyor belt was built using aerospace bearings, a super-long conveyor belt is going to have a ton of rollers underneath it, and consequently will have many, many more bearings than are in the wheels of the plane. Hence, the probability of a bearing in the conveyor belt system failing is much, much higher than that inside the plane wheel. So the conveyor would seize before the airplane wheels even if they used the same grade bearings.

Thus, in either case, the conveyor will seize before the aircraft wheels will. Once this the conveyor belt stops, it's just like a normal runway and the plane will take off.

Q.E.D.

wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 02:56 PM
  #286  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
And crazymjb...if you do ever become an engineer, can you please write "crzymjb" on anything you design? That way I'll know not to ride in it or use it.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 03:14 PM
  #287  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If you spin bearings excessivly faster, whatever the reason, whether it be heat dissapation or not, they WILL heat up and as a result will reach a failure point.

The treadmill is already make believe, logic need not be applied.

Its a theoretical impossibility for it take off if the conveyer belt is isntantly matching wheel speed, which is what I am arguing. As a result of trying the wheel speed would simply just increase and increase and increase until the bearings failed, whether it be from them overheating(which can and does happen) or from the Centrifugal force going up so high the metal can no longer sustain its shape. Again, if it matches vehicle speed, the aircraft will take off.

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 03:29 PM
  #288  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by crazymjb

The treadmill is already make believe, logic need not be applied.


If the treadmill is make believe and can have infinitely strong bearings, then so can the plane. And the only reason you think the plane can't take off is because it's bearings will seize.


Again, I think you're missing the point of this problem. But, oh well.

I like your enthusiasm crazymjb. I do have to say though, that through 10 years of engineering school and several years out in the workplace, I've found that people with your mindset are the worst students and professional engineers. There's nothing worse than an engineer who thinks he or she knows something without actually learning it first. These people tend to argue with the ultimate quest of "winning" some debate instead of learning and trying to find the best answer. Most times, thhey don't have any references to back up their opinions because they've never actually taken the time to learn anything.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 03:43 PM
  #289  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
And, by the way, the reason I think your missing the point of the question is because I think the question is a brainteaser that is meant to test
(a) the application of Newton's laws
(b) the concept of relative motion
(c) the ability to distinguish between one's every day experience with cars (in wich thrust is transmited through the ground-to-tire interface) and airplanes (in which thrust is transmitted through the air-to-airplane interface).

I don't think this was meant to be a question that hinges on the strength of the bearings in airplane wheels.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 03:58 PM
  #290  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I could say a lot about professional engineers(in terms of quirks, my great grandfather chewed 100 times before swallowing, etc, though he lived to 90 so maybe it worked)

Lets say the bearings are invincable. If the conveyer is instantly matched to the wheel speed, the plane will still not move.

Now... As I will say yet again. If the conveyer is simply matching the aircrafts forward speed, assuming the bearings and tires cand stand up to that the plane will take off.

Now the whole other debate... If the bearings were built perfectly and were ivulnerable, and also didn't expand when heated than yes, the treadmill could go at any speed and the aircraft could take off with the normal negligable bearing resistance. This does not change the fact that if it was an instant speed match, the aircraft would not move forward as it's a paradox.

Mike

Last edited by crazymjb; 08-19-2006 at 04:00 PM.
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 04:20 PM
  #291  
fdl
Senior Moderator
 
fdl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Toronto
Age: 43
Posts: 21,673
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
fdl is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 04:36 PM
  #292  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by crazymjb

If the bearings were built perfectly and were ivulnerable, and also didn't expand when heated than yes, the treadmill could go at any speed and the aircraft could take off with the normal negligable bearing resistance. This does not change the fact that if it was an instant speed match, the aircraft would not move forward as it's a paradox.

Mike

Ok, so here you;ve said that
(a) the bearing resistance is negligable. I agree
(b) If the bearings don't fail the plane will take off. I agree with this too.


You're last statement doesn't seem the jibe with the rest of the paragraph.

The plane will move horizontally if the force of the of the engines on the plane is greater than any other horizontal force. The only other one you've identified is bearing friction, which you've stated is negligable.

According to Newton:

F = (m) X (a)

The net horizontal force on the plane = (the mass of the plane) X (the plane's horizontal acceleration)

The net horizontal force = the thrust - the friction of the bearings.

If the the thrust is greater than the friction of the bearings, then by Newton's law (equation above), the plane will have a horizontal aceleration in the direction of the thrust.

No where in the above equation does the speed of the conveyor come in. If you can write a simple equation that alter's Newton's Law to include the speed of the conveyer, please do. That's the only way you can answer this point. ANything else you type is not engineering.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 04:43 PM
  #293  
My Garage
 
GIBSON6594's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Age: 36
Posts: 13,388
Thanked 11 Times in 10 Posts
thread
GIBSON6594 is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 04:45 PM
  #294  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by GIBSON6594
thread

Yeah, after estimating how much time I've spent discussing this with Water-S Jr., I decided that I'm the real asshat here.

wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 05:32 PM
  #295  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't mean to be a complete prick, but I'd like to be in NO WAY associated with water S. I would like to think my arguments, thoughts, and possesions themselves have a little more substance to them. For example... I have engineered and built some stuff before(if you read my threads...) and I provide pics and video clips if applicable.

Dubya, I am saying I agree with you as long as the conveyer belt is matching vehicle speed not wheel speed, and the wheel speed instantly at that(as again that is an impossible situation as it IS a paradox).

Now... If the conveyer speed was trying to match the wheel speed, accelerating at a rapid rate yet remianing behind the speed of the wheels, than assuming the bearings didn't fail yes the plane could still take off take off, HOWEVER, the bearings would fail.

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 05:58 PM
  #296  
'Big Daddy Diggler'
Thread Starter
 
bigman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Yonkers NY
Age: 37
Posts: 11,018
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by GIBSON6594
thread
i never thought it would turn into this, damn.
bigman is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 06:36 PM
  #297  
Interesting. Interesting.
 
wstevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NorCal
Age: 46
Posts: 8,704
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by crazymjb
I don't mean to be a complete prick, but I'd like to be in NO WAY associated with water S. I would like to think my arguments, thoughts, and possesions themselves have a little more substance to them. For example... I have engineered and built some stuff before(if you read my threads...) and I provide pics and video clips if applicable.

Dubya, I am saying I agree with you as long as the conveyer belt is matching vehicle speed not wheel speed, and the wheel speed instantly at that(as again that is an impossible situation as it IS a paradox).

Now... If the conveyer speed was trying to match the wheel speed, accelerating at a rapid rate yet remianing behind the speed of the wheels, than assuming the bearings didn't fail yes the plane could still take off take off, HOWEVER, the bearings would fail.

Mike
Your thoughts are better laid out than Water-S's, so I tak eback the Water-S Jr. reference.

Okie Dokie. Good enough - I'm done with this thread.
wstevens is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 06:44 PM
  #298  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
And FTR, you were 16 once, you know where always right

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 08:14 PM
  #299  
Not Registered
 
Bdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia
Age: 47
Posts: 5,828
Thanked 86 Times in 48 Posts
Petition to get on Mythbusters!

http://www.petitiononline.com/plntdml/petition.html
Bdog is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 08:21 PM
  #300  
One on the right for me
 
subinf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
Age: 35
Posts: 27,551
Thanked 163 Times in 110 Posts
Originally Posted by Bdog

Done
subinf is offline  
Old 08-19-2006, 08:32 PM
  #301  
Senior Moderator
 
srika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 53,735
Thanked 7,269 Times in 3,899 Posts
sounds like a job for myth-busters..
srika is online now  
Old 08-19-2006, 08:35 PM
  #302  
Registered Member
 
crazymjb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 7,441
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I already sent them an E-mail... They said they read it all but don't respond. anyway... [email protected], maybe if we all send requests...

Mike
crazymjb is offline  
Old 02-03-2007, 08:23 PM
  #303  
At the Clarmont Lounge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 33
Posts: 2,436
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I figured it was in here somewhere. It just started in another forum and I can't believe what some people are saying.
JT Money is offline  
Old 02-03-2007, 08:52 PM
  #304  
Adventurist.
 
NiteQwill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 6,661
Thanked 55 Times in 19 Posts
Holy back from the dead... I think I just getting used to the sand here when I started reading this thread.

Never had a chance to follow it, what was the answer?
NiteQwill is offline  
Old 02-03-2007, 10:43 PM
  #305  
Registered Member
 
slayer202's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Age: 32
Posts: 2,522
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
http://forums.anandtech.com/

post it on this forum. They love this stuff there

(Joking, they will probably ban you if you do it)
slayer202 is offline  
Old 02-03-2007, 11:35 PM
  #306  
Senior Moderator
 
srika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 53,735
Thanked 7,269 Times in 3,899 Posts
Originally Posted by slayer202
http://forums.anandtech.com/

post it on this forum. They love this stuff there

(Joking, they will probably ban you if you do it)
hahhaha, ass. go play some Resistance: Fall of Man. thx
srika is online now  
Old 02-04-2007, 01:45 AM
  #307  
Registered Member
 
slayer202's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bergen County, NJ
Age: 32
Posts: 2,522
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by srika
hahhaha, ass. go play some Resistance: Fall of Man. thx
yeah, im confused. But I was literally just playing resistance though
slayer202 is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 02:35 AM
  #308  
At the Clarmont Lounge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 33
Posts: 2,436
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NiteQwill
Holy back from the dead... I think I just getting used to the sand here when I started reading this thread.

Never had a chance to follow it, what was the answer?
The plane will take off.
JT Money is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 08:33 AM
  #309  
Still trolling
 
suXor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wylie, Texas
Posts: 4,623
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by JT Money
The plane will take off.


Not without air flowing over the wings to create lift. If the plane is not moving due tot he runway keeping it in place, it will not generate lift.
suXor is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 09:33 AM
  #310  
Excels at nothing
 
svtmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago
Age: 54
Posts: 35,508
Thanked 2,496 Times in 1,370 Posts
svtmike is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 10:12 AM
  #311  
Insert Sarcasm Here
 
Smalls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gardner, KS
Age: 37
Posts: 3,549
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
here we go again....

it will take off
Smalls is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 10:41 AM
  #312  
At the Clarmont Lounge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 33
Posts: 2,436
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by suXor


Not without air flowing over the wings to create lift. If the plane is not moving due tot he runway keeping it in place, it will not generate lift.
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060203.html
JT Money is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 11:31 AM
  #313  
I shoot people
 
is300eater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 21,134
Thanked 1,845 Times in 1,038 Posts
what about a plane landing onto a conveyer? will it just come to a halt? I don't think so
is300eater is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 11:38 AM
  #314  
Dragging knees in
iTrader: (2)
 
Pure Adrenaline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle Area
Age: 37
Posts: 12,434
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
How is it possible for people to believe that the plane would take off?

Yes, it is creating thrust (whether propeller or jet powered) forward in order to stop moving backward with the conveyor belt. But there is no lift being generated. You need thrust/propulsion to move forward, and lift to take off. You don't have lift in this case. You can increase the power to the max and sit there all day long spinning the tires on the conveyor belt but you are never going to move vertical because there is no air moving around the wings.
Pure Adrenaline is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 11:48 AM
  #315  
I shoot people
 
is300eater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 21,134
Thanked 1,845 Times in 1,038 Posts
Originally Posted by Pure Adrenaline
How is it possible for people to believe that the plane would take off?

Yes, it is creating thrust (whether propeller or jet powered) forward in order to stop moving backward with the conveyor belt. But there is no lift being generated. You need thrust/propulsion to move forward, and lift to take off. You don't have lift in this case. You can increase the power to the max and sit there all day long spinning the tires on the conveyor belt but you are never going to move vertical because there is no air moving around the wings.


you need this vvv



if the plane was sitting still, it dosent matter how fast the wheels are spinning, there will be no airflow to left it off the ground er'... I mean conveyer
is300eater is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 12:33 PM
  #316  
Registered Member
iTrader: (2)
 
DanL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 740
Thanked 67 Times in 32 Posts
Whether the conveyor belt is stationary or moving has absolutely nothing to do with the forward speed of the plane. All it affects is what speed the wheels spin. The plane WILL move foward and WILL take off. Look, dust off your old treadmill, find a hot wheel or matchbox car, and try an experiment yourself. Turn on the treadmill, hold the car on there, and then move it forward with your hand. You have no problem moving the car forward, right? In fact, it doesn't matter how fast the treadmill is running, does it? All that happens is that the wheels spin faster. It's the same with an airplane. It doesn't rely on the wheels and friction with the ground (or belt) for propulsion. The engine is pushing against the air. So the plane will move forward even though the conveyor belt and wheels will be spinning like crazy.
DanL is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 12:39 PM
  #317  
Sold acid to L.RonHubbard
 
CUNextTuesday's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: off the grid
Age: 31
Posts: 5,227
Thanked 148 Times in 107 Posts
How are people still saying that this won't take off?

It's been dicussed over and over - the answer is YES. The plane WILL take off....
CUNextTuesday is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 01:01 PM
  #318  
Go Giants
 
Whiskers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: PA
Age: 47
Posts: 69,206
Thanked 978 Times in 663 Posts
Wait...What was the question again?
Whiskers is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 01:02 PM
  #319  
Senior Moderator
Regions Leader
 
trancemission's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas TX
Age: 48
Posts: 8,859
Thanked 179 Times in 115 Posts
I work on airplanes and I can honestly say "who really gives a shit about this?"

Ill worry about it when one of our jets trys to take off from a treadmill...
trancemission is offline  
Old 02-04-2007, 01:02 PM
  #320  
Go Giants
 
Whiskers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: PA
Age: 47
Posts: 69,206
Thanked 978 Times in 663 Posts
Originally Posted by kensteele
it was a terrible discussion the last few times and it's been closed a couple of times already.
Whiskers is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Will the Plane Take-Off - Merged with MythBusters Show Thread


Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.