Kenny

I argued under the impression that the for the purpose of this dilemma, the plane was being held stationary by the runway (by whatever means).

But like people have said, while following the original question verbatum (that means 'word for word') - there's nothing to suggest the plane is being held in one place by the motorised runway, and so one has to assume the plane is being thrust forwards by it's engine.

With the presence of forward momentum there's no way the plane couldn't take off, save for the sake some poorly placed trees for example.

The reason why I argued so vehemently is that I believed there to be a purpose to the question. From the original criteria set out in the question, the moving runway is not a factor. Given this, the argument is "Can a plane take off?" In which case the answer is going to be 'Yes' (again, save for unspecified degratory factors).

On the assumption the question had a purpose, in which case the runway would have to be a factor - then the runway in question would need to be operating at such a speed it created enough friction on the wheels to keep the plane stationary - in this case the plane wouldn't take off.

But as I've learned that's not what the question asked at all (even if deep down, it REALLY REALLY wanted to). So yeah, the plane takes off.