It was amazing. Even though recovering from the flat spin is a planned part of his show and he would have chosen to perform at a height that he can recover from any failure, it was simply amazing to watch. So much skill and situational awareness.
@@CJ-Foygelo Regardless of his skill level, the prop came off the plane. I guarantee he declared an emergency at the first chance he had, plus people on the ground watching. The emergency vehicles were rolling before he even lined up for the runways. That's just how it works.
That all happened so quickly that at first I thought it was a model aircraft. One hardly ever sees a piloted plane make such sudden movements. What a save and quite the scare. Hope no one was hurt by the prop flying off.
For anyone who's interested: the aerobatics aircraft in the first clip was doing a maneuver called the lomcovák - which uses gyroscopic precession of the engine at full throttle to rotate the aircraft 90° off axis. It's known to be extremely hard on engine crank shafts, which is what failed here causing the prop to run away with one half of it!
I don't think it was. Lomcevak are flown straight up like in a first quarter loop, then strat your manoeuvre. Here he seems to be in a sort of flat spin descending.
It looked to me like it was a stunt pilot doing a controlled stall but the forces were too much for the prop? I am seriously the opposite of an expert though. But it explains how incredibly quick thinking and skilled the pilot was. Although the front falling off isn't a normal thing to happen with a sky boat, that plane looked like it weighs 15 pounds soaking wet and he probably has a LOT of experience controlling it. There are probably contingencies for shit going wrong when you are doing stunts, although being able to think that fast just takes an ungodly amount of hours in the air.
It looks like either the crank snapped off or if it had a gear box the prop was connected to snapped. Look when he lands, you can't see the front part of the crank.
6:16 When I was a kid in Australia, we called those things "windmill pumps." There's a geared shaft running down the centre from the fan hub, and they were usually used for either crop irrigation or pumping water for cattle.
a lot of ranches still us windmill pumps in the US to keep water troughs full way out on the ranges (no need for electrical pumps since electricity may not be available)
I drove an Amish family home once, and they had one of those that was still working to pump water. A lot of farms would have had them 100 years ago, but now they would probably use just electric pumps
Yeah, they're called the same thing in the U.S. There is technically a wind vane on the back (in order to keep the windmill facing into the wind, same as a v-stab on a plane,) but it's not really a "weather vane," per se. Its purpose is just to keep the windmill spinning, not to provide a wind direction measurement.
Kelsey, after being hooked onto 74 gear and other aviation TH-cam channels , over the course of this pandemic, when I saw the second plane featured, my initial reaction was, "" Yawn! Another crab landing! What's new? " Then, when you provided the additional tidbits about how you approach landing in a crosswind, to avoid nasty surprises to passengers at the back of the aircraft, I learned something new. Thanks. Plus you added the disclaimer about following procedure so that some newbie pilot doesn't mess up and blame you. Very smart!😊
First clip: mad flying skills! No bailing out with a chute and fire extinguishers! The 747 one I remember form the Building & Test Flying the 727 & 747. That long flying piece of metal looks like the aft flap.
Damn I felt that burn from down here in Australia 🤣🤣🤣.... I hope they throw whatever books they can at him for that. Damn good recovery on that first clip though, like given the code brown moment it would of been, there was some skillful thoughts there. First rule of aviation, Aviate, navigate, communicate Last clip i was waiting for a bird strike or something, wasn't even watching the flaps lol
Hi Kelsey - In my last couple years flying the Airbus A300, we were doing 0 flap takeoffs. It used more runway but improved second segment climb performance.
Can you elaborate on that? Second segment, I think I heard it mentioned in an aviationvideo before, but I am not sure. From what altitude is that second segment?
Probably less reckless when it's planned to have no flaps for takeoff. In this case, my non-pilot brain starts wondering what other checklist points they forgot.
It just depends on the airplane. Not all of them are certified for flaps zero takeoff. Aside from burning up extra runway unnecessarily, there are maximum speeds for the landing gear, which you might have to exceed (or at least approach with uncomfortable margin) if you take off with no flaps on a plane that wasn't certified for it. On the other hand, it's perfectly fine if the plane is certified for it and the runway is long enough (and the operator's procedure's allow it.) On a lot of light singles, it's perfectly normal to take off with no flaps.
Just wanted to drop a line saying I enjoy your videos Kelsey. I'm not a pilot or anything but I do work in the manufacturing department for an aviation company that designs and manufacturers all of the lighted panels inside of a cockpit of various aircrafts. I really enjoy everything the aviation industry has to offer.
Before the flaps starting creeping out, I thought OMG, this isn't going to go well... That was way too late for my liking. Great vid as always Kelsey. Thanks 👍🏻🇬🇧
I think the biggest concern for those last pilots would be “well what else did this miss in their checklists?”. I know planes are a lot better about built in config checks, but in ye olden days there were plenty of crashes from missed takeoff checklist items…
I agree. That one reminded me of the famous accident where the pilots had pulled the fuse for the slats config warning and then inadvertently missed the before takeoff checklist and there were multiple red flags telling them to stop. I forget what airline but it was on an MD-80 I think.
And I think in some aircraft (for example B737) you will only get takeoff config warning horn and light illuminated without exact item misconfigured, so you could miss flaps, extend them and still have config warning with, for example, spoilers extended, wrong trim setting and end up high speed rejection or even going airborne with wrong configuration guessing where it will lead you. Takeoff config warning is there for a reason, so you can stop and check at the very beginning of take off roll.
With that last one, the main risk I'd see is that it makes your workload higher if you're having to do any takeoff configuration late, while you're starting your take off roll, and now under a severe time crunch. If anything else goes wrong, the fact you're having to fiddle around with your flaps and interrupt the normal checklists to do that, means you may not notice that other problem developing until it's too late, or you may be more likely to mishandle that next thing you need to take care of. I've seen the stories of minor things like this being the first link in a chain that leads to a deadly crash.
Yeah. My first thought was "what else did they skip in the before takeoff checklists?" You're also going to be taking more runway to take off (my second thought was "are going to drive there?"), but that looked to be small enough plane that it's almost certainly not going to cut into the margins (even if you don't actually know what your margins are, since you're now taking off in an unknown configuration).
I was on a plane here in Kyrgyzstan and they were lined up and waiting with the flaps not extended. I was screaming at the flight attendant to tell the pilots. I didn't want to die! The attendant ran up front and a few seconds later the flaps were deploying. Sometimes being a pilot on a plane is scary!
The only problem would have been the aircraft would have needed a lot more speed to takeoff. In case of an aborted takeoff that would have been a big problem, agreed.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg taking off without flaps is really difficult and from a safety standpoint completely unacceptable for most aircraft. There have been deadly accidents caused by incorrect takeoff configurations
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg Please correct me if I'm wrong: - Longer to accelerate means: - - more runway needed (that may not be there) - - longer to gain altitude to clear any obstructions at the end of the runway (it's happened before) - - less time for pilots to recognize the need for an abort (if it's a common mistake for them, then the general level of pilot skill is low. Will they recognize the need for an abort before they run out of runway?) In most airlines, I suspect that the stewards would not run to the crew cabin on the say-so of a passenger-especially not one who is screaming. (NOTE: I have only flown on US piloted planes. Your experience may differ.) Yet *this* steward *did* run to the pilots. To me, that says it was a common error with these pilots, which makes me wonder about their skill/training. Would they even recognize a need for an abort, or would they try to push the takeoff through?
So glad I found your channel. Fly quite a lot living overseas and having to return to the US for different things. Demystifying flying for the masses is only a good thing!
Me too, Suzanne. I lived in Norway for years, flew in Europe, across the Atlantic, and in the U.S. constantly. I experienced my share of scary events, so I appreciate his calming information, and expertise.
I'm not an aviator , but I've been obsessed with flying since my Grandfather flew me from place to place in his beechcraft . I love your channel and the professionalism that is involved. 👍
As a 50yo sight-impaired artist who is scared of heights perhaps I have shot my bolt with regards to becoming a 747 pilot :D But my goodness I do love this channel regardless
I know this is going to sound crazy to you, but believe it or not, there are pilots who actually are scared of heights! There is a world of differece between say climbing a steep tower staircase then when you get to the top looking out with just a rail between you and a sheer drop, then being in an enclosed space such as an aircraft
Found this channel last week and been binging it since. Very informative and entertaining content, even for someone like me, who's only ever been a passenger. Glad Kelsey explained about "landing on the numbers" because "why are they giving up a thousand feet of perfectly good runway" was a question I had during a few of these.
The threshold is also an obstacle height issue. The 3 degree glide-slope is designed to clear 50ft at the runway threshold. If there were (hypothetically) 50ft high trees on the perimeter, you would plow into them trying to reach the numbers.
I used to wonder why they build a lot of runway that is in effect never gonna be used. I live close to Schiphol Airport, and sometimes I rode my bike over there. As it turns out, long runways are all about safety, as is the entire industry. Runways have to be so long so planes that have to abort takeoff have enough kilometers/miles to run out their speed.
Yes. Everyone is impressed by Mr. 747 Extraordinaire Kelsey. It a turn on that his knowledge of his craft with that handsome side grin, keeps me watching and learning. Thanks K-MAN. 747
I'm not a pilot but I enjoy all Kelsey's videos, if I ever become a pilot I would love to work with him. Keep the videos coming buddy and have a safe flight. 😎
As a 28 year airline pilot, I have to say that lowering the flaps during the takeoff roll is HUGELY unsafe. While some airliners can takeoff with no flaps, it needs to be planned ahead of time. If you are planning to use flaps for takeoff, once you start the takeoff roll without them, all your takeoff calculations are now invalid. You have no idea how long your takeoff roll will be. You have no idea if you will be able to stay on the runway if you abort just prior to V1. If you get airborne, you have no idea if you will meet the required climb gradients. Once the CONFIG warning went off, those pilots should have aborted the takeoff, exited the runway, re-accomplished the Before Takeoff Checklist, then thought about trying another takeoff. If the FAA had caught this crew doing this, they would have had much to say to them.
While I don't disagree with your conclusion of it being better to abort and go back through the checklists, wouldn't your takeoff roll be shorter if you start with no flaps and then extend them during the roll? There's less drag without the flaps, so you should accelerate faster than planned prior to extending them. Though, at those airspeeds, the difference would probably be relatively small, but still it shouldn't require any more runway than if you have the flaps extended the whole time. Indeed, this can actually be done intentionally in some light aircraft to reduce short-field takeoff roll (especially the ones where the flaps are extended manually via mechanical linkage rather than via electric/hydraulic/pneumatic actuators.) As far as the V1 abort, I'm not following. Are you talking about an overrun or excursion off the side? Or becoming airborne? I don't see why any of those things would be more likely to happen with flap extension during the takeoff run vs. before it. As long as the flaps are fully extended for at least a second or two before rotating (which you presumably won't be doing anyway in a V1 cut,) I don't see how this would make any of those things more likely to happen. Like I said at the beginning, though, I still fully agree with your assessment that aborting and running back through the before takeoff checklist would have been the right course of action. If for not other reason, if you missed setting the flaps, you may have missed another step, too. Better to stop and make sure everything is correct at 0-5 knots on a taxiway rather than be trying to fix it at 100-150 knots on a runway.
The 747 that hit an embankment was a flight test aircraft landing at Renton approaching over lake Washington. My former boss was a crew member. The single runway at Renton is very short and the crew were trying to give themselves as much stopping distance as possible by landing as close to the pier as possible.
I'd have to disagree with your definition of the propeller, it's actually a fan. The way you can tell is because if it stops spinning, you can visibly see the pilot start to sweat.
I just want to let you know how much I enjoy this channel. Came to it by accident. I'm a diplomat far from home and get a lot of pleasure from learning about something not in my daily agenda. And I fly...a lot! Also love the generic hotel room backgrounds...hilarious
Landend A380 once in a crab, as passenger sitting in the far back on the upper deck and it was OWESOME! It was cool to see the runway from the window :) And the strengthening after tochdown was cooler than rollercoster ride.
Kelsey. I enjoy every video you make. I pretty much learn something from them. The biggest lesson I have learned, however, was that despite my life long aviation passion, when I had the chance to start a career, I seemed to forget commercial aviation as a path to a dream. Thank you Kelsey for your channel.
I'm so glad that you explained what the first plane in this video did. I was fearing that he was going to crash nose down into the ground. Then I thought he was doing show off stunts until you explained what's really going on. We passenger's really have no idea about aviation until we watch videos and read about it and you are a great teacher. 👍🏽
"My landing would not have nearly looked as good, Hes obviously a professional pilot"....Kelsey give yourself some credit. YOUR a professional pitot too!!
Kelsey: keep in mind that back when the 747 was new, a lot of runways were shorter, and if you had to divert there was less of a chance that the airport had ever seen a plane that large land there. Since this was a test pilot, I'm assuming he was working on emergency procedures for landing on otherwise "too-short" runways (at least those which had just barely enough length).
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
Joe Sutter was actually onboard this particular aircraft when this happened. He details the incident in his book (which I highly recommend) and as the previous poster pointed out the accident happened because the test pilot panicked and tried to jam it on the very beginning of the runway. Renton's runway at the time was fairly short but this 747 was nowhere near fully loaded, it was just the 3 of them and the fuel needed for a 20nm flight. They managed to get other 747s in without incident after this flight.
@@justadudeffs His book is, in fact, where I got all my information from about this incident. Just a slight correction, it would be four people on board, as the 747s of those times had three flight crew members, and of course, Joe Sutter himself. The pilot ultimately jumped ship and went on to complete the flight test certification of the Lockheed L-1011.
@@justadudeffs Is this the title? 747: Creating the World's First Jumbo Jet and Other Adventures from a Life in Aviation Looks out of print. No kindle edition but free audiobook from Audible, at least.
When the 747 was in testing, one of the big issues facing pilots was not being able to visually gauge touchdown on the runway due to the large size of the aircraft and the high seating position of the pilot. That is likely why this early test pilot came down to early. As far as how well the 747 was built, just remember back then no one believed something that large and complex could even fly. It was built to extraordinary specifications. It is not only the most beautiful machine ever created by man, it is also an engineering marvel. There is a reason it is known as the Queen of the Skies.
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
6:20 In my area of southern Ontario, Canada, that device is called a windmill, often used on a farm to pump water from a well without needing to use electricity. The wind vane in the back is there to point the blades in front into the wind.
Hello Kelsey. Love your channel. I'm pretty sure that 747 clip was at Renton Field just outside of Seattle Washington. That field is one of many used by Boeing. I see a reference to that happening in 1969 which sounds about right. That field is incredibly short for a 747, so if you were planning to land one there you would have to hit the numbers or else. KRNT is showing today as being 5320 feet long. Not sure of it's length in 69. I grew up in that area. This story was kept under wraps for decades..
Let me add a little detail to this. The landing was at KRNT and was one of the first five 747s and was part of the flight test program. This airplane was going into KRNT for refurbishing after the flight test program before delivery to the airline. I was at the airport when this happened. The landing was on runway 16 (at the time it was 15) coming in over Lake Washington. The wall the landing gear hit was at the end of the runway and marked the end of the ground and held back the lake water. It does not extend above ground level. The piece of the plane that flew off, we thought was some wind surface, perhaps a part of the flaps. I think it was too big to be a landing gear door, but that is possible. I believe the runway length has not changed since then.
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done.
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done.
Hey man, just wanted to say that thanks to you I feel much less anxiety when flying. Thank you so much and much love from Amstedam! Wave to me when fly ing to Schiphol ;-)
Stop putting your intelligence down, Kelsey. You're very intelligent and it shows through what you are doing with videos and explanations. It takes not only intelligence but a caring heart/personality.
I've watched a lot of crazy crosswind landing videos on TH-cam and always wondered why airliners land in a crab. Thanks for the explanation. The largest aircraft I've ever flown is an ATR72 and I always used the same technique as you - maintain a crab until about 10ft above the runway and gradually input rudder to align with the runway as much as possible just prior to touchdown. It avoids the aircraft swinging around so much after touchdown. I also lower a wing a little into the wind, but the ATR72 is a high wing aircraft. Probably not something you'd want to do on many airliners.
Kelsey your presentation skills and confidence are improving so much!!! Petter might want to keep an eye open - I know you like flying the 7-4 Queen more than training - but these episodes are great! Props to you Man!
That first pilot was spectacular! Instant rudder before i could even comprehend the situation, and instant increase in air speed by pushing it down. Amazing!
As for pilots not doing stupid things, well you'd hope. I'm not a frequent flyer but I still have a story for that too. We flew into frankfurt I think when the pilots decided after landing that they'd save some time by taking the first taxiway off the runway, which was closer to their assigned parking position. So after touchdown they applied full brakes. Even 15 minutes later when we were leaving the plane there was thick smoke hanging over the runway, and the smell of burning tyres and brakes. I think that qualifies as a pretty stupid decision to save a few minutes.
I highly doubt that, even the smoke cloud from a long burnout doesnt stays that long, also airliner have anti skid and produce far far less smoke than a burnout, also also on a airport like Frankfurt there would have landed at least 3 more planes in that 15 minutes.
You've never heard of a short-field landing before have you. Your pilots could've easily have just been requested by Tower to make a shorter landing due timing constraints with other inbound/outbound aircraft, especially at an airport as busy as Frankfurt
@@lucasbrien5008 Night landing, not much traffic at the time, late summer without a breeze, so the smoke hung over the tarmac and was clearly visible in the lights when we were boarding the bus to take the passengers to the actual terminal. Even if the tower requested an early exit the pilots should've rejected it. Can you give any reasonable scenario outside of an actual emergency to do that? The only detail I'm not sure about is the airport, it might have happened elsewhere.
@@mummifiedgamer What I can say is that you weren't in the cockpit. Nobody likes an armchair pilot. If there was smoke, it wouldn't be from the tires. I have never heard of wheels locking up on an airliner, but I have heard of brake fires. If it was a brake fire they would have rolled the trucks. But again, you're assuming what went on in the pilots' heads while also assuming conditions were completely normal, both of which you have no way of knowing.
My aunt used to be a flight attendant. She told me that she was working for US Airways in the 80's and am engine fell off the plane as it was over an ocean. They landed safely and were able to fly with the remaining 3 engines. I was just a little child then so I remember the amazing story she told me because it's fascinating to me.
Oof the story with the flaps! I get that it's safe to put them out at the last second, but it makes me think... If they forgot the flaps, what else did they forget??
Putting them out “at the last second” could make the plane “balloon” up - increasing the landing distance or make for a hard landing if the plane stalled too high - definitely true in a light GA aircraft.
Kelsey, good video...! 747 Touchdown on barrier was PanAm #3, after test program and Paris Airshow. Boeing decided to re-furb at Renton Plant, with a minimal runway in 1969 -- you showed result. The right wing gear rotated around the main spar, (not damaging the spar connections) -- enabling the repair and rebuild of the attachments. The insurance provided Boeing the means to "buy-back" the aircraft from PanAm and keep it as a demonstrator, (previously the company leased them from customers for testing). That was the last "74" flight into Renton Airfield...!
Kelsey, I'm surprised you didn't point out the amazing calm that pilot had. He didn't just lose his propeller but he lost it in the middle of performing an AERObatics maneuver/spin and as a pilot who still loves to take a 172 to the practice area and do spins for fun and to stay current with my stall and spin recovery technique. He was also lucky as he was performing at an air show so was immediately over the airport. If this were to happen to me when practicing, I would be too far from the field to make a runway and I would be in a field.
Back in 1995, the same thing happened to my flight. Flaps extended late during take off. I was actually on the back of the plane, watching and wondering, was it a new procedure or what was I missing? We've made it. Fly safe!
Have you noticed the windsock showing quite some wind blowing pretty much down the runway axis? What means a 90° cross-wind at holding position. Maybe it was a perfectly planed procedure to line up, then extend flaps during take-off roll. Without the context of operation handbook for that aircraft, company procedures, and pilot decisions, nobody can tell.
Great vids Kelsey. I'm no pilot but been airside most working life. Your vids are instructive with experience and easy for us non aircrew to understand. Thanks for your work.
That 747 test flight was landing at Renton Field, pretty sure that’s the last time they ever tried to land a 747 there. Not sure if the runway length has changed but current field length is only 5382’.
I remembered that 747 clip is flown by Boeing test pilot. They were flying it to Boeing’s previous plant ( not Everest) to get a new paint job or something (before giving back to the launch airline), the runway is quite short so the pilots were trying to lane on the numbers to ensure they can stop. That plane was put in service and continue flies for quite several years.
The first clip had my heart skip a beat but the pilot handled the issue like a champ. The one with the wall reminds me of that Air India Express 737 which struck a wall and a localizer antenna when taking off, yet the crew continued the departure and only turned back because they were told to. A question regarding the last clip - aren't flaps on SEVERAL checklists you do before taking off?
Hey Kelsey! As a student pilot, I am always looking for ways to expand my knowledge. I have seen many other content creators on aviation including Captain Joe and Mentour Pilot, but nobody was as intriguing as you. So I would just like to say thank you for creating these entertaining and educational videos!
Kelsey - Those are called "Wind Mills" and the vane at the back in relation to the "wheel" points the opposite direction the wind is coming from to keep the wheel facing into the wind.
The wind vain which are usually found on farms and homesteads I know them as windmills, as they are mainly used to pump up 3water from a borehole mechanically.
Hahaha, I saw you grin when you saw the flaps being extended. I did notice right away but your reaction was cool. The 747 incident looks old & narration references the test flight program. Good video. Thanks for sharing it.
The risk they took on that last video was that in the event that, for whatever reason, the flaps didn't deploy, or didn't deploy fully, they wouldn't have the runway to abort. In which case, it could've gone very wrong.
I'm so happy to have recognized the lack of flaps on that last video, I'm thinking while watching that there is no way a large aircraft like that would normally take off with no flaps, i know small aircraft will do it sometimes when there is more then enough runway and all but from my understanding the bigger aircraft normally use flaps on takeoff.
Another example for the truth in the saying "They don't build 'em like that anymore" It never ceases to amaze me how engineers from not so long ago engineered really longlife and sturdy things just from the feeling in their guts, knowledge, experience and a slide rule.. no structural simulations, no computer stress analysis.. I wonder at which point in time we lost all that.
Don't kid yourself there was plenty of trash made back then too. We just only see the good stuff now because only the good stuff survived this long. People will be saying the same thing about stuff made now in 50 years in 2070. Only the good stuff will have lasted that long, so it will look like everything was better than it was.
@@Lessinath you're right I guess, people in the future will say the same about stuff from today that happens to survive for 50+ years. Just I am not sure if that will be an awfull lot, especially consumer grade products.
@@Lessinath Also true about music. You go back far enough and it seems like every song was a hit, but the truth is that all the non-hits have been culled by time for the most part.
You could also argue that it was over engineered back then. Planned obsolescence isn’t always a terrible idea. There’s a bridge in my hometown that survived a flood that took out almost every other bridge in its path. It is too short and too narrow for modern traffic so is obsolete anyway. The expense that went into overbuilding that bridge is wasted because it needs torn down anyway.
They did have a bunch of duds as well. But I think your point is everything is about money now. Companies can't make money if they make products last forever. Case and point would be the auto industry.
Hi kelsey. I'm a private pilot and I've been watching your videos for quite a while. I particularly like the ones on a t c communication. But they are all good. Thank you.
I love to sit near the wings and watch the flight control surfaces. I always watch to make sure the flaps are set for take off. I'm not sure what I'd do if they weren't! What WOULD a passenger do in that situation?
In another comment, Kim Chi says "I was on a plane here in Kyrgyzstan and they were lined up and waiting with the flaps not extended. I was screaming at the flight attendant to tell the pilots. I didn't want to die! The attendant ran up front and a few seconds later the flaps were deploying. Sometimes being a pilot on a plane is scary!"
This is what I like so much about this channel, you always learn something new Better write this one down "Prop flying off the plane = not a good sign" 😁
Week 2 of telling Kelsey I am loving his content! Edit: I was actually thinking while watching the videos, does Crabbing into the wind heighten the risk of landing gear failure? Does that 45-degree force cause any more wear or strain on the tires or struts than landing with tires parallel to the runway?
@@rachellofthouse549 indeed they are! I started flight training in January after years of setbacks, and I finally found a flight school-home life-work balance. Kelsey’s uploads have actually become a mental transition in my weekly schedule that pivots me from work on the weekends to a flight mindset for my 0630 flight slot on Mondays!
The wheels (landing gear) are “casting sort of like a shopping cart. They are designed to swivel. Do the tires wear more? That would be a very technical answer I would think as a number of things are at play. Perhaps someone else (AI ) has experience with tire wear will comment, but I wouldn’t think it would make a huge difference on tire life - just a guess.
@@marlinweekley51 my logic says it causes more wear sort of like going around corners causes more wear on car suspension components and tires. - it does, but it's within design specifications.
@@kenbrown2808 agree, and for the number of times a particular set of tires experience a crabbed landing i am curious whether it significantly reduces their useful life. Do airlines change out tires after a certain number of hours and are those hours low enough so that the potential additional wear does not affect useful life of the tires?
Oh, my!!! That pilot in the first clip has got balls of titanium. Amazing work man -- never give up! I don't really know the first thing about flying, but I don't think you need to be a professional to appreciate both the gravity of the situation and the amazing feat of aviation. By the way, compare that clip to Trevor Jacob's "I Crashed my Airplane", and try to tell me that TrJ isn't a total scam...
What would be going through my mind is that if I forgot the flaps, there could be something else on the checklist I forgot. If I were to continue, I'd be distracted and worried trying to think of anything critical that could be missing. I'd want to taxi back and re-do the checklist, but then I don't have an airline to answer to.
Bernoulli's principal.... The air doesn't push the wing up, the negative pressure pulls the wing up. But you already know this.......Right??? 🙂 Keep up the great work Kelsey, always watching you!
Bernoulli's principle is one of the reasons, but with an angle of attack you also get air pushing the bottom of the wing. That's how acrobatic planes can fly upside down even though in that configuration the shape is wrong for the Bernoulli effect.
So cool to see the 747 test footage with the landing gear crash. I assume the test pilot was like “yeah we were DEFINITELY testing a simulated short landing effect on the landing gear for… uh… definitely official test purposes… and no other reason whatsoever. Hey anyone know where the bathroom is?”
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
@@vbscript2 Sutter was actually on board the plane when it happened. He realized shortly before the crash that they were coming in too low. I don't have his book in front of me anymore since I'm not home, but from what I vaguely remember, they were quite impressed that there was minimal damage to the plane. The landing gear sheared off as it was designed to do.
As I remember with the prototype 747 landing incident, the runway was incredibly short so the test pilots decided to land close to the numbers but were caught out by wind shear.
Read Joe Sutter's book - 747 (great book) that describes this incident in detail. They were taking their brand new 747 progeny to Renton for some minor work (this is the 737 Production plant now and my home airport). With no load the 5000 feet was plenty of room to land but the very new to the 747 (there was only one remember) pilot freaked out. It is a steep decent on final to landing and it had to feel like he was landing on an aircraft carrier in that plane at that runway. The engineering was sound but the site picture was a mess. Anyway, while trying to stick it 5 feet past the wall he put it down a hair early and then this. Sutter was on the airplane that morning and his remark was that the plane came to rest less than half way down the runway - I got the feeling he was not very impressed with the "test" pilot. Met him - cool guy - gone now but what a great story that plane has - now at the Museum of Flight in Seattle.
Reminded me of my first solo. A few days after my 16th birthday I was let go by my instructor in a Beech Musketeer on a showery day in Oceanside CA, after a couple of pattern T&Gs on runway 9. For those of you unfamiliar with So-Cal weather, we don't get much, and a 15 knot wind to us is like a thunderstorm in Texas, so it was a good day for instruction. As I was on climbout, my instructor got on the unicom and told me that the wind had shifted and asked if I was comfortable landing on 27, which I was. The problem was the wind was more out of the south. I wound up crabbing, and floating longer than anticipated. Yes, low wing aircraft tend to float, but it is more pronounced when your 250 pound instructor is not on board. I straightened out too early, touched down on the left side of the center line. Runway was wet, the brakes let go. Fortunately, due to years of motocross, I instinctively knew to get off the brakes and let it roll. The plane was very forgiving and the rudder kept it pointed in the right direction. Instructor gave me a B because while I did the maneuver correctly, I failed to anticipate the change in flight characteristics due to load. Jerk. Might have been a good thing to say when he got out of the plane. Over time I've learned that the main gear can handle a crab a lot easier than it can handle the mud next to the runway, so when in doubt, just fly the crab into the ground.
50 years ago I was maintenance for the A-6 simulator. From what I recall of the contents of the NATOPS manual this particular Grumman aircraft had what is known as "a glide angle like a rock." Such a different story with the light, single-engine, mono plane that the pilot was able to land without a propeller.
Wo wo wo! To be fair! If it lands itself in the mountains, after your pilot abandons you without even troubleshooting...where there were plenty of places he could've put her down...THAT could be a T Jacob landing. It could, bro. 🤣
Kelsey, what you showed was not a weather vane, those are attached to the tops of roofs and do give the direction of the wind. What you showed there was a wind pump. See the thing the spinning part is attached to? There is a gearing system attached to it that operates a water pump. Important on a cattle farm to have an absolutely secure system to keep the water troth filled.
Kelsey, you would be So Good teaching Jr high school students, 8th graders or 9th graders simple instructions for flying planes, just to get their interests going. School districts are really missing out on the opportunity to give All students a look at becoming a pilot on any level. Stay safe, keep the blue skies up 🛩️✈️🤗🦊
You can walk away from a triple pod strike. And the mechanics probably enjoy replacing engines, engine inlet cowls, fan cowls, oil train mats, and t/r cowls. All in a day's work.
Learn something new every time, I had no clue you need the prop, I thought it was to cool the pilot 🙂 I think loosing things like a prop or wheels is a sign of bad maintenance and/or check before flight.
Losing the prop is not a sign of bad maintenance per se. The plane had stalled, came into freefall and the Gforces on the plane get so high the prop is torn off. It is the most vulnerable part of the plane, so to say.
Well done young bald ranga. Just came across your youtube vids and I am super impressed. I'm an old bald ranga that always wanted to be a pilot, but just couldn't afford the payments at the time, so went off and did business degrees, regret now it after 30 years. Thanks for you're vid's, you making an old man happy that others have taken the better exciting path.
Kelsey; your viral debriefs are far more relaxing than 99% of TH-cam.
That first pilots ability to instantly recover from the induced flat spin was incredible too, the rudder kick was instantaneous.
It was amazing. Even though recovering from the flat spin is a planned part of his show and he would have chosen to perform at a height that he can recover from any failure, it was simply amazing to watch. So much skill and situational awareness.
He got the plane on the ground. Testament to his skill. However, have to wonder where that propeller landed and if that was the reason for the sirens?
@@CJ-Foygelo Regardless of his skill level, the prop came off the plane. I guarantee he declared an emergency at the first chance he had, plus people on the ground watching. The emergency vehicles were rolling before he even lined up for the runways. That's just how it works.
Not a flat spin, normal spin.
That all happened so quickly that at first I thought it was a model aircraft. One hardly ever sees a piloted plane make such sudden movements. What a save and quite the scare. Hope no one was hurt by the prop flying off.
That propless landing is nothing short of amazing. Like, what was going through that guy's head, that he got such a mechanical response.
For anyone who's interested: the aerobatics aircraft in the first clip was doing a maneuver called the lomcovák - which uses gyroscopic precession of the engine at full throttle to rotate the aircraft 90° off axis. It's known to be extremely hard on engine crank shafts, which is what failed here causing the prop to run away with one half of it!
By the way, Lomcovak translates as 'hangover'.
The numbers are NOT at the very start of a landing.
I don't think it was. Lomcevak are flown straight up like in a first quarter loop, then strat your manoeuvre. Here he seems to be in a sort of flat spin descending.
@@12345fowler Yeah. I’ve done a lomcavak in an Extra 300. You start by pulling back on the stick and gaining altitude.
That's because the first part of the video is not shown where he actually does Lomcovak, google "Cap21 loses prop "@@12345fowler
That was seriously quick thinking and extremely competent flying in the first clip.
When your life is on the line, thinking becomes very quick.
@@skydiverclassc2031 Either that or you quickly stop thinking at all.
I think that is Uli "Cobra" Dembinski
It looked to me like it was a stunt pilot doing a controlled stall but the forces were too much for the prop? I am seriously the opposite of an expert though. But it explains how incredibly quick thinking and skilled the pilot was. Although the front falling off isn't a normal thing to happen with a sky boat, that plane looked like it weighs 15 pounds soaking wet and he probably has a LOT of experience controlling it. There are probably contingencies for shit going wrong when you are doing stunts, although being able to think that fast just takes an ungodly amount of hours in the air.
It looks like either the crank snapped off or if it had a gear box the prop was connected to snapped. Look when he lands, you can't see the front part of the crank.
He did a absolutely beautiful landing. So glad this pilot kept his witts about him and flew his plane as taught.
Definitely better than a certain TH-camr that decided to ditch a 1940 Taylorcraft out over the mountains in Cali from around 10k'. -_-;
@@athelwulfgalland absolutely .
My FI used to say - Propeller keeps the pilot cool. If it stops (or flies away) then pilot gets all sweaty.
Lol
🤔🤣
😀 A good old GA classic 👍
Underrated comment
That's why they put the propeller at the front of the airplane
6:16 When I was a kid in Australia, we called those things "windmill pumps." There's a geared shaft running down the centre from the fan hub, and they were usually used for either crop irrigation or pumping water for cattle.
we have those in the US, but the one in the clip was just a decorative version.
Yes I've seen them at older or historic homesteads and farms in the US. It's a neat technology running on renewable energy!
a lot of ranches still us windmill pumps in the US to keep water troughs full way out on the ranges (no need for electrical pumps since electricity may not be available)
I drove an Amish family home once, and they had one of those that was still working to pump water. A lot of farms would have had them 100 years ago, but now they would probably use just electric pumps
Yeah, they're called the same thing in the U.S. There is technically a wind vane on the back (in order to keep the windmill facing into the wind, same as a v-stab on a plane,) but it's not really a "weather vane," per se. Its purpose is just to keep the windmill spinning, not to provide a wind direction measurement.
Kelsey, after being hooked onto 74 gear and other aviation TH-cam channels , over the course of this pandemic, when I saw the second plane featured, my initial reaction was, "" Yawn! Another crab landing! What's new? " Then, when you provided the additional tidbits about how you approach landing in a crosswind, to avoid nasty surprises to passengers at the back of the aircraft, I learned something new. Thanks. Plus you added the disclaimer about following procedure so that some newbie pilot doesn't mess up and blame you. Very smart!😊
First clip: mad flying skills! No bailing out with a chute and fire extinguishers!
The 747 one I remember form the Building & Test Flying the 727 & 747. That long flying piece of metal looks like the aft flap.
lmao I mentioned that in a different post here. I'm surprised that 74Gear hasn't weighed in on it like everyone else?
Damn I felt that burn from down here in Australia 🤣🤣🤣.... I hope they throw whatever books they can at him for that.
Damn good recovery on that first clip though, like given the code brown moment it would of been, there was some skillful thoughts there. First rule of aviation, Aviate, navigate, communicate
Last clip i was waiting for a bird strike or something, wasn't even watching the flaps lol
Hi Kelsey -
In my last couple years flying the Airbus A300, we were doing 0 flap takeoffs. It used more runway but improved second segment climb performance.
Can you elaborate on that? Second segment, I think I heard it mentioned in an aviationvideo before, but I am not sure. From what altitude is that second segment?
Less drag, so higher speed and greater efficiency despite less runway redundancy....
Probably less reckless when it's planned to have no flaps for takeoff. In this case, my non-pilot brain starts wondering what other checklist points they forgot.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg First segment is from 35 feet until gear retraction. Seconds starts from there until usually 400 feet or set by the operator.
It just depends on the airplane. Not all of them are certified for flaps zero takeoff. Aside from burning up extra runway unnecessarily, there are maximum speeds for the landing gear, which you might have to exceed (or at least approach with uncomfortable margin) if you take off with no flaps on a plane that wasn't certified for it. On the other hand, it's perfectly fine if the plane is certified for it and the runway is long enough (and the operator's procedure's allow it.) On a lot of light singles, it's perfectly normal to take off with no flaps.
Just wanted to drop a line saying I enjoy your videos Kelsey. I'm not a pilot or anything but I do work in the manufacturing department for an aviation company that designs and manufacturers all of the lighted panels inside of a cockpit of various aircrafts. I really enjoy everything the aviation industry has to offer.
Before the flaps starting creeping out, I thought OMG, this isn't going to go well... That was way too late for my liking. Great vid as always Kelsey. Thanks 👍🏻🇬🇧
I think the biggest concern for those last pilots would be “well what else did this miss in their checklists?”. I know planes are a lot better about built in config checks, but in ye olden days there were plenty of crashes from missed takeoff checklist items…
Exactly my thought, too.
And mine.
I agree. That one reminded me of the famous accident where the pilots had pulled the fuse for the slats config warning and then inadvertently missed the before takeoff checklist and there were multiple red flags telling them to stop. I forget what airline but it was on an MD-80 I think.
And I think in some aircraft (for example B737) you will only get takeoff config warning horn and light illuminated without exact item misconfigured, so you could miss flaps, extend them and still have config warning with, for example, spoilers extended, wrong trim setting and end up high speed rejection or even going airborne with wrong configuration guessing where it will lead you. Takeoff config warning is there for a reason, so you can stop and check at the very beginning of take off roll.
Yeah, that's what I thought. If they forgot something as critical as flaps, what else did they forget?!?!
With that last one, the main risk I'd see is that it makes your workload higher if you're having to do any takeoff configuration late, while you're starting your take off roll, and now under a severe time crunch. If anything else goes wrong, the fact you're having to fiddle around with your flaps and interrupt the normal checklists to do that, means you may not notice that other problem developing until it's too late, or you may be more likely to mishandle that next thing you need to take care of. I've seen the stories of minor things like this being the first link in a chain that leads to a deadly crash.
"fiddle around with your flaps" - fnarr fnarr
Yeah. My first thought was "what else did they skip in the before takeoff checklists?" You're also going to be taking more runway to take off (my second thought was "are going to drive there?"), but that looked to be small enough plane that it's almost certainly not going to cut into the margins (even if you don't actually know what your margins are, since you're now taking off in an unknown configuration).
@@tylisirn Yeah, that was what immediately worried me too. There are a lot of other "We need that to live" settings on those checklists.
first new 74 gear video since I have became a new fan
I really like your analogies about how the mechanics and physics function, Kelsey. Thanks for making things easy to visualize.
I was on a plane here in Kyrgyzstan and they were lined up and waiting with the flaps not extended. I was screaming at the flight attendant to tell the pilots. I didn't want to die! The attendant ran up front and a few seconds later the flaps were deploying. Sometimes being a pilot on a plane is scary!
The only problem would have been the aircraft would have needed a lot more speed to takeoff. In case of an aborted takeoff that would have been a big problem, agreed.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg taking off without flaps is really difficult and from a safety standpoint completely unacceptable for most aircraft. There have been deadly accidents caused by incorrect takeoff configurations
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg What makes you so sure? We don't know how much weight the plane is carrying or how long the runway is.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg Please correct me if I'm wrong:
- Longer to accelerate means:
- - more runway needed (that may not be there)
- - longer to gain altitude to clear any obstructions at the end of the runway (it's happened before)
- - less time for pilots to recognize the need for an abort (if it's a common mistake for them, then the general level of pilot skill is low. Will they recognize the need for an abort before they run out of runway?)
In most airlines, I suspect that the stewards would not run to the crew cabin on the say-so of a passenger-especially not one who is screaming. (NOTE: I have only flown on US piloted planes. Your experience may differ.)
Yet *this* steward *did* run to the pilots. To me, that says it was a common error with these pilots, which makes me wonder about their skill/training. Would they even recognize a need for an abort, or would they try to push the takeoff through?
@@Timothy003L It would have been death for us on a fully loaded 737-300 on a short old Soviet runway.
So glad I found your channel. Fly quite a lot living overseas and having to return to the US for different things. Demystifying flying for the masses is only a good thing!
Me too, Suzanne. I lived in Norway for years, flew in Europe, across the Atlantic, and in the U.S. constantly. I experienced my share of scary events, so I appreciate his calming information, and expertise.
I'm not an aviator , but I've been obsessed with flying since my Grandfather flew me from place to place in his beechcraft . I love your channel and the professionalism that is involved. 👍
As a 50yo sight-impaired artist who is scared of heights perhaps I have shot my bolt with regards to becoming a 747 pilot :D But my goodness I do love this channel regardless
...old ATC man here USAF...still love to monitor tower ... it get's in your blood ...
@@willgaukler8979 it's very exciting, somehow
I know this is going to sound crazy to you, but believe it or not, there are pilots who actually are scared of heights! There is a world of differece between say climbing a steep tower staircase then when you get to the top looking out with just a rail between you and a sheer drop, then being in an enclosed space such as an aircraft
@@WayneM1961 I was really surprised that Stella is afraid of heights as a flight attendant as well, its amazing what people can achieve!
@@WayneM1961 or those window floors. Aaargh!
Found this channel last week and been binging it since. Very informative and entertaining content, even for someone like me, who's only ever been a passenger. Glad Kelsey explained about "landing on the numbers" because "why are they giving up a thousand feet of perfectly good runway" was a question I had during a few of these.
The threshold is also an obstacle height issue. The 3 degree glide-slope is designed to clear 50ft at the runway threshold. If there were (hypothetically) 50ft high trees on the perimeter, you would plow into them trying to reach the numbers.
I used to wonder why they build a lot of runway that is in effect never gonna be used. I live close to Schiphol Airport, and sometimes I rode my bike over there.
As it turns out, long runways are all about safety, as is the entire industry. Runways have to be so long so planes that have to abort takeoff have enough kilometers/miles to run out their speed.
Yes. Everyone is impressed by Mr. 747 Extraordinaire Kelsey. It a turn on that his knowledge of his craft with that handsome side grin, keeps me watching and learning. Thanks K-MAN. 747
I'm not a pilot but I enjoy all Kelsey's videos, if I ever become a pilot I would love to work with him. Keep the videos coming buddy and have a safe flight. 😎
Same, I'm just an aviation buff myself, not a pilot. I love his videos!
As a 28 year airline pilot, I have to say that lowering the flaps during the takeoff roll is HUGELY unsafe. While some airliners can takeoff with no flaps, it needs to be planned ahead of time. If you are planning to use flaps for takeoff, once you start the takeoff roll without them, all your takeoff calculations are now invalid. You have no idea how long your takeoff roll will be. You have no idea if you will be able to stay on the runway if you abort just prior to V1. If you get airborne, you have no idea if you will meet the required climb gradients. Once the CONFIG warning went off, those pilots should have aborted the takeoff, exited the runway, re-accomplished the Before Takeoff Checklist, then thought about trying another takeoff. If the FAA had caught this crew doing this, they would have had much to say to them.
Not to mention you don't know if the flaps will even be able to fully extend into that position or if they somehow get jammed somewhere in between.
I’m sure you remember the PSA flight that tried that and went off the end of the runway a few years back.
@@alexmelia8873 Which flight was that.
While I don't disagree with your conclusion of it being better to abort and go back through the checklists, wouldn't your takeoff roll be shorter if you start with no flaps and then extend them during the roll? There's less drag without the flaps, so you should accelerate faster than planned prior to extending them. Though, at those airspeeds, the difference would probably be relatively small, but still it shouldn't require any more runway than if you have the flaps extended the whole time. Indeed, this can actually be done intentionally in some light aircraft to reduce short-field takeoff roll (especially the ones where the flaps are extended manually via mechanical linkage rather than via electric/hydraulic/pneumatic actuators.)
As far as the V1 abort, I'm not following. Are you talking about an overrun or excursion off the side? Or becoming airborne? I don't see why any of those things would be more likely to happen with flap extension during the takeoff run vs. before it. As long as the flaps are fully extended for at least a second or two before rotating (which you presumably won't be doing anyway in a V1 cut,) I don't see how this would make any of those things more likely to happen.
Like I said at the beginning, though, I still fully agree with your assessment that aborting and running back through the before takeoff checklist would have been the right course of action. If for not other reason, if you missed setting the flaps, you may have missed another step, too. Better to stop and make sure everything is correct at 0-5 knots on a taxiway rather than be trying to fix it at 100-150 knots on a runway.
@@CaptainKevin US Airways Express Flight 2495
The 747 that hit an embankment was a flight test aircraft landing at Renton approaching over lake Washington. My former boss was a crew member. The single runway at Renton is very short and the crew were trying to give themselves as much stopping distance as possible by landing as close to the pier as possible.
A pilot humble enough to say he ain't that smart, but does everything you'd want a smart guy to do. I'd take you as my pilot anytime!
I'd have to disagree with your definition of the propeller, it's actually a fan. The way you can tell is because if it stops spinning, you can visibly see the pilot start to sweat.
Under appreciated comment. I roared.
What propeller? Lol...
@@morgandude2002 I think he is talking about the fan.
@@mattstorm360 Lol...
That is...so....Unfunny....
I just want to let you know how much I enjoy this channel. Came to it by accident. I'm a diplomat far from home and get a lot of pleasure from learning about something not in my daily agenda. And I fly...a lot! Also love the generic hotel room backgrounds...hilarious
Landend A380 once in a crab, as passenger sitting in the far back on the upper deck and it was OWESOME! It was cool to see the runway from the window :) And the strengthening after tochdown was cooler than rollercoster ride.
'Watching a prop flying away, that's never a good sign' - that's an understatement :D Good vid as usual
Kelsey. I enjoy every video you make. I pretty much learn something from them. The biggest lesson I have learned, however, was that despite my life long aviation passion, when I had the chance to start a career, I seemed to forget commercial aviation as a path to a dream. Thank you Kelsey for your channel.
9:32 Kelsey's face just DROPPING after "the captain's pride" made me laugh!
I'm so glad that you explained what the first plane in this video did. I was fearing that he was going to crash nose down into the ground. Then I thought he was doing show off stunts until you explained what's really going on. We passenger's really have no idea about aviation until we watch videos and read about it and you are a great teacher. 👍🏽
As a sim engineer your videos always amazes me, they are super cool and full with infos, making me consider to become a pilot
"My landing would not have nearly looked as good, Hes obviously a professional pilot"....Kelsey give yourself some credit. YOUR a professional pitot too!!
but Kelsey's not an aerobatic pilot, so his skillset is different. the pilot in the clip probably couldn't grease in a 747, either.
Surely he meant to use or include the word acrobatic.
You’re
@@MisterHenk123 you beat me to it. xP
I've never seen a professional pitot before.
Kelsey: keep in mind that back when the 747 was new, a lot of runways were shorter, and if you had to divert there was less of a chance that the airport had ever seen a plane that large land there. Since this was a test pilot, I'm assuming he was working on emergency procedures for landing on otherwise "too-short" runways (at least those which had just barely enough length).
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
Joe Sutter was actually onboard this particular aircraft when this happened. He details the incident in his book (which I highly recommend) and as the previous poster pointed out the accident happened because the test pilot panicked and tried to jam it on the very beginning of the runway. Renton's runway at the time was fairly short but this 747 was nowhere near fully loaded, it was just the 3 of them and the fuel needed for a 20nm flight. They managed to get other 747s in without incident after this flight.
@@justadudeffs His book is, in fact, where I got all my information from about this incident. Just a slight correction, it would be four people on board, as the 747s of those times had three flight crew members, and of course, Joe Sutter himself. The pilot ultimately jumped ship and went on to complete the flight test certification of the Lockheed L-1011.
@@justadudeffs Is this the title?
747: Creating the World's First Jumbo Jet and Other Adventures from a Life in Aviation
Looks out of print. No kindle edition but free audiobook from Audible, at least.
@@omally that's the one 👍
When the 747 was in testing, one of the big issues facing pilots was not being able to visually gauge touchdown on the runway due to the large size of the aircraft and the high seating position of the pilot. That is likely why this early test pilot came down to early. As far as how well the 747 was built, just remember back then no one believed something that large and complex could even fly. It was built to extraordinary specifications. It is not only the most beautiful machine ever created by man, it is also an engineering marvel. There is a reason it is known as the Queen of the Skies.
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
"just remember back then no one believed something that large and complex could even fly." Ummm, what?
Well, 747 was just 'big', and big is not beautiful. In my opinion, Concorde was the most beautiful machine ever created by man.
Love this channel. Brilliant insight as ever! Keep up the good work Kelsey 👍
Love your content. Makes my day love 74gear! Keep it going
1:45 "You see, this is the prop. When it flies away, it's never a good sign."
Understatement of the year right there.
6:20 In my area of southern Ontario, Canada, that device is called a windmill, often used on a farm to pump water from a well without needing to use electricity. The wind vane in the back is there to point the blades in front into the wind.
0:50 i love your expressions its like you got the controls in your hands everytime
Hello Kelsey. Love your channel. I'm pretty sure that 747 clip was at Renton Field just outside of Seattle Washington. That field is one of many used by Boeing. I see a reference to that happening in 1969 which sounds about right. That field is incredibly short for a 747, so if you were planning to land one there you would have to hit the numbers or else. KRNT is showing today as being 5320 feet long. Not sure of it's length in 69. I grew up in that area. This story was kept under wraps for decades..
Let me add a little detail to this. The landing was at KRNT and was one of the first five 747s and was part of the flight test program. This airplane was going into KRNT for refurbishing after the flight test program before delivery to the airline. I was at the airport when this happened. The landing was on runway 16 (at the time it was 15) coming in over Lake Washington. The wall the landing gear hit was at the end of the runway and marked the end of the ground and held back the lake water. It does not extend above ground level. The piece of the plane that flew off, we thought was some wind surface, perhaps a part of the flaps. I think it was too big to be a landing gear door, but that is possible. I believe the runway length has not changed since then.
I’ll have to ask my flight instructor about this - my flight school is located at KRNT!
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done.
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done.
The face Kelsey makes at 9:36 is the best !!! love you man !
Hey man, just wanted to say that thanks to you I feel much less anxiety when flying. Thank you so much and much love from Amstedam! Wave to me when fly ing to Schiphol ;-)
Heb je wel eens naar de video's van MentourPilot en CaptainJoe gekeken? Ik heb mijn kennis van het vliegen met deze drie kanalen opgebouwd.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg My 3 favorite as well!
Stop putting your intelligence down, Kelsey. You're very intelligent and it shows through what you are doing with videos and explanations. It takes not only intelligence but a caring heart/personality.
I've watched a lot of crazy crosswind landing videos on TH-cam and always wondered why airliners land in a crab. Thanks for the explanation. The largest aircraft I've ever flown is an ATR72 and I always used the same technique as you - maintain a crab until about 10ft above the runway and gradually input rudder to align with the runway as much as possible just prior to touchdown. It avoids the aircraft swinging around so much after touchdown. I also lower a wing a little into the wind, but the ATR72 is a high wing aircraft. Probably not something you'd want to do on many airliners.
I’m always learning new tidbits from these videos! Thanks Kelsey!
Love your videos so much! They’ve helped me get over my fear of flying💓
There are a number of people who mention the same thing here. Not me, but a pilot who explains what actually happened is very reassuring.
Kelsey your presentation skills and confidence are improving so much!!!
Petter might want to keep an eye open - I know you like flying the 7-4 Queen more than training - but these episodes are great! Props to you Man!
Let's go 74 Gear!! You're almost to 1 million subscribers!
That first pilot was spectacular! Instant rudder before i could even comprehend the situation, and instant increase in air speed by pushing it down. Amazing!
As for pilots not doing stupid things, well you'd hope. I'm not a frequent flyer but I still have a story for that too. We flew into frankfurt I think when the pilots decided after landing that they'd save some time by taking the first taxiway off the runway, which was closer to their assigned parking position. So after touchdown they applied full brakes. Even 15 minutes later when we were leaving the plane there was thick smoke hanging over the runway, and the smell of burning tyres and brakes. I think that qualifies as a pretty stupid decision to save a few minutes.
I highly doubt that, even the smoke cloud from a long burnout doesnt stays that long, also airliner have anti skid and produce far far less smoke than a burnout, also also on a airport like Frankfurt there would have landed at least 3 more planes in that 15 minutes.
You've never heard of a short-field landing before have you. Your pilots could've easily have just been requested by Tower to make a shorter landing due timing constraints with other inbound/outbound aircraft, especially at an airport as busy as Frankfurt
Sounds like we can't know the circumstances the pilots did that under, so it's a bit of a rush to judgement to call it a stupid decision.
@@lucasbrien5008 Night landing, not much traffic at the time, late summer without a breeze, so the smoke hung over the tarmac and was clearly visible in the lights when we were boarding the bus to take the passengers to the actual terminal. Even if the tower requested an early exit the pilots should've rejected it. Can you give any reasonable scenario outside of an actual emergency to do that?
The only detail I'm not sure about is the airport, it might have happened elsewhere.
@@mummifiedgamer What I can say is that you weren't in the cockpit. Nobody likes an armchair pilot. If there was smoke, it wouldn't be from the tires. I have never heard of wheels locking up on an airliner, but I have heard of brake fires. If it was a brake fire they would have rolled the trucks. But again, you're assuming what went on in the pilots' heads while also assuming conditions were completely normal, both of which you have no way of knowing.
My aunt used to be a flight attendant. She told me that she was working for US Airways in the 80's and am engine fell off the plane as it was over an ocean. They landed safely and were able to fly with the remaining 3 engines. I was just a little child then so I remember the amazing story she told me because it's fascinating to me.
Oof the story with the flaps! I get that it's safe to put them out at the last second, but it makes me think... If they forgot the flaps, what else did they forget??
Exactly what I was thinking.
Putting them out “at the last second” could make the plane “balloon” up - increasing the landing distance or make for a hard landing if the plane stalled too high - definitely true in a light GA aircraft.
@@marlinweekley51 sure, but I was talking more so about takeoff, not landing. Appreciate your expertise though :)
Always love Kelsey's enthusiasm in his videos. Keep it up bro!
The thing at the farm with the fan is a windmill. The thing on the roof of the barn with a 🐓 and an arrow and the N, S, E & W is a weather vane.
Kelsey, good video...! 747 Touchdown on barrier was PanAm #3, after test program and Paris Airshow. Boeing decided to re-furb at Renton Plant, with a minimal runway in 1969 -- you showed result. The right wing gear rotated around the main spar, (not damaging the spar connections) -- enabling the repair and rebuild of the attachments. The insurance provided Boeing the means to "buy-back" the aircraft from PanAm and keep it as a demonstrator, (previously the company leased them from customers for testing).
That was the last "74" flight into Renton Airfield...!
Remember kids! Prepositions are important. Landing by the numbers is very different from landing on the numbers.
Let's eat Grandpa!
@@Cautionary_Tale_Harris Grandma maybe?
Kelsey, I'm surprised you didn't point out the amazing calm that pilot had. He didn't just lose his propeller but he lost it in the middle of performing an AERObatics maneuver/spin and as a pilot who still loves to take a 172 to the practice area and do spins for fun and to stay current with my stall and spin recovery technique. He was also lucky as he was performing at an air show so was immediately over the airport. If this were to happen to me when practicing, I would be too far from the field to make a runway and I would be in a field.
Back in 1995, the same thing happened to my flight. Flaps extended late during take off. I was actually on the back of the plane, watching and wondering, was it a new procedure or what was I missing? We've made it. Fly safe!
Have you noticed the windsock showing quite some wind blowing pretty much down the runway axis? What means a 90° cross-wind at holding position. Maybe it was a perfectly planed procedure to line up, then extend flaps during take-off roll. Without the context of operation handbook for that aircraft, company procedures, and pilot decisions, nobody can tell.
Great vids Kelsey. I'm no pilot but been airside most working life. Your vids are instructive with experience and easy for us non aircrew to understand. Thanks for your work.
That 747 test flight was landing at Renton Field, pretty sure that’s the last time they ever tried to land a 747 there. Not sure if the runway length has changed but current field length is only 5382’.
I remembered that 747 clip is flown by Boeing test pilot. They were flying it to Boeing’s previous plant ( not Everest) to get a new paint job or something (before giving back to the launch airline), the runway is quite short so the pilots were trying to lane on the numbers to ensure they can stop. That plane was put in service and continue flies for quite several years.
Good thing he had enough energy to turn that bird on its wing. Good pilot.
Thanks for the hand out the window analogy, Kelsey - that makes it so simple to understand.
The first clip had my heart skip a beat but the pilot handled the issue like a champ. The one with the wall reminds me of that Air India Express 737 which struck a wall and a localizer antenna when taking off, yet the crew continued the departure and only turned back because they were told to. A question regarding the last clip - aren't flaps on SEVERAL checklists you do before taking off?
Well thays the speciality of Indian pilots they don't give a shot until the plane is going down or about to crash
Just the opposite with me. Expected the plane to go down when I saw the stall, then my heart made a small jump when the pilot managed to land.
OMG This Lift Example Finally Makes Sense! Thanks Kelsey
Hey Kelsey! As a student pilot, I am always looking for ways to expand my knowledge. I have seen many other content creators on aviation including Captain Joe and Mentour Pilot, but nobody was as intriguing as you. So I would just like to say thank you for creating these entertaining and educational videos!
Kelsey - Those are called "Wind Mills" and the vane at the back in relation to the "wheel" points the opposite direction the wind is coming from to keep the wheel facing into the wind.
The wind vain which are usually found on farms and homesteads I know them as windmills, as they are mainly used to pump up 3water from a borehole mechanically.
Yep. Weather vane indicates wind direction. Windmill converts wind energy into useful work.
Hahaha, I saw you grin when you saw the flaps being extended. I did notice right away but your reaction was cool. The 747 incident looks old & narration references the test flight program. Good video. Thanks for sharing it.
Damn Kelsey, your channel is really blowing up. I think you had something like 200K subs when I subbed and now well over 800K. Congrats brother.
1:50 "that's never a good sign". Understatement of the CENTURY right there, sir!
The risk they took on that last video was that in the event that, for whatever reason, the flaps didn't deploy, or didn't deploy fully, they wouldn't have the runway to abort. In which case, it could've gone very wrong.
I'm so happy to have recognized the lack of flaps on that last video, I'm thinking while watching that there is no way a large aircraft like that would normally take off with no flaps, i know small aircraft will do it sometimes when there is more then enough runway and all but from my understanding the bigger aircraft normally use flaps on takeoff.
Another example for the truth in the saying "They don't build 'em like that anymore" It never ceases to amaze me how engineers from not so long ago engineered really longlife and sturdy things just from the feeling in their guts, knowledge, experience and a slide rule.. no structural simulations, no computer stress analysis.. I wonder at which point in time we lost all that.
Don't kid yourself there was plenty of trash made back then too. We just only see the good stuff now because only the good stuff survived this long. People will be saying the same thing about stuff made now in 50 years in 2070. Only the good stuff will have lasted that long, so it will look like everything was better than it was.
@@Lessinath you're right I guess, people in the future will say the same about stuff from today that happens to survive for 50+ years. Just I am not sure if that will be an awfull lot, especially consumer grade products.
@@Lessinath Also true about music. You go back far enough and it seems like every song was a hit, but the truth is that all the non-hits have been culled by time for the most part.
You could also argue that it was over engineered back then. Planned obsolescence isn’t always a terrible idea. There’s a bridge in my hometown that survived a flood that took out almost every other bridge in its path. It is too short and too narrow for modern traffic so is obsolete anyway. The expense that went into overbuilding that bridge is wasted because it needs torn down anyway.
They did have a bunch of duds as well. But I think your point is everything is about money now. Companies can't make money if they make products last forever. Case and point would be the auto industry.
Hi kelsey. I'm a private pilot and I've been watching your videos for quite a while. I particularly like the ones on a t c communication. But they are all good. Thank you.
I love to sit near the wings and watch the flight control surfaces. I always watch to make sure the flaps are set for take off. I'm not sure what I'd do if they weren't! What WOULD a passenger do in that situation?
In another comment, Kim Chi says "I was on a plane here in Kyrgyzstan and they were lined up and waiting with the flaps not extended. I was screaming at the flight attendant to tell the pilots. I didn't want to die! The attendant ran up front and a few seconds later the flaps were deploying. Sometimes being a pilot on a plane is scary!"
This is what I like so much about this channel, you always learn something new
Better write this one down "Prop flying off the plane = not a good sign"
😁
Week 2 of telling Kelsey I am loving his content!
Edit: I was actually thinking while watching the videos, does Crabbing into the wind heighten the risk of landing gear failure? Does that 45-degree force cause any more wear or strain on the tires or struts than landing with tires parallel to the runway?
Sundays are Kelsey days!
Edit: His expression at 9:37 kills me 🤣
@@rachellofthouse549 indeed they are! I started flight training in January after years of setbacks, and I finally found a flight school-home life-work balance. Kelsey’s uploads have actually become a mental transition in my weekly schedule that pivots me from work on the weekends to a flight mindset for my 0630 flight slot on Mondays!
The wheels (landing gear) are “casting sort of like a shopping cart. They are designed to swivel. Do the tires wear more? That would be a very technical answer I would think as a number of things are at play. Perhaps someone else (AI ) has experience with tire wear will comment, but I wouldn’t think it would make a huge difference on tire life - just a guess.
@@marlinweekley51 my logic says it causes more wear sort of like going around corners causes more wear on car suspension components and tires. - it does, but it's within design specifications.
@@kenbrown2808 agree, and for the number of times a particular set of tires experience a crabbed landing i am curious whether it significantly reduces their useful life. Do airlines change out tires after a certain number of hours and are those hours low enough so that the potential additional wear does not affect useful life of the tires?
Oh, my!!! That pilot in the first clip has got balls of titanium. Amazing work man -- never give up!
I don't really know the first thing about flying, but I don't think you need to be a professional to appreciate both the gravity of the situation and the amazing feat of aviation.
By the way, compare that clip to Trevor Jacob's "I Crashed my Airplane", and try to tell me that TrJ isn't a total scam...
What would be going through my mind is that if I forgot the flaps, there could be something else on the checklist I forgot. If I were to continue, I'd be distracted and worried trying to think of anything critical that could be missing. I'd want to taxi back and re-do the checklist, but then I don't have an airline to answer to.
Hot roll and no flaps. Top notch.
I am surprised that you haven't reacted to the Trevor Jacob video
Bernoulli's principal.... The air doesn't push the wing up, the negative pressure pulls the wing up. But you already know this.......Right??? 🙂 Keep up the great work Kelsey, always watching you!
Bernoulli's principle is one of the reasons, but with an angle of attack you also get air pushing the bottom of the wing. That's how acrobatic planes can fly upside down even though in that configuration the shape is wrong for the Bernoulli effect.
So cool to see the 747 test footage with the landing gear crash. I assume the test pilot was like “yeah we were DEFINITELY testing a simulated short landing effect on the landing gear for… uh… definitely official test purposes… and no other reason whatsoever. Hey anyone know where the bathroom is?”
Looks to fo... hey bud you got a pair of undies I can... well.. have?
The pilot was determined to use the entire length of the runway because Renton's runway is a little over 5,000 feet long, and he wasn't convinced that it was possible for a 747 to land on a runway that short, even though Joe Sutter got an engineer to show him the performance charts to prove it could be done. The 747 was being flown there to have the test equipment removed and airline interiors installed prior to delivery to Pan Am since the Everett plant was too busy to do it at that time.
@@CaptainKevin I imagine neither Sutter nor Tripp was very happy about that result.
@@vbscript2 Sutter was actually on board the plane when it happened. He realized shortly before the crash that they were coming in too low. I don't have his book in front of me anymore since I'm not home, but from what I vaguely remember, they were quite impressed that there was minimal damage to the plane. The landing gear sheared off as it was designed to do.
I get a lot out of your videos, this one especially interesting "don't try to land on the numbers" was a gem.
As I remember with the prototype 747 landing incident, the runway was incredibly short so the test pilots decided to land close to the numbers but were caught out by wind shear.
I was just about to say that. I think they were worried about getting it back to Boeing field. Take off was not an issue.
That was in Renton and that runway is fairly short. Wikipedia says the current length is 5382 ft.
Read Joe Sutter's book - 747 (great book) that describes this incident in detail. They were taking their brand new 747 progeny to Renton for some minor work (this is the 737 Production plant now and my home airport). With no load the 5000 feet was plenty of room to land but the very new to the 747 (there was only one remember) pilot freaked out. It is a steep decent on final to landing and it had to feel like he was landing on an aircraft carrier in that plane at that runway. The engineering was sound but the site picture was a mess. Anyway, while trying to stick it 5 feet past the wall he put it down a hair early and then this. Sutter was on the airplane that morning and his remark was that the plane came to rest less than half way down the runway - I got the feeling he was not very impressed with the "test" pilot. Met him - cool guy - gone now but what a great story that plane has - now at the Museum of Flight in Seattle.
Reminded me of my first solo. A few days after my 16th birthday I was let go by my instructor in a Beech Musketeer on a showery day in Oceanside CA, after a couple of pattern T&Gs on runway 9. For those of you unfamiliar with So-Cal weather, we don't get much, and a 15 knot wind to us is like a thunderstorm in Texas, so it was a good day for instruction. As I was on climbout, my instructor got on the unicom and told me that the wind had shifted and asked if I was comfortable landing on 27, which I was. The problem was the wind was more out of the south. I wound up crabbing, and floating longer than anticipated. Yes, low wing aircraft tend to float, but it is more pronounced when your 250 pound instructor is not on board. I straightened out too early, touched down on the left side of the center line. Runway was wet, the brakes let go. Fortunately, due to years of motocross, I instinctively knew to get off the brakes and let it roll. The plane was very forgiving and the rudder kept it pointed in the right direction. Instructor gave me a B because while I did the maneuver correctly, I failed to anticipate the change in flight characteristics due to load. Jerk. Might have been a good thing to say when he got out of the plane. Over time I've learned that the main gear can handle a crab a lot easier than it can handle the mud next to the runway, so when in doubt, just fly the crab into the ground.
It’s so interesting what you do with your pilots skills keep up the good work 😀
50 years ago I was maintenance for the A-6 simulator. From what I recall of the contents of the NATOPS manual this particular Grumman aircraft had what is known as "a glide angle like a rock." Such a different story with the light, single-engine, mono plane that the pilot was able to land without a propeller.
when a 747 tries to land anywhere, you know trevor jacob wasn't the pilot.
Wo wo wo! To be fair! If it lands itself in the mountains, after your pilot abandons you without even troubleshooting...where there were plenty of places he could've put her down...THAT could be a T Jacob landing.
It could, bro.
🤣
you can excange 747 with plane
Saves time on all that passport nonsense if we just travel in disposable planes and bail out with 12 lucky go pros for company.
Kelsey, what you showed was not a weather vane, those are attached to the tops of roofs and do give the direction of the wind.
What you showed there was a wind pump. See the thing the spinning part is attached to? There is a gearing system attached to it that operates a water pump. Important on a cattle farm to have an absolutely secure system to keep the water troth filled.
What is your take on the Trevor Jacob jump/crash?
Kelsey, you would be So Good teaching Jr high school students, 8th graders or 9th graders simple instructions for flying planes, just to get their interests going. School districts are really missing out on the opportunity to give All students a look at becoming a pilot on any level.
Stay safe, keep the blue skies up 🛩️✈️🤗🦊
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing... not so sure the flight mechanics will agree with that 😂
A great landing is one where you can re-use the plane!
i say a good landing is any landing you can walk away from AND the plane is still usable , is a good landing
You can walk away from a triple pod strike. And the mechanics probably enjoy replacing engines, engine inlet cowls, fan cowls, oil train mats, and t/r cowls. All in a day's work.
Learn something new every time, I had no clue you need the prop, I thought it was to cool the pilot 🙂
I think loosing things like a prop or wheels is a sign of bad maintenance and/or check before flight.
Losing the prop is not a sign of bad maintenance per se. The plane had stalled, came into freefall and the Gforces on the plane get so high the prop is torn off. It is the most vulnerable part of the plane, so to say.
I am glad I was not on that flight, otherwise I would probably have undesireably decorated some zebra stripes in my boxers.
Well done young bald ranga. Just came across your youtube vids and I am super impressed. I'm an old bald ranga that always wanted to be a pilot, but just couldn't afford the payments at the time, so went off and did business degrees, regret now it after 30 years. Thanks for you're vid's, you making an old man happy that others have taken the better exciting path.