Those of us who remember the "Pig" from our military service days, will also remember it as the "Converter" because its engines only converted fuel to noise and we surmised that it only managed to get airborne due to the curvature of the Earth.
Thanks for the kind words! Yes it's an intriguing design. But for the life of me I can't find a lick of info on it in recent times, not even word that they ran out of business.
G'day, I've seen a couple of those big ol Piaggio 166 Twin Cargo/Commuter Liners. They were both on the VH Registers, as painted (Australia), and parked outside Illawarra Aviation at Bankstown Airport, Sydney...; in 1979-'80, tied down, derelict, reputed to be both needing major overhauls - but in 6 months at the adjoining Hangar I never saw anybody go near them. Apparently someone had gone broke trying to operate them in the Papua New Guinea Highlands we were always told it looked as it did due to having begun as a Flying Boat. Apparently they required Gentle handling of their Engines, And though they were OK at Sea Level, up in the Owen Stanley Ranges it was Necessary to bend the Throttle Stalks, Thus blowing up a lot of Motors. Enough that the whole Enterprise went broke. Overweight, Fat, Underpowered, Draggy... Not worth owning. Hence the condition of the two Derelict Pigs. Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@aircraftadventures-vids The core teaching we get from Al Mooney… Speed and efficiency are both important. For both the plane, and the factory building the plane… From the airfoils selected, to the cross sectional area of the cabin used…. Wind resistance slows things down. So, Al was a big proponent of minimizing these losses… while still maintaining key comfort dimensions. Wooden composites (cellulose and lignin) were an awesome material to sculpt into aerodynamic shapes…. Aluminum is a more robust material for a machine that lives in the real world… but aluminum is much more challenging to form into nice rounded shapes… The canard layout is a set up for increased aerodynamic efficiency… where both wings are providing lift… Achieving the full advantage of this configuration takes additional effort… The forward wing will destroy the airflow/lift of the trailing wing unless they get proper vertical separation… Al Mooney brought a few things to the Avtek project… nice curvy shapes, and enough vertical separation between the forward and trailing wings…. The eyebrow wings… look a little funny. But, they serve a great purpose. Early on… Al Mooney numbered his design projects in numerical order… no matter what company he lead the engineering for… Then each design got version identifiers added with each significant design change. The plane we are most familiar with… the M20, was quickly modified to a most standard state… and became the M20A The M20B was the all metal version of the M20A The M20C included many evolutionary changes to the M20B The M20D was an entry model M20 that could be stepwise upgraded to the M20C (constant speed prop, retract gear) M20E added more power via fuel injection M20F got the mid body fuselage with the E’s engine G is the mid body with C’s lovable carbureted O360 H&I were projects that didn’t get commercialized J is where composites returned to improve the aerodynamics of the F… The chain continued and currently sits at M20V a high powered, twin turbo normalized, intercooled, impressive speedster… known as the Acclaim! Al left the company early on…. The company followed his teachings with every new version… 😃
This is wonderful. I think I can promote your channel if you assign me the task of dubbing your videos into Arabic, as Arab youth love to understand this wonderful engineering.
Shoot an email to richard@e-sense.tv, I can email you the script and you can send it back translated. I think that's the best way to do it, using the captions. Much appreciated!
I always enjoy the Aircraft Adventures videos… Where else can we find great presentations of all the various airplanes out there… Note: If the videos were error free…. Who would be writing in the comment section? 😃
Don't forget the Angel Aircraft Model 44. It's been certificated and got the production certificate. It was made with remote bush operations in mind, i think there is one out there flying last I heard.
Good one particularly like twin.. Pushers and the Skycar is very cool but theres others like a float plane flyingboat and a Russian amphibian flyingboat. 👍🏼🧙♂️🇬🇧
For sure there's more! Which is great, I can work on more vids, lol. Please do go ahead and list out anything you'd like me to cover so I can drop it into the idea box
@@aircraftadventures-vids Not a pusher but incredible twin Wilson global Explorer only two built a flying go anywhere expedition craft th-cam.com/video/RLKNPOSpMpY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=nCQTzSEEcj3czj-8 Even carried a hanglider and had an internal divers hatch.
@@aircraftadventures-vids The Russian adventure pusher twin... Ak62 th-cam.com/video/cPnjM1Zat-U/w-d-xo.htmlsi=cqqQGc8eUpPbJOA9 Check out the Seabear for a tractor twin Pushers keep the props away from the Passengers and cabin on the ground and in the air. Also worth a look is the Beriev 103 tractor twin that sits wing on the water .. .. There are others out in Siberian bush territory . Then theres the French Akoya hydro amphibian . Very streamlined very advanced.. single
The AvTek (Mooney) 400 would have been directly competing with the Beech Starship. That aircraft suffered painful delays because the fear-of-failure FAA made them go wildly above "normal" plane construction safety margins. If the Beech was reintroduced with modern design standards it would be way popular. But it won't because it would cannibalize King Air sales.
The Starship was an engineering failure. The contemporary Piaggio Avanti ridiculed it in every metric. Piaggio had less R&D money, less powerful engines and somehow managed to create a small plane with a huge and quiet cabin. The Avanti's performance and range put the final nails in the Starship's coffin... Most amazingly, the Piaggio's beautiful lines are made of metal, and even now look futuristic.
6:56 WOW ''up to 9 hours of endurance'' !!!! I SURE HOPE IT HAS A NICE POTTIEE!!!! :) hehehehe (head...bathroom...toilette?? yea pottie) and a couple of COTTS for the ''BRAVO TEAM'' to catch a nap on their OFF TIME :) hahahaha
The Skycar's lifting body design seems like a great idea, look at all the room you get. I would think there would be a market for such an innovative design but maybe the $$$million price was a bit much??
The king of experimental airplanes… The Wright Flyer… Was a twin prop, pusher configuration, where the pilot was in the prone position… Technicality: twin prop driven by bicycle chains from the single engine… Like Al Mooney’s A400 design… the Wright flyer was also a canard…. Those guys were all about aero efficiency…. 😃
Noted, you're right. Ugh, that would indeed a bit uncomfy flying like that. That being said, the english did develop some small twin in WWII to test prone piloting positions.
Prone worked for those bicycle guys from Dayton, OH…. 😃 Aka Wilbur and Orville…. The plane had limited horse power and no cockpit, so the prone position was a bit more aerodynamic too… 😃
They’re not mentioning the fact that pusher props are quieter than normal propellors. The difference is less noise in the passenger compartment, as measured in decibels.
@@aircraftadventures-vids You’re wrong. Pusher props throw sound into the airstream behind the plane. The reason that commercial planes don’t use pusher props is that they get much better fuel economy than those horrible GE jet engines. But look: Neither of us has the data we need to prove our point. I don’t have the decibel ratings for various aircraft engines, so I can’t prove that I’m right. The real issue is fuel economy. Modern commercial planes like the 737 get the same terrible fuel economy as old planes like the 727. 90 miles per seat per gallon. It should be 300 miles per seat per gallon. Our entire transportation system is crippled by machines that waste fuel on purpose. The cars, the planes, the trains, the boats; everything. We’re being held hostage by the coal and oil Mafia.
@@ronliebermann pusher-propellers are inherently louder due to the propeller blades rotating at high velocity thru the wing and fuselage wakes. This same phenomenon reduces pusher propeller efficiency by greater than 1%. The fact its behind the aircraft is irrelevant, because sound travels at you know, the speed of sound. Putting the engines behind a large bulkhead does reduce cabin noise somewhat for some aircraft. But not for the Cessna 337! Or the Defiant. Re: 300 passenger air miles per gallon... The highest theoretical air mileage is in the range of 150-160. That is a specific point designed, lower speed, unswept, high aspect ratio wing with a span greater than any Gate at any airport in existence. Oh, and FULL boundary layer control via powered boundary layer suction. It's not gonna happen. There is NO WAY to get 300 passenger air miles per gallon, at anywhere near the speeds people want to travel at. (Maybe at sailplane speeds). If they make jets half as fast. People will just drive because skipping the drive to airport, parking, walking, bus, subway and gate to gate walking. After the long TSA line, wait lines. Boarding times. Door close times, etc. means saving 2-3 hours of airport terminal time BEFORE layover that can be 2-3 hours or more each. If you take a 4hr flight and make it 8hrs to save gas (unswept mach 0.45-0.5 wing) You can literally just drive half way across America in less time than hopping a couple connecting flights across the midwest.
@@TheJustinJ You’re certainly entitled to your own opinion. But your claims are just your informal point of view. We aren’t debating verifiable facts. I believe that 300 miles per gallon per seat is already attainable.
Gents, Don’t forget what causes most of the engine noise…. Then let’s remember what dissipates the sound’s power…. Blade tip speed gets really loud…. 2700 rpm on a long prop gets noticeably loud. Starts getting closer to the speed of sound… Blade materials can be sound deadening as well… MT composite props get used in noise sensitive areas…. Aluminum props make the engine sound alive! If you ever played baseball with a wooden bat, and an aluminum bat… you will know the difference… Move the prop as far from your ears as possible…. Even a couple of feet (or a meter) will make a difference…. Sound drops off by the power of 2 as distance increases…. The pusher configuration puts the props pretty far away from the pilot’s ears…. The passenger’s ears will be pretty close though… Often the pusher layout, puts the props closer to the cabin… as the cabin tapers in a bit back there…. Where the tractor props can be more distant… In modern times… They make good headsets and cabin insulation…. So this is more of a Chevy vs Ford discussion… 😃
@@aircraftadventures-vids Definitely, this other is a Burnelli Lifting Fuselage: th-cam.com/video/YPprm1nb1uM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=lUHov9IWbsCEUk8P I failed in retrieving references for the performances of the UK built Burnellis, as the one general Charles de Gaulle used as personal airplane
If the design is good enough another company could partner up or invest in them (like Cessna bought Pipistrel) Somehow I just don't think small twins are that attractive in general (exception, maybe the tecnam)
@@aircraftadventures-vids Agreed. Rectracts and especially twins are dying fast due primarily to insurance costs. There is a beautiful Baron down our ramp that'll probably go for $100k compared to a Skyhawk, with similar TBO, easily getting $200k.
@@jimmiller5600 There's a Twin Bonanza B50 for sale, I think it's going for $65k, but with run-out motors. I can even imagine how much you'd have to dump into that thing to keep it going.
@@aircraftadventures-vids it wasnt cessna it was texan? is that the name? maybe they own cessna too. either way pipistrel didnt need partner but his owner kind of want to get out. orca looks sexier than that ukrainian... but hey who knows if any will get any support.
Awfully presumptuous of you to say we "have never heard of" the Piaggio which has been around for nearly 70 years. Forget the Hype, stick to the facts.
It predates the USSR, the “the Ukraine” terminology was in use in the days of the Russian Empire to describe the region which comprises the modern state of Ukraine
@@aircraftadventures-vids it is an important drop that has taken hold over the last 2+ years… As Ukraine is fighting for democracy and the right to exist. 😃
No post-crash fire, even with severe damage to the aft fuselage, wing and engine nacelles. In conjunction with the known highest cause of engine failure. And the fact its a twin, and one normal failure would not result in an off-airport crash... It is OBVIOUS it ran out of gas.
![โรงเรียนตอนตี 2 โคตรหลอน..!! [โรงเรียนไดเม่]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2MAEMwqVYh8/mqdefault.jpg)
![ลองสั่งของจากแอพ temu ถูกจริงหรอ?? ( part : 1/2 ) [โกงไหมครับ ep.89 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RTcZSQTiDZw/mqdefault.jpg)
Those of us who remember the "Pig" from our military service days, will also remember it as the "Converter" because its engines only converted fuel to noise and we surmised that it only managed to get airborne due to the curvature of the Earth.
There are some onboard vids of the P166 taking off and man, I'd swear a 747 would be off in less time! Still a badass plane, long runway and all.
Appreciate the effort of collecting and putting it all together. Inspiring designs. How i wish all were still in use and even in production.
Couldn't agree more!
Fantastic overview of some really cool , obscure aircraft. thanks.
Thanks again, bud!
Orka is one of best looking GA aircrafts ever, really beautiful design.
I was always hoping someone would make one for the Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Great video. Thanks for your research, narration and great images. I think the Italian twin tail Sky Car has incredible potential.
Thanks for the kind words! Yes it's an intriguing design. But for the life of me I can't find a lick of info on it in recent times, not even word that they ran out of business.
Excellent choice of aircraft for your video, great narration. Thank you
Thank you!
You did mention the Piaggio P-180 but not the Velocity V-Twin... the two that actually "made it". And, don't forget the Rutan Defiant.
Fun fact about the Avtek 400: it was featured in the famed Belisarius Productions tv show Airwolf!
G'day,
I've seen a couple of those big ol
Piaggio 166 Twin Cargo/Commuter Liners.
They were both on the VH Registers, as painted (Australia), and parked outside Illawarra Aviation at Bankstown Airport, Sydney...; in 1979-'80, tied down, derelict, reputed to be both needing major overhauls - but in 6 months at the adjoining Hangar I never saw anybody go near them.
Apparently someone had gone broke trying to operate them in the Papua New Guinea Highlands we were always told it looked as it did due to having begun as a Flying Boat.
Apparently they required
Gentle handling of their Engines,
And though they were OK at
Sea Level, up in the
Owen Stanley Ranges it was
Necessary to bend the Throttle Stalks,
Thus blowing up a lot of
Motors.
Enough that the whole
Enterprise went broke.
Overweight, Fat, Underpowered,
Draggy...
Not worth owning.
Hence the condition of the two
Derelict Pigs.
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Great description of the pigs, lol. Thanks for the input.
Let's see if anyone catches my hilarious production mistake. Comment below if you find it. 😩
At the start of #2 you said #1.
So 2 is the new 1 LoL
Seems to be the hard part of making an airplane video…. 😃
The way you pronounce innovative and resemblance? 😉
For me the absolutely HARDEST part is the voiceover, hearing my voice on the video is like nails on a chalkboard. But it's what I got. @@AC-jk8wq
Remarkable aircraft, great video.
Many thanks!
Can you fly a pusher with one engine down??
Sure can, the same physics still apply to a normal tractor-prop. I've been told the Orka flies great on one engine.
Nice work capturing Al Mooney’s ultimate design work…!
There may have been two versions of it? Avtek 400 & 500?
😃
Till I worked on this video I had no idea Al Mooney worked on the Avtek. He had his hand in many other designs! (Jetstar + Lockheed AL60)
@@aircraftadventures-vids
The core teaching we get from Al Mooney…
Speed and efficiency are both important. For both the plane, and the factory building the plane…
From the airfoils selected, to the cross sectional area of the cabin used…. Wind resistance slows things down. So, Al was a big proponent of minimizing these losses… while still maintaining key comfort dimensions.
Wooden composites (cellulose and lignin) were an awesome material to sculpt into aerodynamic shapes…. Aluminum is a more robust material for a machine that lives in the real world… but aluminum is much more challenging to form into nice rounded shapes…
The canard layout is a set up for increased aerodynamic efficiency… where both wings are providing lift…
Achieving the full advantage of this configuration takes additional effort…
The forward wing will destroy the airflow/lift of the trailing wing unless they get proper vertical separation…
Al Mooney brought a few things to the Avtek project… nice curvy shapes, and enough vertical separation between the forward and trailing wings…. The eyebrow wings… look a little funny. But, they serve a great purpose.
Early on… Al Mooney numbered his design projects in numerical order… no matter what company he lead the engineering for…
Then each design got version identifiers added with each significant design change.
The plane we are most familiar with… the M20, was quickly modified to a most standard state… and became the M20A
The M20B was the all metal version of the M20A
The M20C included many evolutionary changes to the M20B
The M20D was an entry model M20 that could be stepwise upgraded to the M20C (constant speed prop, retract gear)
M20E added more power via fuel injection
M20F got the mid body fuselage with the E’s engine
G is the mid body with C’s lovable carbureted O360
H&I were projects that didn’t get commercialized
J is where composites returned to improve the aerodynamics of the F…
The chain continued and currently sits at M20V a high powered, twin turbo normalized, intercooled, impressive speedster… known as the Acclaim!
Al left the company early on…. The company followed his teachings with every new version…
😃
This is wonderful. I think I can promote your channel if you assign me the task of dubbing your videos into Arabic, as Arab youth love to understand this wonderful engineering.
Shoot an email to richard@e-sense.tv, I can email you the script and you can send it back translated. I think that's the best way to do it, using the captions. Much appreciated!
I always enjoy the Aircraft Adventures videos…
Where else can we find great presentations of all the various airplanes out there…
Note: If the videos were error free…. Who would be writing in the comment section?
😃
Really inspirational 👏
Amazing italian plane❤
Yup, both of them!
The Skycar, no one is going to jump out of that plane with a parachute.
Don't forget the Angel Aircraft Model 44. It's been certificated and got the production certificate. It was made with remote bush operations in mind, i think there is one out there flying last I heard.
I already covered it in a previous video 👍
Good one particularly like twin.. Pushers and the Skycar is very cool but theres others like a float plane flyingboat and a Russian amphibian flyingboat.
👍🏼🧙♂️🇬🇧
For sure there's more! Which is great, I can work on more vids, lol. Please do go ahead and list out anything you'd like me to cover so I can drop it into the idea box
@@aircraftadventures-vids
Not a pusher but incredible twin
Wilson global Explorer only two built a flying go anywhere expedition craft
th-cam.com/video/RLKNPOSpMpY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=nCQTzSEEcj3czj-8
Even carried a hanglider and had an internal divers hatch.
@@aircraftadventures-vids
th-cam.com/video/RLKNPOSpMpY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=nCQTzSEEcj3czj-8 there was a twin version.
@@aircraftadventures-vids
The Russian adventure pusher twin... Ak62
th-cam.com/video/cPnjM1Zat-U/w-d-xo.htmlsi=cqqQGc8eUpPbJOA9
Check out the Seabear for a tractor twin
Pushers keep the props away from the Passengers and cabin on the ground and in the air.
Also worth a look is the Beriev 103 tractor twin that sits wing on the water .. ..
There are others out in Siberian bush territory .
Then theres the French Akoya hydro amphibian . Very streamlined very advanced.. single
Very pretty planes😁
The AvTek (Mooney) 400 would have been directly competing with the Beech Starship. That aircraft suffered painful delays because the fear-of-failure FAA made them go wildly above "normal" plane construction safety margins. If the Beech was reintroduced with modern design standards it would be way popular. But it won't because it would cannibalize King Air sales.
The Avtek also didn't have nearly close to the colossal funding that Beech had, but yeah I'd otherwise agree they joined the same grave pretty much.
The Starship was an engineering failure. The contemporary Piaggio Avanti ridiculed it in every metric. Piaggio had less R&D money, less powerful engines and somehow managed to create a small plane with a huge and quiet cabin. The Avanti's performance and range put the final nails in the Starship's coffin...
Most amazingly, the Piaggio's beautiful lines are made of metal, and even now look futuristic.
6:56 WOW ''up to 9 hours of endurance'' !!!! I SURE HOPE IT HAS A NICE POTTIEE!!!! :) hehehehe (head...bathroom...toilette?? yea pottie) and a couple of COTTS for the ''BRAVO TEAM'' to catch a nap on their OFF TIME :) hahahaha
The Skycar's lifting body design seems like a great idea, look at all the room you get. I would think there would be a market for such an innovative design but maybe the $$$million price was a bit much??
Piston twins are very hard to market, liability and cost is hard to justify.
아주 좋은 유튜브 입니다
I didn't know Bruce Spence had a TH-cam channel. 😵💫
Lol! Yeah gyro captain's my favorite aviation movie character and has been my IG avatar for years, so there he is.
I wonder what has happened in this field the last ten years?
Great video
Thanks!
hmmm interesting that a400 also had above the wing mounted engines not just regular pusher
I like Embraer's CBA 123.
Me too. I worked for Embraer 2001-2010.
2:10 "number one". lolol!
Ugh, I know 😩
Good video of interesting aircraft! Well done doing your own narration - thank you for that, I hate the canned voices. Oh, btw - it's inno-VAY-tive!
noted!
I want all of these in Flight Simulator.
I've heard of these aircraft
starship by beech was the best
FAA didn't think so
It surprised me that I didn't see the KEF Angel
Until a year ago I used to follow your "guess the plane " posts on IG 😂 now turns out you have a YT channel with awesome content! 😄 Subscribed😎
Thank you! Much appreciated. I still post the "guess the plane" occasionally. In fact did one today.
When you mentioned the seating position you said, “prone” when I think you meant “supine”. “Prone” would be face down.
That is correct, and someone else pointed that out. To my credit, there WERE a few experimental prone-position planes, but definitely not this one.
He-163 Salamander.
F-22 (believe it or not).
The king of experimental airplanes…
The Wright Flyer…
Was a twin prop, pusher configuration, where the pilot was in the prone position…
Technicality: twin prop driven by bicycle chains from the single engine…
Like Al Mooney’s A400 design… the Wright flyer was also a canard…. Those guys were all about aero efficiency….
😃
Regarding #3: 'prone position' would be on one's stomach. The seating position in this aircraft should be described as 'almost supine.'
Noted, you're right. Ugh, that would indeed a bit uncomfy flying like that. That being said, the english did develop some small twin in WWII to test prone piloting positions.
Prone worked for those bicycle guys from Dayton, OH…. 😃
Aka Wilbur and Orville….
The plane had limited horse power and no cockpit, so the prone position was a bit more aerodynamic too…
😃
I liked the video but would have been much better if you had gave us performance data such as speed and altitude.
Noise would seem to be an issue with the V24.
I had previously heard of the P166 in the GO-480 video. And, speaking of the GO-480, what happened to its video?
I took it down, had some Twin Bonanza footage owner didn't like me using.
@@aircraftadventures-vids Oh
I remember as a young by seeing a Piaggio Portofino at Yeadon (Leeds/Bradford airport). It had a horrible brown paint scheme if I recollect correctly.
9:53 this was in a episode of the show Airwolf. Then it fell into obscurity.
They’re not mentioning the fact that pusher props are quieter than normal propellors.
The difference is less noise in the passenger compartment, as measured in decibels.
I take it you have not heard any pusher aircraft, they are unequivocally louder than their tractor-propped brethren. Much louder.
@@aircraftadventures-vids You’re wrong. Pusher props throw sound into the airstream behind the plane.
The reason that commercial planes don’t use pusher props is that they get much better fuel economy than those horrible GE jet engines.
But look: Neither of us has the data we need to prove our point. I don’t have the decibel ratings for various aircraft engines, so I can’t prove that I’m right.
The real issue is fuel economy. Modern commercial planes like the 737 get the same terrible fuel economy as old planes like the 727. 90 miles per seat per gallon. It should be 300 miles per seat per gallon.
Our entire transportation system is crippled by machines that waste fuel on purpose. The cars, the planes, the trains, the boats; everything. We’re being held hostage by the coal and oil Mafia.
@@ronliebermann pusher-propellers are inherently louder due to the propeller blades rotating at high velocity thru the wing and fuselage wakes. This same phenomenon reduces pusher propeller efficiency by greater than 1%. The fact its behind the aircraft is irrelevant, because sound travels at you know, the speed of sound. Putting the engines behind a large bulkhead does reduce cabin noise somewhat for some aircraft. But not for the Cessna 337! Or the Defiant.
Re: 300 passenger air miles per gallon... The highest theoretical air mileage is in the range of 150-160.
That is a specific point designed, lower speed, unswept, high aspect ratio wing with a span greater than any Gate at any airport in existence. Oh, and FULL boundary layer control via powered boundary layer suction.
It's not gonna happen. There is NO WAY to get 300 passenger air miles per gallon, at anywhere near the speeds people want to travel at. (Maybe at sailplane speeds).
If they make jets half as fast. People will just drive because skipping the drive to airport, parking, walking, bus, subway and gate to gate walking. After the long TSA line, wait lines. Boarding times. Door close times, etc. means saving 2-3 hours of airport terminal time BEFORE layover that can be 2-3 hours or more each.
If you take a 4hr flight and make it 8hrs to save gas (unswept mach 0.45-0.5 wing) You can literally just drive half way across America in less time than hopping a couple connecting flights across the midwest.
@@TheJustinJ You’re certainly entitled to your own opinion. But your claims are just your informal point of view. We aren’t debating verifiable facts.
I believe that 300 miles per gallon per seat is already attainable.
Gents,
Don’t forget what causes most of the engine noise….
Then let’s remember what dissipates the sound’s power….
Blade tip speed gets really loud…. 2700 rpm on a long prop gets noticeably loud. Starts getting closer to the speed of sound…
Blade materials can be sound deadening as well…
MT composite props get used in noise sensitive areas….
Aluminum props make the engine sound alive!
If you ever played baseball with a wooden bat, and an aluminum bat… you will know the difference…
Move the prop as far from your ears as possible…. Even a couple of feet (or a meter) will make a difference…. Sound drops off by the power of 2 as distance increases….
The pusher configuration puts the props pretty far away from the pilot’s ears…. The passenger’s ears will be pretty close though…
Often the pusher layout, puts the props closer to the cabin… as the cabin tapers in a bit back there…. Where the tractor props can be more distant…
In modern times…
They make good headsets and cabin insulation…. So this is more of a Chevy vs Ford discussion…
😃
2:09 We got two #1's in a row
The Italian Sky Car had a Burnelli lifting fuselage?
Sort of, not as pronounced though. It’s airfoil shaped like the Shorts 360
@@aircraftadventures-vids Definitely, this other is a Burnelli Lifting Fuselage: th-cam.com/video/YPprm1nb1uM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=lUHov9IWbsCEUk8P
I failed in retrieving references for the performances of the UK built Burnellis, as the one general Charles de Gaulle used as personal airplane
You missed the Indian Saras aircraft
No #2.
yes, there is a number 2, you get it by adding the two number 1! 😹
Number 1 twice.
ding ding ding
@@aircraftadventures-vids , Greetings from Rio. 😁
@@sempreame O Rio eh lindo! Minha esposa é carioca tb
@@aircraftadventures-vids, no way!!!!
Angel 44.
2:08 - Number one?
You said number 1 instead of 2
yup
Pusher props scare me, I would never fly one
Why is that?
Apparently they are inherently predisposed to merc passengers and pilots alike out of blind distain for physics and everything good in life.
🆒😎🤘!
🤟🤟🤟
OMA Sud -- late 2007 startup? Bad timing.
Softex -- anything outta Ukraine is a tough bet nowadays.
If the design is good enough another company could partner up or invest in them (like Cessna bought Pipistrel) Somehow I just don't think small twins are that attractive in general (exception, maybe the tecnam)
@@aircraftadventures-vids Agreed. Rectracts and especially twins are dying fast due primarily to insurance costs. There is a beautiful Baron down our ramp that'll probably go for $100k compared to a Skyhawk, with similar TBO, easily getting $200k.
@@jimmiller5600 There's a Twin Bonanza B50 for sale, I think it's going for $65k, but with run-out motors. I can even imagine how much you'd have to dump into that thing to keep it going.
@@aircraftadventures-vids it wasnt cessna it was texan? is that the name? maybe they own cessna too. either way pipistrel didnt need partner but his owner kind of want to get out.
orca looks sexier than that ukrainian... but hey who knows if any will get any support.
Textron is the parent company of both Cessna and Beechcraft, and now Pipistrel…. (2022)
😃
1:45 innovA?tive
English is my first second language, lol.
On the topic of Ukraine built airplanes…. They have a rich history of building planes…. Including the Antonov Mriya giant cargo hauler…. An-225. 😃
reesomblunce ???
Yes, I'm practicing my french accent for my upcoming trip
ok, but why do you say "innovative" that way?
Great video, but wow, dude, you pronounce words like I’ve never heard from anybody !
“Ree-zom-blance” for resemblance😂 really
Welp...get ready to put up with more more english-butchering, got more vids on the way 🤟
No worries, mate, butcher away. Language aside, the videos are very well done. @@aircraftadventures-vids
You English sounds weird. Where did you get that accent?
😂
Awfully presumptuous of you to say we "have never heard of" the Piaggio which has been around for nearly 70 years. Forget the Hype, stick to the facts.
Wait are you the real Ted Smith?
Speaking of awesome twins… the Aerostar is fantastic!
😃
no one come closed to embraer cba-123
FYI a pilot is NOT A PASSENGER -
Some are
You made the mistake of referring to the country of Ukraine as "the Ukraine". I believe this designation held over when Ukraine was part of the USSR.
It predates the USSR, the “the Ukraine” terminology was in use in the days of the Russian Empire to describe the region which comprises the modern state of Ukraine
Interesting, that never crossed my mind and I didn't know "the" was dropped at some point.
@@aircraftadventures-vids kind of like a slavic/russian empire equivalent of the roman empire limes as you also find it in Serbia's Krajina. 😏👌
Wont have to worry about that for long fellas
@@aircraftadventures-vids it is an important drop that has taken hold over the last 2+ years…
As Ukraine is fighting for democracy and the right to exist.
😃
first
So number two crashed due to engine failure..thought thats why twins are considered safer..did they bith fail..poor design for the price..
No post-crash fire, even with severe damage to the aft fuselage, wing and engine nacelles.
In conjunction with the known highest cause of engine failure. And the fact its a twin, and one normal failure would not result in an off-airport crash...
It is OBVIOUS it ran out of gas.
enovative design hahaah
Someone needs to learn how to pronounce "innovative."
Joke is on you.. I heard of all of them before.
Dang. I should have checked with you first.