If you haven't yet, you have to check out the latest Real Science video. Features one of the funniest interviews I have ever seen. th-cam.com/video/eoJWQNg7egc/w-d-xo.html
“Johnson you got a plane design for me?” Shows the asymmetrical winged plane. “Sorry sir i think it didn’t glue right let me....” “Johnson..... *you’re a genius* !”
It was fairly well behave in most situations. Test pilots gradually expand the flight envelope. They never tested the plane to stall, for the reasons stated in this video, but with enough altitude the wings would be unswept and recovered.
What I always find fascinating is when you hear test pilots talk they like it's just another day at the office. Clearly they are too busy to think about being scared.
@@RealEngineering Given this is the first thing you say in the video and it is so basic, you might want to fix and reupload... otherwise your video loses credibility.
I once read a test pilot's autobiography wherein he said that if a plane looked good, it generally flew well. With that criterion in mind, this plane must've flown like ass.
Marcel Bloch (later Dassault) if i remember well EDIT: Yup he said "Un bel avion est un avion qui vole bien" or "A beautiful plane is a plane that flies well" in english.
Well I do believe that in the mind of a test pilot "looks good" has quite a different meaning that it has to you and me ahahah. I'm pretty sure that someone who's all career has been centered around planes and testing new planes will have quite some instinctive understanding of planes aero and their behaviour, and surely they translate in his opinion about what it means for a plane to "look good"
You can learn a lot from it too. Understanding some engineering subjects can help you figure out why something doesn’t work, how to fix something, or how to design/make something.
Having an understanding of engineering and being scientifically literate is not just for engineers and scientists, it's helpful to everyone, even in everyday life.
@@martinross9093 I’m almost certain more than 1% of viewers want to be an engineer. I want to be an engineer, so unless 999 others of you say you don’t, your stats are wildly wrong. But 100% of them enjoy learning about it.
hate to break it to people like you, but nasa has a annual budget bigger than most country's spend on their national defense. in addition, nasa is no longer saddled with the shuttle, which was an enormous money pit that never made it an economic operation that nasa was anticipating
@@amblincork It's not really university lecturer level, it's more a popular science approach, and I think he does pretty well. Funnily enough, some of my favourite lecturers when I've been studying engineering, are the ones who get to ten minutes into their hour, then spend the remaining fifty minutes digressing in increasingly nerdy directions, and trying to cram five hours' worth in! Wouldn't work too well on TH-cam I think...
*describing how to make helicopter “Okay, so what you’re gonna do is make a flying machine with blades horizontal to the ground, that spin to give it lift” “Alright boss, helicopter’s all built” “Oh damnit Jerry, not like that!”
@@RealEngineering Hi and Hello. I gather people for a good cause: I wanna provide people with Links leading to bad or toxic people. Mobber, Racists, Sexists, Bullies, more. I got the Links and i need help with reporting them. TH-cam is in a bad state and i think you heard of that. Many complain about it, its strike-system and its CEO: Susan. But... I mean... complaining about the State of the world is nice and dandy, but... how about acting? Doing something? So i made a Wiki where i store Links for all to use. Yeah, unorthodox, i know, but whatever. Its my Try to help. You can at least pre-emptive 'block user' regarding the Racists and all those, but you can also do one thing more and report them, so YT becomes a better place. I know this was random and also overly summarized, but think about it and consider. You can make a difference. I tried to explain it as good as possible, but the Wiki will tell and show you more, i guess.
I think the best thing about this channel is how he can make me feel like I understand what he is saying, only for me to realize im still too dumb to figure out what just happened once it ends.
A watched a video were the pilot tested this oblique wing and it was easy to control. All this issues now are much easy to overcome wiri flight by wire. It is strange, but works pretty well.
I had been watching your videos until my final year of college, 2019. Since then, my interest in engineering has plummeted as I got into my daily 9-5 job. Though I do an engineer's work there, I don't seem to have that thirst for engineering anymore. Just watched your video now after a while, boy you bet... I feel alive after a long time.. feeling fascinated about aerospace engineering.. great video!!
@@michaelguzzi1 That would've been cool! I'm not an engineer, but that can't be too hard, can it? I think two small electronic engines like the ones in cheap commercial drones should do the trick if you made it out of styrofoam.
I feel like an important aspect of the plane wasn't discussed in this video, that the oblique wing (60 degrees sweep angle) was never intended to fly transonic. It was flown during research to collect data by flying a real aircraft, rather than wind tunnel tests. The oblique wing design was proposed by Robert.T.Jones, to fly efficiently in both transonic and supersonic speeds. This aircraft, the AD-1, flew at max, 170 knots where the main idea of the design was to fly at supersonic speeds. Any challenges this aircraft came upon were not really a surprise. The idea of the oblique wing design was to fly at 0 degree sweep angle at low speeds and gradually at 60 degrees sweep angle at supersonic speeds. The AD-1 was really a scaled down NASA version of a passenger oblique wing design by Boeing.
Hello Mr Engineering. Just heard a mistake in your information. At 3:02, you said "airliners cruise just below critical Mach number". This is not correct. Airliners usually cruise ABOVE their critical Mach number.
Let me get this straight: You comment something that is unrelated to the fact that I have two DANGEROUSLY DASHING girlfriends? Considering that I am the unprettiest TH-camr ever, having two hot girlfriends is really incredible. Yet you did not mention that at all. I am quite disappointed, dear cra
Funny you should say.....we are cooking some ideas up for a Fake Engineering series that will talk about Sci-Fi technology. Not on this channel though.
I'd assume there isn't anything espessialy interesting about it from an engineering standpoint so he hasn't made a video about it. Maybe he could talk about fitting the cannon in the center of the propeller but that's not unique to the BF109
@@_M4X15 I mean I have to agree with you because he hasn’t made anything about it, but when you research the plane many people say it was a state of the art plane and just leave it at that. So it leaves me wondering.
Thank you so much for referencing your sources!!! I know it may seem like an ardours and pointless task, but your references assisted me a lot whilst conducting a EPQ style research project. Don’t stop referencing!
Of all of the videos I have watched from this channel, this is the one I most had to rewind and re-watch. Aerodynamics is very interesting to me, and simultaneously confusing at times. Thanks for explaining this plane and the topic so well!
I was thinking something similar. If you kept the intersection inside the plane, it would avoid a pocket between the two airfoils. You could probably even make it functionally entirely symmetrical, so I wouldn't hate it. (Even though I totally admire them for trying this.)
Won't work, as the aft-wing will be positioned in the drag of the front wing. They tried this with the Caproni Ca.60 (exactly 100 years ago), which had 3 triwing installments after one another. It was supposed to fly across the Atlantic, but never made it out of Lake Maggiore in one piece.
3:40 chordwise flow is the component perpendicular to the centerline of the airplane, not that parallel to the leading or trailing edge. And it happens not just because of the geometry of the wing, but because there spanwise pressure gradients due to sweep
Now that’s what I love to see from this channel! Less politics of today, more of engineering!!! Great vid! Now I’m looking for another Irish to put up an amazing show today! And McGregor is about to deliver big time!
I wonder if computers with their abilities to perform hundreds of flight attitude corrections every second could make this concept come back to life again
I'm just an Airbus pilot, but I love these. Basically, flying that thing with the wings pivoted would be kinda like flying single engine all the time. But 7° bank for level flight would get really screwy to get used to.
Yeah I wonder if the same modern control mechanisms that made it unnecessary for fighters and the like, could also make it more practically controllable with modern autopilot features, especially on some sort of drone plane. That said the reasons to do so are still pretty few lol. It would be strange to always have to he rolled like that. Could be even more disorienting in IMC if you need to stay rolled to fly level and straight based on the configuration of the wing.
@@revenevan11 Oh man. At least in IMC you could do something like have the attitude indicator fake wings level and recalibrate based on speed and pivot. Plus, modern fly by wire planes do so much magic behind the scenes to mask control issues, they COULD make it work. To my knowledge, modern fighters are nigh uncontrollable without the computers, so it would just be up to software to work out. But at this point, it's like 🤷♂️ why bother?
You'd develop a weird crick in your neck, like putting the TV in your living room at a corner angle from the couch. You'd have to alternate forward sides each flight
This has been enlightening because when I was little I've played with radio settings and intercepted conversations on wich operation NACA was mentioned multiple times but never knew what that stood for
TH-camrs are starting to copy each other. Some months ago half as interesting copied economics explained on a video about Australia.... This is only going to get worse
*Richard Vogt* had drawn up plans for this kind of plane in 1942 when he still worked for the company Blohm+Voss in germany, after the war he moved to america (in operation paperclip) and worked for the US Air Force. i wouldn't be surprised if some of his drawing were the cornerstone of this design.
@Lupus Didacus I think they're referring to the mistake in the very beginning of the video; the last A in NASA is Administration, not Association. Everyone is going to comment pointing out/correcting that lol.
I'd love to see a plane with two symmetrical oblique wings, starting superposed, and pivoting into an X figure. It would probably generate too much drag, but it would look super cool.
I was going to say it is the National aeronautics and space ADMINISTRATION NOT ASSOCIATION but a bunch of people already commented this but anyway great video
I was waiting for an explanation on this odd design and plus I’m completely in love with this man's accent! Very very interesting and educational video, my compliments
This video is really good. You point out important points and explain them in such a way that it is easy to understand. And more importantly, I could not spot any error or oversimplification. Keep up the good work. I had never a closer look to the oblique wing concept and thus this video was really interesting. For those of you who want to know more about the x-planes: NASA has some pretty interesting and free e-books.
Most people would not know what side slip is, so maybe 30seconds to explain cross controls e.g. Left rudder & right Aileron = side slip with rapid altitude loss , love your videos btw
Oof, sorry man. The second "A" in NASA stands for "Administration". This one's gonna have to go up there with CGP Grey's original Tekoi video. #yikes 😬
Renowned British designer/inventor Barnes Wallace first posited a single piece swing wing in the 50s, his postwar aeronautic concepts were well ahead of materials science of the time
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is an independent agency of the U.S. federal government responsible for the civilian space program, as well as aeronautics and space research. NASA was established in 1958, succeeding the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.
FYI, I love your merch! The graph paper journals are so Flippin awesome. The covers are soft, the quality is high, and they just make my life easier. The pocket one is dope too
As a kid I had a toy model of this plane I can remember already at age 5-6 how bizarre it appeared to be able to rotate the wing almost like a propeller.
I didn't fully understand the section regarding the "Area Rule". I think I grasp the fundamental concept, but [@9:42] I don't yet “𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑔𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔“ with respect to the AD-1. I can intuit that the asymmetrical geometry will certainly have a unique impact on the Longitudinal Cross-Sectional Area but it's not at all obvious to me why this would “𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠-𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒.” I found the YF-102A example only somewhat helpful. It was easy to appreciate how the different area plots related to the ideal in the diagram, but how the plot actually relates to the geometry of the plane in the photo is not at all obvious to me. Anyone else stuck on this point or is it just me? Perhaps an R.E. follow-up up on Longitudinal Cross-Sectional Area and the Whitcomb Rule could clear this up‽ 𝙿.𝚂. 𝙶𝚁𝙴𝙰𝚃 𝚅𝙸𝙳𝙴𝙾❕ 𝙸 𝚕𝚘𝚟𝚎 𝚢𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝 ﹠𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚑𝚊𝚗𝚗𝚎𝚕! ✈️
That is so cool! Thank for putting in the effort that is needed to show the world some of the unique aviation designs around! Other Rutan Designs, LongEz, Varieze, Voyager (the airplane), Cat bird, Boomerang, Beechcraft Starship, Spaceship One, and many others. The guy just keep on building interesting things and came at it from an engineering background. If you ever end up in America and want a ride in a LongEZ let me know.
If you haven't yet, you have to check out the latest Real Science video. Features one of the funniest interviews I have ever seen. th-cam.com/video/eoJWQNg7egc/w-d-xo.html
I have request, can make a video on diamond shape wing planes.
Nasa is an acronym for National Aeronautic and Space Administration. There are no national entities known as "associations" in the United States.
It is National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(I'll put an image in the discord), in aero-and-astronautical-engeneering
Your accent sounds less heavy in this video
“Johnson you got a plane design for me?”
Shows the asymmetrical winged plane.
“Sorry sir i think it didn’t glue right let me....”
“Johnson..... *you’re a genius* !”
Shit, here we go again.
Tekuani Aakab
I can relate to that! 😂
Good one xD
The absolute chrome-plated steel BALLS on the test pilot who actually got INTO that thing.
It was fairly well behave in most situations. Test pilots gradually expand the flight envelope. They never tested the plane to stall, for the reasons stated in this video, but with enough altitude the wings would be unswept and recovered.
There are also flight simulators they practiced in for a long time. Obviously it’s only a simulator so yeah still a pretty brave pilot.
@@mosesfox52 I mean, if something broke on the swing or even on one of the control surfaces...
I'd say anyone who gets into a test plane to fly it first has balls of steel
What I always find fascinating is when you hear test pilots talk they like it's just another day at the office. Clearly they are too busy to think about being scared.
NAS"A" is "ADMINISTRATION" not "ASSOCIATION".
Better than people who think the a is for agency
ha, shit. One of those things that just slips through and you never even bother to check. Mortified
Right, it is Administration
@@RealEngineering Given this is the first thing you say in the video and it is so basic, you might want to fix and reupload... otherwise your video loses credibility.
@@RealEngineering It happens...still a good video!
Would love to see Flite Test have a hand at making a model of this!
Bro I love that channel
Put this on their social media pages
Hell yeah!
Please
Tom Stanton also does cool experimental things like this
I once read a test pilot's autobiography wherein he said that if a plane looked good, it generally flew well. With that criterion in mind, this plane must've flown like ass.
It flew 50% good 50% bad all the time
Pilot I want you to test this plane.
How well does it fly?
Yesn't.
Marcel Bloch (later Dassault) if i remember well
EDIT: Yup he said "Un bel avion est un avion qui vole bien" or "A beautiful plane is a plane that flies well" in english.
Well I do believe that in the mind of a test pilot "looks good" has quite a different meaning that it has to you and me ahahah. I'm pretty sure that someone who's all career has been centered around planes and testing new planes will have quite some instinctive understanding of planes aero and their behaviour, and surely they translate in his opinion about what it means for a plane to "look good"
Means the F-22 raptor must fly like the absolute BEAUTY that it is
Even though i have no intention of being an engineer; this stuff is still interesting
I believe thats one of his main channel goals if I'm not wrong.
You can learn a lot from it too. Understanding some engineering subjects can help you figure out why something doesn’t work, how to fix something, or how to design/make something.
I don’t think 0,1% of viewers intend on becoming engineers
Having an understanding of engineering and being scientifically literate is not just for engineers and scientists, it's helpful to everyone, even in everyday life.
@@martinross9093
I’m almost certain more than 1% of viewers want to be an engineer. I want to be an engineer, so unless 999 others of you say you don’t, your stats are wildly wrong.
But 100% of them enjoy learning about it.
RE: “You probably know where this is going”
Me: Nope lol
😂😂
I'm on my 4th year of engineering and is not that simple to understand
@@bigdoggo5827 we're not all undegrad students in engineering lol
Last time I was this early to a real engineering video nasa still had a big budget
*_BIG_
Damn
Ok boomer.
So your like 60?
hate to break it to people like you, but nasa has a annual budget bigger than most country's spend on their national defense. in addition, nasa is no longer saddled with the shuttle, which was an enormous money pit that never made it an economic operation that nasa was anticipating
Finally an engineering video I’ve been waiting forever
I wonder what the seven people who clicked thumbs down didn't like.
@@jerryormston3916 in my comment?
@@Manuel-gu9ls no, to the video
Screaming sarcasm can make you deaf too
I wish we could get new videos everyday! But I'm perfectly happy with less frequency if it's means higher quality.
This video was posted right when I was going through some bad things today, atleast this made me feel happy. Thank you, and have a great day.
Hope you feel better soon. This year has been rough for a lot of people. Me included!
@@RealEngineering thank you and I hope the best for you aswell and yesh thie year has been very bad, thank you.
@@4rsh193 you mean bad sites? 👌😉😉
Keep your chin up!
@@omidrastin3745 no like parents mentaly abusing bad mate
Let's be real here, isn't every new experimental plane *weird*?
[After watching the video]
Yea... this one's definitely weird.
Or to look at it another way: if an experimental plane isn't weird, is it really experimental?
@@creepingjesus5106 Aye good point!
Yes - some of the narrators language is distinctly un - engineer like !!
@@amblincork I'd believe him if he taught me that, he sounds very credible to me.
@@amblincork It's not really university lecturer level, it's more a popular science approach, and I think he does pretty well.
Funnily enough, some of my favourite lecturers when I've been studying engineering, are the ones who get to ten minutes into their hour, then spend the remaining fifty minutes digressing in increasingly nerdy directions, and trying to cram five hours' worth in! Wouldn't work too well on TH-cam I think...
*describing how to make helicopter
“Okay, so what you’re gonna do is make a flying machine with blades horizontal to the ground, that spin to give it lift”
“Alright boss, helicopter’s all built”
“Oh damnit Jerry, not like that!”
I wonder how this idea would work in a biplane type scenario. Having a top AND bottom mounted wing assembly that function opposite of each other.
The forward swept wings have another advantage: they look cool as heck.
Agreed fully
The Su-47 approves of your statement.
@@AdmiralWillisLee1942 well... that one fell apart mid air
@@jebise1126 yeah, but it fell apart in style
Did the Su-47 crash? I've never heard of it.
Btw, I thought it's a very beautiful plane. Better looking than the X-29.
i don’t mean to nit pick but it’s
National
Aeronautics and
Space
Administration
not assoctiation love your vids though!
I done goofed.
I'm glad someone else noticed this.
@@RealEngineering Whoops! Quick! Edit the video and re-upload it before anyone notices!
Jk we still love you ❤
Indeed, it's a governmental administration, not a trade association.
@@RealEngineering Hi and Hello.
I gather people for a good cause:
I wanna provide people with Links leading to bad or toxic people.
Mobber, Racists, Sexists, Bullies, more. I got the Links and i
need help with reporting them.
TH-cam is in a bad state and i think you heard of that.
Many complain about it, its strike-system and its CEO: Susan.
But... I mean... complaining about the State of the world is nice
and dandy, but... how about acting? Doing something?
So i made a Wiki where i store Links for all to use. Yeah, unorthodox, i
know, but whatever. Its my Try to help.
You can at least pre-emptive 'block user' regarding the
Racists and all those, but you can also
do one thing more and report them, so
YT becomes a better place.
I know this was random and also overly summarized, but
think about it and consider. You can make a difference.
I tried to explain it as good as possible, but the Wiki will tell and show
you more, i guess.
I really appreciate the term “Frankenstein’s monster” rather than the common misconception of “Frankenstein”
I thought the author said it was fine to refer to the monster as Frankenstein? Or am I misinformed
I always think of Young Frankenstein, where Gene Wilder corrects the pronunciation of his name to "Frahnkenshteen."
As frankenstein is now public domain. I use XKCD's rendition of the story, which has named the monster frankenstein.
Frankenstein created a life and abandoned it. Frankenstein IS the monster ;-)
I think the best thing about this channel is how he can make me feel like I understand what he is saying, only for me to realize im still too dumb to figure out what just happened once it ends.
1:54 Now, that shot revives Top Gun memories or what?!
Revvin up the engine; listen to her howl and (groan?)
@@hobog Roar 😉
I miss the time when "engineers" tried to make planes that flapped wings like birds
some flying robots are made this way. look up ornithopters
not trying to show off, but flappy wings are extremely efficient when subject is small like bird.
@@omidrastin3745 hmmm, drone birds
Yeah me too. I was but a wee lad. The good ol’ days.
Ya, University of Toronto Institute of Aerospace Studies had some neat ornithopters :
th-cam.com/video/eW9XsjllM6A/w-d-xo.html
4:40 in all fairness, a lot of modern fighters use their stabilators at the back to control roll as well as ailerons
The going "through the science and engineering" videos are your best, always enjoyable.
Except for the nikola video.
Maybe I make trivial mistakes for the comment engagement. Maybe I'm an idiot. We may never know.
Smart.
But also, "Administration"...
A watched a video were the pilot tested this oblique wing and it was easy to control. All this issues now are much easy to overcome wiri flight by wire. It is strange, but works pretty well.
I had been watching your videos until my final year of college, 2019. Since then, my interest in engineering has plummeted as I got into my daily 9-5 job. Though I do an engineer's work there, I don't seem to have that thirst for engineering anymore. Just watched your video now after a while, boy you bet... I feel alive after a long time.. feeling fascinated about aerospace engineering.. great video!!
3:15 What software does he use to animate and design these?? They're elegantly amazing!
Probably After Effects
After Effects
He also learned blender during quarantine :)
He would probably tell you to learn that on Skillshare
#sponsored #money
Man I love this thing, been looking forever for some good plans to build an RC version of it
Found any?
@@ethanbennett9000 Not yet!
@@michaelguzzi1 What’s “RC” exactly?
@@zoetje1760 In this context it's short for Radio Control
@@michaelguzzi1 That would've been cool! I'm not an engineer, but that can't be too hard, can it? I think two small electronic engines like the ones in cheap commercial drones should do the trick if you made it out of styrofoam.
I feel like an important aspect of the plane wasn't discussed in this video, that the oblique wing (60 degrees sweep angle) was never intended to fly transonic. It was flown during research to collect data by flying a real aircraft, rather than wind tunnel tests. The oblique wing design was proposed by Robert.T.Jones, to fly efficiently in both transonic and supersonic speeds. This aircraft, the AD-1, flew at max, 170 knots where the main idea of the design was to fly at supersonic speeds. Any challenges this aircraft came upon were not really a surprise. The idea of the oblique wing design was to fly at 0 degree sweep angle at low speeds and gradually at 60 degrees sweep angle at supersonic speeds. The AD-1 was really a scaled down NASA version of a passenger oblique wing design by Boeing.
8:43 where did you find that amazing shot of Concorde taking off !??? I love it !
Hello Mr Engineering. Just heard a mistake in your information. At 3:02, you said "airliners cruise just below critical Mach number". This is not correct. Airliners usually cruise ABOVE their critical Mach number.
We have real engineering but where's fictional engineering?
Let me get this straight: You comment something that is unrelated to the fact that I have two DANGEROUSLY DASHING girlfriends? Considering that I am the unprettiest TH-camr ever, having two hot girlfriends is really incredible. Yet you did not mention that at all. I am quite disappointed, dear cra
@@AxxLAfriku. Understandable...
kurzgesagt?
History Channel
Funny you should say.....we are cooking some ideas up for a Fake Engineering series that will talk about Sci-Fi technology. Not on this channel though.
Can you do the spitfire’s rival, the BF-109? You’ve already done the spitfire. Only seems fitting.
I'd assume there isn't anything espessialy interesting about it from an engineering standpoint so he hasn't made a video about it. Maybe he could talk about fitting the cannon in the center of the propeller but that's not unique to the BF109
@@_M4X15 I mean I have to agree with you because he hasn’t made anything about it, but when you research the plane many people say it was a state of the art plane and just leave it at that. So it leaves me wondering.
@@_M4X15 maybe the focke wulf 190 is interesting bacause of its aircooling system ?
What about the 262?
Lol, i was building weird plane in ksp when this video came out
Keblar space program?
Tis a warning ole’ chap
@@SpoilerAlert__ kerbal*
Love that cross deck pendant jumping up to attach itself to the tailhook of the forward moving F-14 at 2:00!
That was so well explained, i wish my University had that Gift
I’ve never seen this plane before. Thanks for sharing!
It is called “National Aeronautics and Space Administration”
Thank you so much for referencing your sources!!! I know it may seem like an ardours and pointless task, but your references assisted me a lot whilst conducting a EPQ style research project. Don’t stop referencing!
Did I spy a Mustard-style model there? There's clearly some knowledge sharing going on in Nebula.
Noticed that as well. Looked exactly like Mustard’s style.
Of all of the videos I have watched from this channel, this is the one I most had to rewind and re-watch. Aerodynamics is very interesting to me, and simultaneously confusing at times.
Thanks for explaining this plane and the topic so well!
How about 2 of that wing that makes X shape when swept?
I was thinking something similar. If you kept the intersection inside the plane, it would avoid a pocket between the two airfoils. You could probably even make it functionally entirely symmetrical, so I wouldn't hate it. (Even though I totally admire them for trying this.)
That's what I was thinking. Why have a wing that performs asymmetrical just reduce fuel & drag
Won't work, as the aft-wing will be positioned in the drag of the front wing. They tried this with the Caproni Ca.60 (exactly 100 years ago), which had 3 triwing installments after one another. It was supposed to fly across the Atlantic, but never made it out of Lake Maggiore in one piece.
@@bakkerem1967 Thanks!
but what if one wing set was low deck and one set was high deck, like a biplane?
3:40 chordwise flow is the component perpendicular to the centerline of the airplane, not that parallel to the leading or trailing edge. And it happens not just because of the geometry of the wing, but because there spanwise pressure gradients due to sweep
Now that’s what I love to see from this channel! Less politics of today, more of engineering!!! Great vid! Now I’m looking for another Irish to put up an amazing show today! And McGregor is about to deliver big time!
I appreciate the subtle sound of the rotating wing in your explanation at 3:40
I'm a simple man, i see Real Engineering video, i stop everything i currently do to watch it.
I wonder if computers with their abilities to perform hundreds of flight attitude corrections every second could make this concept come back to life again
I saw the thumbnail pic and I was like WTH? Lol
This came out on my birthday! Thanks for all the awesome engineering! I'm planning on going to NAU for mechanical and electrical this year!
Nasa: So are you thinking a forward swept wing or a backward swept wing?
Engineers: Yes
I'm just an Airbus pilot, but I love these. Basically, flying that thing with the wings pivoted would be kinda like flying single engine all the time. But 7° bank for level flight would get really screwy to get used to.
Yeah I wonder if the same modern control mechanisms that made it unnecessary for fighters and the like, could also make it more practically controllable with modern autopilot features, especially on some sort of drone plane. That said the reasons to do so are still pretty few lol. It would be strange to always have to he rolled like that. Could be even more disorienting in IMC if you need to stay rolled to fly level and straight based on the configuration of the wing.
@@revenevan11 Oh man. At least in IMC you could do something like have the attitude indicator fake wings level and recalibrate based on speed and pivot. Plus, modern fly by wire planes do so much magic behind the scenes to mask control issues, they COULD make it work. To my knowledge, modern fighters are nigh uncontrollable without the computers, so it would just be up to software to work out. But at this point, it's like 🤷♂️ why bother?
You'd develop a weird crick in your neck, like putting the TV in your living room at a corner angle from the couch. You'd have to alternate forward sides each flight
i love this channel, keep up the great work
This has been enlightening because when I was little I've played with radio settings and intercepted conversations on wich operation NACA was mentioned multiple times but never knew what that stood for
Correct me if I’m wrong, but does the swept wings also reduce drag by decreasing frontal area?
you are correct, he mentions this in the video.
@Martin Ross It is decidedly so.
@@TheYang2208 oh, must have overheard that part
11:38 "learning by doing is essential for education"
> online engineering labs have entered the chat
"Real Engineering" channel really gave the "Mustard" channel a run for their money when it comes to content about transportation engineering
i still prefer mustards style of video
TH-camrs are starting to copy each other. Some months ago half as interesting copied economics explained on a video about Australia.... This is only going to get worse
Ooh looks like I've got a new NASA paper to read, thanks!
Reading technical journals mr Scott ?
Association? I'm like.. When did that happened?
*Richard Vogt* had drawn up plans for this kind of plane in 1942 when he still worked for the company Blohm+Voss in germany, after the war he moved to america (in operation paperclip) and worked for the US Air Force.
i wouldn't be surprised if some of his drawing were the cornerstone of this design.
2:50 I see Andy Niven's diagrams get drummed into everyone
Your production value and quality really has increased a lot over the years! Great video!
Hey Brian, youre the best
The animations on this channel are getting better and better. These are the best animations I have seen, yet!
RIP any chance of actual discussion in the comments
@Lupus Didacus I think they're referring to the mistake in the very beginning of the video; the last A in NASA is Administration, not Association. Everyone is going to comment pointing out/correcting that lol.
Hardly likely to spark it.... or maybe....
I'd love to see a plane with two symmetrical oblique wings, starting superposed, and pivoting into an X figure. It would probably generate too much drag, but it would look super cool.
1:58. This clip of the F-14 is being played backwards. interesting
I can’t get over how good the renders are
National Aeronautics and Space "Administration"
“You guys are making that new plane, right?”
“Uhh, ‘helicopter’ you mean? Right? You meant to say ‘helicopter’, right? Oh wtf..”
Lol
Hi. NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration, not Association
The best example I've seen yet of "picking the wrong trade-offs".
I was going to say it is the National aeronautics and space ADMINISTRATION NOT ASSOCIATION but a bunch of people already commented this but anyway great video
k then why comment
I was waiting for an explanation on this odd design and plus I’m completely in love with this man's accent!
Very very interesting and educational video, my compliments
0:20 Administration* As it is an agency of the US gov’t
BTW, 1:50 NACA = National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Alternative title: World's most expensive plane
This was a very interesting video, thank you for covering this fascinating topic
how many came here just by looking at the display pic?..
0:48 has hidden content in the closed captions of a line about the X-13 that was cut. Gotta love them Easter Eggs.
Seems am a tad too early for comments!
Same
@Alexandre Limberger he looks 15...
This video is really good. You point out important points and explain them in such a way that it is easy to understand. And more importantly, I could not spot any error or oversimplification. Keep up the good work.
I had never a closer look to the oblique wing concept and thus this video was really interesting. For those of you who want to know more about the x-planes: NASA has some pretty interesting and free e-books.
0:24 Administration, not Association 🤭🙄
Thank you for your time and effort..
Idea: What drugs NASA scientists use when making their planes
RP-1
Having worked with scientists before. Coffee, lots and lots of coffee
I love how active this guy is
Im 14 and im just super interested in engineering!
I just wanted to type something cause im the 115th comment! :D
Build amazing things that will push humanity forward my friend 🙂
@@liamriley9816 thx bro
3:15 thank you for explaining swept wing design :)
NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.. please at least try googling nasa next time.. how embarrassing😳
Most people would not know what side slip is, so maybe 30seconds to explain cross controls e.g. Left rudder & right Aileron = side slip with rapid altitude loss , love your videos btw
Oof, sorry man. The second "A" in NASA stands for "Administration". This one's gonna have to go up there with CGP Grey's original Tekoi video. #yikes 😬
Renowned British designer/inventor Barnes Wallace first posited a single piece swing wing in the 50s, his postwar aeronautic concepts were well ahead of materials science of the time
Hey NASA's final letter "A" does not stands for "Association", it's "Advocacy". This is me nicely correcting you.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, administration....
It's administration
Administration
3 people just killed my sarcasm instantaneously
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is an independent agency of the U.S. federal government responsible for the civilian space program, as well as aeronautics and space research. NASA was established in 1958, succeeding the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.
FYI, I love your merch! The graph paper journals are so Flippin awesome. The covers are soft, the quality is high, and they just make my life easier. The pocket one is dope too
The test pilot for this thing was just built different, my god.
When it came to fu*ks, he probably gave none. Legend
Quick feedback: next time you will have to deinterlace videos like ones at 5:20
As a kid I had a toy model of this plane I can remember already at age 5-6 how bizarre it appeared to be able to rotate the wing almost like a propeller.
I didn't fully understand the section regarding the "Area Rule". I think I grasp the fundamental concept, but [@9:42] I don't yet “𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑔𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔“ with respect to the AD-1.
I can intuit that the asymmetrical geometry will certainly have a unique impact on the Longitudinal Cross-Sectional Area but it's not at all obvious to me why this would “𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠-𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒.”
I found the YF-102A example only somewhat helpful. It was easy to appreciate how the different area plots related to the ideal in the diagram, but how the plot actually relates to the geometry of the plane in the photo is not at all obvious to me.
Anyone else stuck on this point or is it just me?
Perhaps an R.E. follow-up up on Longitudinal Cross-Sectional Area and the Whitcomb Rule could clear this up‽
𝙿.𝚂. 𝙶𝚁𝙴𝙰𝚃 𝚅𝙸𝙳𝙴𝙾❕
𝙸 𝚕𝚘𝚟𝚎 𝚢𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚗𝚝
﹠𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚑𝚊𝚗𝚗𝚎𝚕! ✈️
That is so cool! Thank for putting in the effort that is needed to show the world some of the unique aviation designs around!
Other Rutan Designs, LongEz, Varieze, Voyager (the airplane), Cat bird, Boomerang, Beechcraft Starship, Spaceship One, and many others. The guy just keep on building interesting things and came at it from an engineering background.
If you ever end up in America and want a ride in a LongEZ let me know.
mmmmmmm fresh content straight out of the sound software
Engineers: Hey, let's make a plane fly like Superman!
Air Force: What are you smoking???!!!
NASA: Genius!!!
Thanks for saving us common mortals from the boredom that are lockdowns and quarantines.