hummercj Same here colleague! Although there are still some weird stuff regarding the appearance of some strange pressure waves in some areas, this video has great captured footage.
The last time I saw this film was in my physics class at The College of William and Mary in about 1958. Shell Oil produced quite a few excellent films about aviation in those days. Thank you for posting this.
I used to get these as 16mm films for my HS science classes, in the late '70s. This one, "Schlieren," and "Refinery Processes" were favorites. Such excellent explanations. I agree with the review that this comes from a time when documentaries truly explained things. THANK YOU for uploading this.
Awesome, I always had a little trouble understanding transonic witchery, but this old video manages to explain it really well with simple demonstrations.
As soon as I seen the car moving through the water I understood a bit better.. Good vid... I've often felt the "Shock Wave" when my wife ripping money outta my wallet.... Let's go Brandon !
0MoTheG Not an aerodynamicist, but shockwaves are less severe on sharp, thin wings because they don't form as strong a bow wave, nor do they suffer as much flow separation at the rear of the wing. Remember the example of the bow wave using a car and a boat? The sharp leading edge cuts through the air better, creating less of a bow wave. A thinner wing means that the airflow over the top and bottom can be smoother, pushing back the rear shock and preventing flow separation. The problem with thin wings is that they don't generate much lift at subsonic speeds, and they don't provide much internal space for fuel and whatnot. However by using swept wings, aerodynamicists can make a fatter wing behave AS IF it were thin and sharp because the chord (length of the aerofoil parallel to the direction of flight) is longer in relation to the wing's thickness. For example, the BAE Lightning, which essentially had rectangular wings if you discount the sweep. But by sweeping the rectangle back 60 degrees, the chord doubles in length without changing any of the other parameters of the wing. This is why the swing wing was so popular in the 1970's - extended, the wings gave better performance at subsonic speeds, but when swept back, the same wing would perform better at transsonic and supersonic speeds because it behaved like a longer, thinner wing. The drawback, of course, is the sweeping mechanism is heavy.
+0MoTheG I think the other guy got confused. You're talking about the sweep: how the wing is swept back rather than more perpendicular to the fuselage, correct? I wondered about this too but a simple explanation I found is that if you look down vertically on the aircraft and imagine the shock-waves being produced on the aerofoil's maximum thickness, you will see something like a normal shock-wave (more perpendicular) with unspecialised wings, and with swept wings you will see something like an oblique shock-wave (small angles like those produced by sharp aerofoils). This reduces drag because a normal shockwave tends to have supersonic airflow in-front and subsonic behind it, while an oblique tends to have supersonic airflow both in front and behind it. By reducing the amount the air is slowed by (how much force it takes), you thereby reduce the amount of drag produced on the aircraft; as every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This isn't exactly the case because it's still a normal shock-wave on the wing, it's just you're looking vertically down on it. However, the amount the air is slowed by is very much related to the angle of the shockwave. If you can deter the shockwave from being perpendicular, even if it's just on one dimensional plane (from bird's-eye view) then the air will not slow as much and less drag will be felt.
As I am a very old man I remember all that is shown in this video/film. This film was made in the last 20 years of the British Empire 1950-1970, where the British Engineers were no longer respected and told their children to take up social and servicing and financial and entertaining and vociferous media and political professions. Also, the British doors were opened to the immigrants from the old colonies who flocked in multitudes to Britain without having any Engineering interests but armed with the simplest domestic commercial talents including the manner in which they extorted the British by devaluing their homes to take over large areas everywhere along Britain. You should have been there in London to hear what went on at Speaker's Corner, and I shall not go into details. Well, those countries which do not respect their engineers and start basing their economies on what was mentioned above, then the value of the monetary system is not real and it is only a financial racket that must contain a continuous running devaluing of what workers earn. This is still happening in Britain and Europe with the EU rackets going on and even the great US is suffering from this sickness. Note Brexit! Anyway, while the British Empire lasted, it was all so very pleasant for the British, and I saw all those aircraft being developed and flown to Malta where I now live and we had to share the brunt of the British war with Germany and Italy, The Hawker Hunter was a beautiful aircraft and on looking back, one can appreciate the unity of the British Nation and its people, back them, Now the British community feeling is all gone, and Britain and its cities, including Europe, are full of strangers, basing the national income of giving a prostituting servicing, EU political members, Tourism and dealing with millionaires, without asking how money comes about as in Monte Carlo where the local people who built Monte Carlo, had to go to the South of France and Monte Carlo is now being run by 2400 millionaires and 200 Billionaires, were entertaining them is the prime servicing economy and the engineering products, involving research and production of high-level technology is imported from distant countries to decorate a few superyachts for entertaining escorts. When long traditional national cultures and social structures, built over 1000 years, are fast-changing..... the nation resumes to just giving domestic instinctive services to others, as that is the easiest instinctive work to do, with no tangible products, no guarantees, and not much sweat, nor responsibility involved. The financial servicing industry and immigration has curtained and destroyed the engineering industry in Britain and in Europe.
Hear Hear ! I watched a documentary last week with a native from Africa complaining how engineers and scientists in more developed countries were holding them back technically, by not sharing their experience and knowledge of technology. I've never heard that excuse for not being able to use scientific process principles that are available to everyone on the planet. And one would think that Africa supposedly being the cradle of civilization would be well in front technically etc and more advanced. Sadly for them this is not be and not likely if this mindset is set to continue...
@@charliepearce8767 Thank you for replying. I am glad that you appreciated how I felt while I lived in Britain in the years 1950 to 1970 where I saw it all happening. It takes a thousand years to build a nation and 50 to destroy it. I lived around Newcastle upon Tyne and Chatham Dockyard where many new engineering innovations started the initiation of the British Empire. It was only a few isolated people who worked so hard in Britain to make it an engineering nation but then every one prefered the servicing vociferous professions and hence the result now in Britain and in Europe and the US all playing a financial game but they will lose the game to new engineering nations as China and India.
@@carmelpule6954 Money has no allegiance other than to itself. The same money powers that built the Anglo-Saxon empire now saw better opportunities elsewhere to set the factories and from where to spoil resources.
LOTS of Schlieren in supersonics wind tunnels. Now they do it over real aircraft in open air! www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/multimedia/imagegallery/Schlieren/index.html
It's almost ironic how at 18:55 the narrator foresees propulsion breakthroughs but at 18:11 he almost considers the aerodynamics to be solved. I guess the `boom` was a sign of progress for a few years. Now supercruise thrust is a given but aerodynamic problems keep supersonic flight unbearable.
Old school videos like this on technical subjects are far superior to nearly anything put out today. Thanks for posting!
As an aerodynamicist, this is probably the best explanation I've ever seen of how shocks move/form.
hummercj
Same here colleague! Although there are still some weird stuff regarding the appearance of some strange pressure waves in some areas, this video has great captured footage.
as an aerodynamicist, I agree with you too :) Somehow, I haven't seen this video before
Yes, it's really well explained, I'll use it in my lessons on principles of flight
This video has helped more with the understanding of drag divergence than anything else I’ve been able to find. It’s fantastic.
The last time I saw this film was in my physics class at The College of William and Mary in about 1958. Shell Oil produced quite a few excellent films about aviation in those days. Thank you for posting this.
I used to get these as 16mm films for my HS science classes, in the late '70s. This one, "Schlieren," and "Refinery Processes" were favorites. Such excellent explanations. I agree with the review that this comes from a time when documentaries truly explained things. THANK YOU for uploading this.
Your lucky...in the 70s
All I got was canned in my HS science class for asking questions .
Questions were forbidden.
Last day was the best day !
God bless you for this passionate lessons.
Must watch for aeronautical students..
So beautifully explained... just amazing!
Thanks for sharing, crucial knowledge in a sort time period and surprisingly better prepared than nowadays presentation…
This video makes visualising airflows around shock waves and shock stall so easy! I was not able to link my theory this well before.
Awesome, I always had a little trouble understanding transonic witchery, but this old video manages to explain it really well with simple demonstrations.
Thanks for the upload, had a hunt around and discovered this was made in 1969.
This is really educational, and still relevant.
Best video to explain high speed flights
Definitely didn't expect Shell, of all companies, to make a video on this subject. Even though some of their fuel derivatives power various airplanes.
the greatest video on shock wave can anyone see ever
This was from a time in United States history when documentaries actually contained information. Sadly, that era has passed.
Except that it was produced by a British subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell.
@@MrShobar Then where is the accent!?
@@Khyrid Yeah, watching all those `V` planes and hearing a yank narrate caught my attention.
@@Khyrid I have only see British types in this video.
Amazing video! Far superior than today's standards
This is an excellent video to watch if you are studying BTEC Aeronautical engineering in the UK and is very good for topic 3 of unit 48
Absolutely amazing video, far better portrayal than even Part-66 approved aircraft engineer text books.
60's engineers: "It's convenient to divide flying speeds into three ranges: subsonic speeds, transonic speeds, and supersonic speeds."
Hypersonic speeds: _maniacal laughter_
It's not really flying is it. More like falling
This is just amazing!
Thank you for uploading this Video. Has lots of very good information.
Thank you for uploading
Really neat. It was really well explained.
Great video.
Thanks.
As soon as I seen the car moving through the water I understood a bit better..
Good vid...
I've often felt the "Shock Wave" when my wife ripping money outta my wallet....
Let's go Brandon !
Scott Manley brought me here
boris4231 Same!
oh hai there he brought me here too :P
+boris4231 me too
me too
Very informative.
The only thing missing is how the sweep affects the position of the shock along the chord and span.
Anyone know more?
0MoTheG Not an aerodynamicist, but shockwaves are less severe on sharp, thin wings because they don't form as strong a bow wave, nor do they suffer as much flow separation at the rear of the wing. Remember the example of the bow wave using a car and a boat? The sharp leading edge cuts through the air better, creating less of a bow wave. A thinner wing means that the airflow over the top and bottom can be smoother, pushing back the rear shock and preventing flow separation. The problem with thin wings is that they don't generate much lift at subsonic speeds, and they don't provide much internal space for fuel and whatnot.
However by using swept wings, aerodynamicists can make a fatter wing behave AS IF it were thin and sharp because the chord (length of the aerofoil parallel to the direction of flight) is longer in relation to the wing's thickness. For example, the BAE Lightning, which essentially had rectangular wings if you discount the sweep. But by sweeping the rectangle back 60 degrees, the chord doubles in length without changing any of the other parameters of the wing.
This is why the swing wing was so popular in the 1970's - extended, the wings gave better performance at subsonic speeds, but when swept back, the same wing would perform better at transsonic and supersonic speeds because it behaved like a longer, thinner wing. The drawback, of course, is the sweeping mechanism is heavy.
+0MoTheG I think the other guy got confused. You're talking about the sweep: how the wing is swept back rather than more perpendicular to the fuselage, correct? I wondered about this too but a simple explanation I found is that if you look down vertically on the aircraft and imagine the shock-waves being produced on the aerofoil's maximum thickness, you will see something like a normal shock-wave (more perpendicular) with unspecialised wings, and with swept wings you will see something like an oblique shock-wave (small angles like those produced by sharp aerofoils). This reduces drag because a normal shockwave tends to have supersonic airflow in-front and subsonic behind it, while an oblique tends to have supersonic airflow both in front and behind it. By reducing the amount the air is slowed by (how much force it takes), you thereby reduce the amount of drag produced on the aircraft; as every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This isn't exactly the case because it's still a normal shock-wave on the wing, it's just you're looking vertically down on it. However, the amount the air is slowed by is very much related to the angle of the shockwave. If you can deter the shockwave from being perpendicular, even if it's just on one dimensional plane (from bird's-eye view) then the air will not slow as much and less drag will be felt.
There are videos on the X-1 that explain that very well.
Very little of this quality is done these days, that I can find anyway.
Where's part 1?
There is also a _Part 1_ and _Part 3_ .
very good
Top Video
They don't make tutorials like they used to.
Kerballs brought me here . . . .
Is that colour Schlieren they're using?
Good.
As I am a very old man I remember all that is shown in this video/film. This film was made in the last 20 years of the British Empire 1950-1970, where the British Engineers were no longer respected and told their children to take up social and servicing and financial and entertaining and vociferous media and political professions. Also, the British doors were opened to the immigrants from the old colonies who flocked in multitudes to Britain without having any Engineering interests but armed with the simplest domestic commercial talents including the manner in which they extorted the British by devaluing their homes to take over large areas everywhere along Britain. You should have been there in London to hear what went on at Speaker's Corner, and I shall not go into details.
Well, those countries which do not respect their engineers and start basing their economies on what was mentioned above, then the value of the monetary system is not real and it is only a financial racket that must contain a continuous running devaluing of what workers earn. This is still happening in Britain and Europe with the EU rackets going on and even the great US is suffering from this sickness. Note Brexit!
Anyway, while the British Empire lasted, it was all so very pleasant for the British, and I saw all those aircraft being developed and flown to Malta where I now live and we had to share the brunt of the British war with Germany and Italy,
The Hawker Hunter was a beautiful aircraft and on looking back, one can appreciate the unity of the British Nation and its people, back them, Now the British community feeling is all gone, and Britain and its cities, including Europe, are full of strangers, basing the national income of giving a prostituting servicing, EU political members, Tourism and dealing with millionaires, without asking how money comes about as in Monte Carlo where the local people who built Monte Carlo, had to go to the South of France and Monte Carlo is now being run by 2400 millionaires and 200 Billionaires, were entertaining them is the prime servicing economy and the engineering products, involving research and production of high-level technology is imported from distant countries to decorate a few superyachts for entertaining escorts.
When long traditional national cultures and social structures, built over 1000 years, are fast-changing..... the nation resumes to just giving domestic instinctive services to others, as that is the easiest instinctive work to do, with no tangible products, no guarantees, and not much sweat, nor responsibility involved. The financial servicing industry and immigration has curtained and destroyed the engineering industry in Britain and in Europe.
Hear Hear !
I watched a documentary last week with a native from Africa complaining how engineers and scientists in more developed countries were holding them back technically, by not sharing their experience and knowledge of technology.
I've never heard that excuse for not being able to use scientific process principles that are available to everyone on the planet.
And one would think that Africa supposedly being the cradle of civilization would be well in front technically etc and more advanced.
Sadly for them this is not be and not likely if this mindset is set to continue...
@@charliepearce8767 Thank you for replying. I am glad that you appreciated how I felt while I lived in Britain in the years 1950 to 1970 where I saw it all happening. It takes a thousand years to build a nation and 50 to destroy it. I lived around Newcastle upon Tyne and Chatham Dockyard where many new engineering innovations started the initiation of the British Empire. It was only a few isolated people who worked so hard in Britain to make it an engineering nation but then every one prefered the servicing vociferous professions and hence the result now in Britain and in Europe and the US all playing a financial game but they will lose the game to new engineering nations as China and India.
@@carmelpule6954
Money has no allegiance other than to itself.
The same money powers that built the Anglo-Saxon empire now saw better opportunities elsewhere to set the factories and from where to spoil resources.
I have just the one question- how on earth did they make this video?
LOTS of Schlieren in supersonics wind tunnels. Now they do it over real aircraft in open air! www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/multimedia/imagegallery/Schlieren/index.html
It's almost ironic how at 18:55 the narrator foresees propulsion breakthroughs but at 18:11 he almost considers the aerodynamics to be solved. I guess the `boom` was a sign of progress for a few years. Now supercruise thrust is a given but aerodynamic problems keep supersonic flight unbearable.
anyone know the name of the film ?
informative
Shibu Clement hive 😎✌️
Hola, podria alguien traducirlo al español para poder entenderlo. desde ya muchas gracias
Lo voy a considerar... la pregunta es cuanto va a tomar.
any ladd here from ma boy steve
Why am I watching this?
Indian Airforce?
zzzzzzzZZ