ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- 👉Original Video: • Who really won the jet...
👉Discord: / discord
👉 Patreon: / mcjibbin
☕Buy me a coffee!: www.buymeacoff...
📦P.O. Box info (NOT accepting ANY perishable items)
For any clothing: l'm a Men's size large
McJibbin
P.O. Box 447
Bristol, Rhode Island 02809
USA
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through TH-cam videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
#american
#mcjibbin
#americanreacts
#reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
The Brits great at inventing something, less so commercially developing it.
More like "less so having money to invest in them"
More like “less so having a government that understands it’s usefulness”
Unfortunately goes for Sport too . .
2 words, Rolls Royce.
@@user-sd3ik9rt6d your right, I just meant generally
The metal fatigue that afflicted the Comet was the result of the constant pressurisation and de-pressurisation of the fusalage. This resulted in tiny cracks forming in the corners of the squared-off windows.
They only found this out after building a big water tank into which they put a complete fusalage and put it through hundreds of cycles of pressurisation until it eventually failed.
They then re-designed the aircraft with oval windows, but by then the damage was already done,
Aha, that old myth. Whilst the Comet 1’s windows may look square from a distance, the corners are in fact rounded to help distribute stress loads in the airframe skin. This problem was already well known and de Havilland’s designers weren’t entirely stupid !
Also, there is no evidence that any cabin window failed.
When placed in a test tank and subjected to repeated pressurisation cycles, the airframe under test at Farnborough failed, not at a window, but at a panel in the roof containing am antenna/aerial.
The cause of the failure was also nothing to do with any squareness or roundness. The skin tore as a result of fractures radiating from a RIVET!
De Havilland had used a new technique using PUNCHED holes to fit rivets. These left ‘invisible’ microfractures surrounding the rivet hole. They lengthened under stress and the skin eventually tore, presumably being the cause for the loss of several Comets.
The fix was to use punched rivets as well as thicker aluminium. The windows subsequently were made more rounded to reassure the flying public further.
@@nmellor774The myth about the windows has been attributed to the use of the word ‘window’ in the official report to describe the hole in the upper fuselage where those particular aerial/antenna were fitted.
The Comet became the Mighty Hunter "Nimrod" the world's first ASW Jet Aircraft.
And that idiot Cameron cancelled its refurbishment in favour of a Boeing based system. Nimrod was unique. It could travel on 4 engines and patrol on 1. I doubt the Boeing replacement is as good.
@@colinstock325 Thought it was Thatcher that scrapped the Nimrods as well when they were technicalyl more advanced than the (cheaper) American AWAC.
@@percyprune7548 AEW Nimrod was a technical disaster.
The huge computing power needed to make it work was packed into the bomb bay and over heated also it couldn't discriminate between cars on the motorway and low flying intruders
Frank Whittle from England is regarded as the jet inventor.
Yes, he's regarded as the father of the jet engine
The UK gave repeat gave the US jet engines
They gave them much more than that. Much of the Manhattan project was based on British research (and many british scientists were part of it). The miniaturised radar was also huge.. no way they could have made proximity fuses for AA without them and they had a massive effect on the hit rate of AA.
The story of how they sent much of these is interesting in itself and worth a watch.. covered by many channels.
@@dzzopeif I remember correctly the small radar piece was the cavity magnatron given which many other pieces of tec during the tizzard mission
@@Floody77 yuup
The Tizard Mission: 75 years on by Deborah Evanson 02 December 2015
"Carrying a cargo of blueprints, prototypes and new technologies, the group travelled to the United States via Canada with the hope of sharing these innovations in exchange for assistance with the war effort." "Winston Churchill commissioned a task force to share some of Britain’s technological secrets with the US- particularly its advances in radar - in return for industrial resources to help develop these technologies at the mass scale needed for war." "Among the secrets taken across the Atlantic was a piece of hardware called a cavity magnetron - the core technology for microwave radar. Invented just a few months earlier by scientists John Randall and Harry Boot, the cavity magnetron would greatly reduce the size of radar sensors such that they could be incorporated into aircraft." "By early 1941, portable airborne radar had been developed and fitted to both American and British planes. The collaboration led to the development of other technologies which would be instrumental in the war effort." Vernon Gibson, chief scientific advisor for the Ministry of Defence, said: "The Tizard Mission, and the partnership resulting from it, showed that the way we develop technology is just as important as how we use technology,"
Immediate post war Pratt and Whitney licensed (that means paid for) the RR Nene jet engine, first tested in 1944.
There was no formal cooperation on A bombs until after the Quebec agreement, August 1943.
Cavity magnetron had been developed just a few months prior and all they had were a few hand made prototypes, it was left to Bell Labs to redesign for mass production and MIT Rad Lab to design radar to make use of it.
Proximity fuze was being used in bombs and rockets, it took two years to make it work in AA shells.
My dad was in the RAF, a navigator in bombers. He later became friends with some of the test crew for the de Havilland comet. I seem to remember him saying that the fuselage failure was blamed on some of the early models having square windows, you see on the later ones they were round. We had a picture on the wall at home when I was a boy of the comet in flight, signed by the test pilots.
Not too sure why American reactors feel the need to wear hats when they are indoors.
Here I am wearing a hat indoors in Britain
@@HunkumSpunkumI’ve had the misfortune of stumbling across a Baseball game whilst suffering from insomnia.
Needless to say, it cured it. 😂
The voice informing you that the German engine had a life span of 25 hours was the great aviator Henry 'Winkle' Brown. Who flew so many different aircraft marks, he set a record no one will ever surpass. Of all the first first generation jet powered aircraft, no one flew as many of them as he did, possibly a few exceptions he missed out on from the Soviet models....
Eric, not Henry. His book, "Wings on my Sleeve", is well worth reading.
The Comet - the problem with metal fatigue was the height it cruised at, flying high the air pressure is very light, at ground level pressue is dense. With so many take offs and landings caused the fatigue. They fell apart due to square windows, the designers didn't realise that would be a problem - that's why all airliners since have oval windows.
I used to think the same, but actually, it's a misconception that the windows were the primary cause, that has become so widespread that people understandably think it is fact.
The truth is, though the mk.1 Comet had squared windows, they still had rounded corners, and these corners are not where the fatigue cracks originated. Rather, they started at the corners of the ADF antenna cutouts, which were square, and were described in the accident report as "ADF aerial windows". It is thought that the word "windows" was picked up by the press and the misunderstanding spread from there.
It is not helped by the fact that in the accidents, the crack spread violently VIA the windows, and that such photos were widely circulated...
...And that the redesigned Comet 2 switched to completely round windows, which further cemented people's idea that it was the windows that were at fault primarily.
Rounder windows are far better in pressurised aircraft for sure, and part of the raft of redesigns to better cope with pressurisation cycles, but again, the squareness was not the main cause of the Comet disasters.
Mentour Pilot has a good video on this and it all checks out if you delve deep enough, though the window story is still all over the place. 👍
It was not so much that the outside air pressure was light, but that the fuselage was pressurise for the comfort of the passengers. The fatigue was from the constant cycle of Pressurization & Depressurization, with some design issues concentrating the problem. When the fuselage failed, usually under pressure, it tended to unzip in much the way that a balloon bursts.
The turbine blades are turned by the exhaust gases, the shaft turning the compressor blades sucking in and compssing the air.
Once the whole thing is running it is self sustaining as long as there is fuel to burn.
Yes connor you are correct, the engine on the ME262 had a life of about 20 something hours. After then the engines had to be replaced. This is one big reason that so many of the ME262s that existed could not be put into the skies in the last days of WW2.
Because the number of engines being worn out couldn't be replaced by new ones fast enough.
Yes, the Germans were unable to develop alloys for the blades to withstand the severe high temperatures in the turbines, which limited the engines lifespan..
Its not wear and tear - its metal fatigue fracturing and failures due to extra stresses and cycles prevalent in jet style aircraft because of the greater stresses and speeds and altitudes they fly at. What the detailed causes of MF are were not apparent in detail and indeed the Comet accidents catalysed the world's aircraft companies to research and understand it. It was almost a matter of luck that DH had made some design detail in the Comet that helped MF appear earlier whereas Boeing (the main jet competitor at the time) had chosen some different approaches which by pure luck minimised the issues the Comet suffered. Once they were identified the Comet design was amended and went on to fly well and safely, but the commercial success at the level it deserved was denied at as the Boeing 707 went past it in the 203 years the Comet was being upgraded. In a way analogous to the way the UK caught up and went ahead of the Germans in WW2 with the Meteor despite the Germans having a 2 year lead in the early 40s. Had those Comet crashes not happened DH would have sold hundreds of the Comets but the only jet readily available until 1958 was then the Boeing 707 - and the rest is history!
At least the 707 was a really good aircraft. Further, it's surprising how few people seem to read the comments as there's loads of folk identifying the windows as the problem. Which simply perpetuates the misunderstanding.
I’m guessing a big added stress compared to non jet airliners is the constant pressurisation and depressurisation on the cabin as well as much more extreme changes in temperatures at those altitudes. A really different prospect compared to say a DC3 I’d imagine.
"It's complicated"
Ahh, the answer to ohh so many questions which people think are simple.
Compression crushing very similar, if you want to try and find out what compressed air feels like get a cycle pump put your finger partially over where the air comes out and pump you will find out quickly what happens to compressed or crushed.
Minute 18.00 They knew about metal fatigue, but what they didn't know was the effect of metal fatigue on a monococque pressurised fuselage when multiple windows with square corners were introduced.
The video is wrong the first RAF squadron to use Meteors was 616 Squad. not 161
Fun fact, the number of the beast is actually 616 not 666
The swept back wings, so the story goes, came about by chance. The wings were originally straight out but the weight of the engines altered the centre of gravity. Rather than redesign the whole fuselage they swept the wings so that the Centre of Gravity remained as calculated.
The original Jumo 004 engine had a service life of around 100 hours. However, as the Reich was lacking many strategic raw materials, the engine had to be extensively redesigned in order to save nickel and molybdenum in particular. This not only led to a loss of engine performance, but also reduced the service life due to increased wear on parts subject to high thermal stress down to 25 hours. The design changes due to the lack of raw materials also set the Me 262 program back by 1 to 1.5 years.
Principal of a cyclinder engine and a gas turbine are the same i.e. Suck-Squeeze-Bang-Blow.
suck-squeeze-bang-blow lol thank you that is the kind of simple explanation i need sometimes 😅😇
@@McJibbin You need that on a t-shirt.
The Comet crashed because the windows were originally square, this caused metal fatigue around the windows. The solution was windows with rounded edges. As military aircraft don't usually have windows for the passengers, this was an unknown risk.
I used to think the same, but actually, it's a misconception that the windows were the primary cause, that has become so widespread that people understandably think it is fact.
The truth is, though the mk.1 Comet had squared windows, they still had rounded corners, and these corners are not where the fatigue cracks originated. Rather, they started at the corners of the ADF antenna cutouts, which were square, and were described in the accident report as "ADF aerial windows". It is thought that the word "windows" was picked up by the press and the misunderstanding spread from there.
It is not helped by the fact that in the accidents, the crack spread violently VIA the windows, and that such photos were widely circulated...
...And that the redesigned Comet 2 switched to completely round windows, which further cemented people's idea that it was the windows that were at fault primarily.
Rounder windows are far better in pressurised aircraft for sure, and part of the raft of redesigns to better cope with pressurisation cycles, but again, the squareness was not the main cause of the Comet disasters.
Mentour Pilot has a good video on this and it all checks out if you delve deep enough, though the window story is still all over the place. 👍
My understanding is the early comets had square cornered windows which were the site where metal fatigue started try it yourself, keepbending a piece of metal with a sharp notch then one with a curve. Later windows were rounded, the likes of the DC8 windows were rounded and didn't suffer failure. Comet had lost trust, Boeing and Douglas got the market.
I used to think the same, but actually, it's a misconception that the windows were the primary cause, that has become so widespread that people understandably think it is fact.
The truth is, though the mk.1 Comet had squared windows, they still had rounded corners, and these corners are not where the fatigue cracks originated. Rather, they started at the corners of the ADF antenna cutouts, which were square, and were described in the accident report as "ADF aerial windows". It is thought that the word "windows" was picked up by the press and the misunderstanding spread from there.
It is not helped by the fact that in the accidents, the crack spread violently VIA the windows, and that such photos were widely circulated...
...And that the redesigned Comet 2 switched to completely round windows, which further cemented people's idea that it was the windows that were at fault primarily.
Rounder windows are far better in pressurised aircraft for sure, and part of the raft of redesigns to better cope with pressurisation cycles, but again, the squareness was not the main cause of the Comet disasters.
Mentour Pilot has a good video on this and it all checks out if you delve deep enough, though the window story is still all over the place. 👍
The fundamental problem isn’t so much the engine as the propeller itself. For one thing it creates drag which limits speed. More importantly it moves much faster than the aircraft so its tips become supersonic (and therefore inefficient) long before the aircraft. The compressor of a centrifugal flow engine was an impeller which pushed air sideways: think of a really old-fashioned hairdryer with the air intake on the side. Axial flow engine uses a turbine or turbines as the compressor and therefore draws air through in a straight line like a modern hairdryer. The essence of the gas turbine is that the hot gas turns turbines which are connected to the compressor causing it to spin. Despite appearances the Me 262 is not regarded as having swept wings and I’m rather shocked that the IWM repeat this common fallacy. The 262’s wings were swept at 18° to control the aircraft’s centre of gravity; swept wing aircraft must have a wing sweep of at least 30° if they are to delay the compressibility effects which prevent high speed flight. The Comet’s issues stemmed from its extremely light design which was pressurised for long periods of high altitude flight, something that no previous aircraft had attempted. It wasn’t wear and tear! Metal fatigue is the phenomenon of metal slowly weakening and cracking as it’s put under repeated loads; it simply hadn’t been seen before. Had de Havilland not experienced the problem Boeing would have done.
As the air cones into the air intake each fan compresses the air it receives. Thus, by the time it reaches the last compressor blade you have a high density compressed amount of air.
8:47 It's not true that the swept-back wings were put in for better performance. This was a side effect of installing swept-back wings to correct a problem with the centre of gravity.
The History Chap is a history channel worth checking out
Propeller aircraft start having problems as the propeller tips approach the speed of sound. I'm no expert, but I think it's to do with shockwaves which are many and complicated.
Also, the blades reach a point where they are offering more resistance to forward motion than thrust, this is why very high speed dives would often result in the loss of the propeller / engine / aircraft.
Max speed for any propeller aircraft is around 500 MPH. Blades can go supersonic and reduce efficiency big time. Even using turbo jets.
Trike undercarriage was already used elsewhere. (Not possible with a gurt great propeller up front.)
Wings on Me262 was necessary simply because engines where heavier than expected. Hence wings "swept) to move them backwards to restore C of G. Aerodynamic "advantages" unexpected benefit. But small ( if any) at the speeds reached.
Connor's been on a plane, many times in his own words...presumably, this same aircraft having flown successfully once, he identified as a safe bet for his further excursions ! 🤣
It was a good question about limited prop power as you go faster as you were heading down the correct way of thinking. Essentially, as the speed of the aircraft increases the props will bespinning faster than the aircraft's travelling speed, this means that the prop tips start to go sonic before the aircraft which can be particularly fatal for the prop life (as in they decide that an early detachment from the a/c to be free in the breeze is the best solution :P). There was an aircraft designed with the idea of supersonic props though, tested by the US in the 1960s I think that was nicknamed the Thunderscreech. It did not go well
Thought I'd also add the metal wear was specifically the windows, they put square windows in the original airframe which caused metal fatigue to amplify on the corners due to the pressurised cabin. This, in turn led to the metal fracturing when the pressure difference was greatest, i.e. at altitude, causing the aircraft to split in half. the reason for the square windows initially was so the aircraft windows looked different to ship windows from what I remember. The reason it hadn't been experienced before though was the huge differential in pressure between the cabin and the exterior from being the first pressurised cabin civilian aircraft to fly that high.
The Comet was the first, but revealed technical challenges, which later manufacturers like Boeing were then able to avoid.
The second mouse gets the cheese.
That will happen when the first mouse has no experience of mass producing all metal aircraft.
The first comments had square windows and with the pressure going up and down crack started from the corners of the windows and ended up breaking the plane apart, that is why the widows on all commercial aircraft are oval or round.
Crikey Connor yer gonna av a ponytail soon mate 😂🧢
Yes I'm full of envy hahaha 🙈🤫🤣
There were a couple of axial flow jets under development by the British, but not put into service during the war.
Those responsible for jet engine development realised that the axial flow engine needed much further refinement and therefore opted to go with the simpler, and much faster to get into production and service, centrifugal jet engine, the axial flow engine that had been developed in Britain at the time, the Metrovick F.2, was eventually to lead to the Armstrong Siddeley Saphire engine of the late 1940’s.
Hay Connor, enjoy your content. However, noticed the name Captain Eric "Winkle" Brown RN he is a legend! A Royal Navy officer and test pilot who flew 487 different types of aircraft and the first person to take off and land a Jet from a carrier. I would recommend his story.
Amazing to think it was less than 40yrs between the first manpowered flight to the jet engine. Technology at the highest level.
Until the comet, there really was no good data on large, jet powered all metal aircraft being pressurised and depressurise over time - and the squarish windows started tiny cracks near the corners. Problem fixed and the Comet became the very successful Nimrod Maritime Patrol aircraft that flew up until 2011.
Actually we flew a jet plane in 1941, The Whittle Power Jets W1, well before the ME262 and the Gloster Meteor. As for understanding jet engines, google it and more blades compress the air in stages. Takes a bit to understand but so simple really...
What amazes me is how little millenials know.
That's often due to lack of experience, but in my time, I've seen middle-aged teachers telling their class that gravity is due to rotation of the earth or that birds are not animals. In fact, I found supporting kids in science classes to be an exercise in the firm biting of the tongue. I could ask a hundred random so-called boomers how a jet engine works, and I would guess the majority would not know where to begin. Only when we begin to investigate do we learn these things.
I mean, I’m a millennial and I’m middle-aged. Lack of knowledge seems pretty bad across all generations tbh, just different lacks. The lack of media literacy of Gen X and Baby Boomers has become very apparent the past few days in the UK, for example.
Each compressor stage increases the air speed and also the air density (pressure) - so its high speed and high pressure by the combustion chamber. The turbine stages behind the combustion chamber drives the compressors being turned by the hot exhaust flow
Put far more simply than my effort.
7.15 In simple terms the compressor was initially rotated by a starter motor, compressing the air. Fuel was injected and the air/fuel mixture was ignited. The resulting expanding gases rushed out of the tailpipe providing forward motion.
The rotation of the compressor was maintained by a set of vanes attached to the rear end of the main shaft in the flow of the exhaust gases.
There are Meteors today with original engines still flying. Also the Comet was the first pressurized passenger aircraft and initially had square windows..! Hence the fuselage wear and tear.
As gasses, like air, get squeezed both their pressure and temperature go up. This makes combustion more efficient, but the increased pressure also creates a force preventing more air being added. The compressor is spun by the turbine in the exhaust to provide a counteracting force to push more air into the engine core. A multi-stage compressor can get up to higher pressures with a smaller profile (so less drag).
Should review the advanced German jet the Horton 229, a stealth flying wing that for 40 years was still top secret.
"Crush" the air is a confusing term. The air is being compressed on its way through the turbine compressor section where it will be squeezed down so you end up with a very small volume that contains a lot of Oxygen so when this air reaches the combustion chamber where the fuel is injected, you can inject more fuel for the volume of air which will decide the power you get out of the jet engine.
The biggest problem they had adopting these jet engines in airplanes was that they in the beginning did not fully appreciate the importance of the wing shape when creating a faster and more maneuverable aircraft.
Luckily, Hitler did not appreciate the importance of having gotten the ME-262 into service only as a fighter from the beginning.
Hitler strangely rarely appreciated the importance of new inventions. He also did not support the production of the first real assault riffle in the beginning.
Americans should always remember that all the technology for jet engines and missile technology originally did not come from America but from the ruins of Europe.
About flying today, it has never been safer, but that being said, the recent problems at Boeing clearly show that no matter the technological advances, a corrupted business culture of greed where the focus is purely on profit and shareholders can bring even the most experienced and esteemed companies into trouble.
British gave the USA the jet engine, just like they gave the Wright brothers airframe design in the form of gliders. Germany gave them rockets. They were given steam engines, petrol engines, diesel engines etc. The USA gave the world litigation, the wright brothers were experts in this field spending much time trying to stop others developing their own aircraft. All the above is available if you research.
Post war RR sold the Nene engine to Pratt and Whitney.
Film, audio recording, light bulb perfected, Triode, escalator, airplane, assembly line applied to auto production, FM radio, alternating current/AC, broadcast radio, electronic television, Ferris wheel, first US patent for radar granted 1934 (Wattson Watt began experiments in 1935 following a MoD request for a "death ray"), klystron tube (valve), Hughes tri cone drill bit, Houdry process for catalytic cracking of oil and Salk polio vaccine.
Once granted, the patent was published and became available worldwide. It lapsed in 1934 when Whittle found himself unable to afford the renewal fee of £5.
The First Patent - Sir Frank Whittle - inventor of the jet engine page
GLAD you called Von Braun brother I certainly wouldn't have done, he was a Major in the Gestapo and responsible personally for the deaths of over 15000 slave workers. RE the DH Comet the fact of metal fatigue was virtually unknown until until De Havillands own investigation ino the crashes and upon finding the cause published it world wide along with their research results, ultimately benefiting amongst others...the USA.
Maybe if a company that had mass produced all metal aircraft had been given the contract it would not have happened.
Von Braun wasn't in the Gestapo but in the SS. And he wasn't personally responsible for the deaths of thousands of slave workers. His SS membership was opportunistic to carry out his rocket science work. He also was opportunistic with regards of slave labour and might even have been involved in demanding disciplinarians against sabotaging slave workers. It could never been fully proven how deep he was involved with slave labour around the V2 program but he certainly wasn't an angel accepting the situation in order to move on with his rocket projects.
Robert Hutchings Goddard (October 5, 1882 - August 10, 1945)[1] was an American engineer, professor, physicist, and inventor who is credited with creating and building the world's first liquid-fueled rocket, which was successfully launched on March 16, 1926.[2] By 1915 his pioneering work had dramatically improved the efficiency of the solid-fueled rocket, signaling the era of the modern rocket and innovation. He and his team launched 34 rockets between 1926 and 1941, achieving altitudes as high as 2.6 km (1.6 mi) and speeds as fast as 885 km/h (550 mph).[3]
You should watch a video of “winkle” Brown’s experiences - what a legend!
Fun fact, Hitler drew the initial design for the Beetle motor car before handing it off to Porsche. Yes, just like Napoleon, Hitler was too ambitious, but he had to be. If you want a different take on History, go watch Europa, the last battle.
necessity is the mother of all inventions.
Wear and tear, metal fatigue, in pressurised aircraft was an unknown. The problem with the Comet was square windows. With the metal flexing slightly under cabin pressure, after a relatively short time cracks started to form around the corners of the windows. The remedy was round windows. No corners, no weak point.
The first operational RAF jet fighter was the Meteor, in 1944.....
The Comet’s metal fatigue was caused by fitting square windows - the corners were a weak spot, attracking splits. That’s why airliner windows are round
Myth.
Ok before I watch this....Frank Whittle? Good stuff hoping for the Komet, good to see the ME-262 & Gloster Meteor. They started it all. x
not a stupid question - when props start to spin faster the tips will go supersonic, which creates a bunch of issues with turbulence and the props do start to get into the danger zone of failing and literally falling apart
Connor, it's actually my hat - Dad
Your Rocket hero was considered a war criminal in the UK.
Allied war criminals also existed, and never had been punished.
The Germans didn’t have access to chromium which meant their turbine blades which were made of normal steel as apposed to chrome steel didn’t have a long service life. Although they lacked the power, the British engines were easier to produce and maintain.
It is the combustion in the engine that turns the turbine shaft which is attached to the compressor blades. As more air is sucked in and compressed it increases the power of the turbine which in turn sucks in more air. Modern engines have multiple shafts inside of each other in order to run the different parts of the turbine rotors at their optimum rotating speed which is just below the speed of sound.
Was up at Duxford with the Imperial War Museum last year.There was a Heinkel 162 being worked on. The volunteer showed me the oil drained from the engine. He reckoned it was original luftwaffe oil.
The fastest propellor driven aircraft was the XF-84H Thunderscreech, which used a jet engine to power a propellor, like a modern turboprop engine, but this aircraft could go supersonic, with the caveat that it produced over 200db of sound, since the tips of the blades are constantly breaking the sound barrier, and the torque from the engine wanted to make the aircraft do a perpetual barrel roll. They only flew it a dozen times before the program was cancelled.
The Brits got them too not just the US and SU
Soviet Union?
Never seen it abbreviated like that if so.
Early on in the wsr the RAF asjed fir the development of a fighter capable of reaching supersonic speed. They approached a small aircraft design company to see if this was possible. After the war as part of sharing our research with our American allies and they with us we handed over everything that had been done to this point. When our people went to the States guess what they were denied access to any research on supersonic fly. When you broke the sound barrier. Your plabe was launched exactly as ours would of been launched it's shape was exactly the same as the British design. Doesn't take much to realise where the idea came from.
Had the engine for that aircraft been built ?
@nickdanger3802 from the documentary I watched, the engine was in its final development at the end of the war. Wish I could remember the program. Be about 7/8 years ago when I saw sit
@@listerofsmegv987pevinaek5 Miles M52
Connor, just use the simple rule if you think America made/invented it... its often British first
Film, audio recording, light bulb perfected, Triode, escalator, airplane, assembly line applied to auto production, FM radio, alternating current/AC, broadcast radio, electronic television, Ferris wheel, first US patent for radar granted 1934 (Wattson Watt began experiments in 1935 following a MoD request for a "death ray"), klystron tube (valve), Hughes tri cone drill bit, Houdry process for catalytic cracking of oil and Salk polio vaccine.
Propellers 'fly' like a conventional aerofoil, close to the speed of sound conventional aerofoils shock stall, & won't work any more, jet engines also have the same problem the airflow through the engine needs to be below the speed of sound but the jet blast doesn't, supersonic jets usually have intakes that restrict the speed of flow down. but to achieve high speeds often an afterburner is used [ a rocket]
The *effects* of metal fatigue had been known since around the 1830s from mine engineering, and was progressively investigated as those effects began to proliferate on railway engines and their tracks.
Strangely, little work appears to have derived from metal ships - presumably because if metal ships failed they were lost. Yet ships always had round portholes...so...
The science of repetitive strain causing metal failure was well known by the mid 1900s. But the primarily metal aeroplane was only common as of the mid 1930s, so a lot of learning was squeezed into the next 20 years, and I am sure that many aircraft were lost to metal fatigue.
The Comet was such a newsworthy item that its losses had an immediate effect.
There was still no ability to *predict* failure until 1961, and so designs up until then had to be tested. The Comet's square windows were [with hindsight] not adequately tested beforehand.
0:03 paused for the immediate, regardless like - as I always do..
I dont know how you know - but you always know which videos I would like to see, so I watch ‘em with ya.
Keep on it Mcmate 🙏🏻
It was metal fatigue of the body contributed to by square windows creating higher stress points. Windows were rounded and the problem fixed but by then trust was gone and Boeing (with round windows as well) was on the rise.
Aircraft before and during WWII did not fly for long enough to get metal fatigue. On top of that, Pressurised fuselages were only used in one aircraft before then, an American Bomber. The problem the early Comets suffered from was not the amount of time it was flying, it was the constant changes in air pressure, every flight the fuselage would be pressurised and depressurised every time it took off and landed. At that time, a flight from London to South Africa would need multiple stops. So the fuselage was expanding and contracting many times during its journey. All of this was new to Aviation. The original Comet had square windows, fatigue crept from the corners. It is why all aircraft now have round windows. Of course Boeing missed all of these problems as just by luck they put round windows in, but at least the doors didn't come off the Comet!
Hi! Connor. Metal fatigue expt: take a paperclip, bend it & straighten it repeatedly. It will break and if you touch the broken ends they will be hot. In practice fatigue happens slowly, then propagates at the speed of sound (in that material) BANG! oops!
The Germans were phenomenal engineers, there is no other word for it. They were ahead on *everything*, EXCEPT, crucially & fortunately, the nuclear bomb. It was Hitler's flawed oversight getting in the way that did for them. Which is, in my view, poetic justice.
The British jet was patented in 1930 by Frank Whittle. The British were first. Also, all the early research for the atom bomb was done by the British and the secrets given to the Americans. The atom was split many years before by the British.
With regards to the limits of the propellor driven aircraft, this was explored by the Americans when they created the "Thunderscreech". But to put it simply the limitation comes in the fact that the turning speed of the propellor reaches such speeds that the first blade creates a vaccum in its wake and it gets to the point where the second propellor blade moving at such a high speed actually passes through vaccum created by the first blade, thus negating thrust. Also the tips of the propellor blades go supersonic which also can cause problems.
Hitler distanced himself from the term Blitzkrieg in November 1941 (when a positional war had begun on the Eastern Front): he had "never used the word Blitzkrieg, because it is a completely stupid word."
The Comet was for the day very big, pressurised and doing a lot more flying than any military bomber (which had pretty short service lives). So it was pretty much the first time such an aircraft did enough flying for metal fatigue to become a problem. The problem was twofold, a hole cut for an antenna had square corners (this was the “window” that failed, not the ones you can look out of), and they’d anyway built the Comet 1 far too light (because they didn’t have enough power from the engines). Contemporary accounts said the airframe flexed a great deal. And by the time they’d redesigned it, the world had moved on.
Today Britain’s position in the aviation industry is more monetarily valuable than ever before. This is because our companies shrank to concentrate on the expensive parts; avionics, systems, wings, engines, undercarriage. So some good came from that early experience!
The The Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II is a single-seat, twin-turbofan, straight-wing, subsonic attack aircraft developed by Fairchild Republic for the United States Air Force. In service since 1977, it is named after the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, but is commonly referred to as the "Warthog" or simply "Hog". Looks to the The Heinkel He 162 similar but instead of a single central mounted engine the A- 10 has two side mounted engines. Peace out.
Yes you would have jet travel today without the war. Whittle patented his first design in 1932. 7 YEARS before the war began in Europe.
Would it happened as quickly? Now THAT is the real question. I suspect no WWII would have held Jet engine tech back by a decade, maybe even two. But it WOULD have still happened.
Yes war accelerates technological progress, but progress does not stop if there is no war.
EDIT: And no, the Germans were not ahead of their time. Either the Brits or the US could have made something similar to the V1. Its just they did not need to waste the vast amount of resources on a desperation weapon that essentially achieved nothing as they were not losing.... Instead they concentrated (mostly) on sensible weapons and designs that could be mass produced.
If anything the British and Americans were actually MORE advanced than the Germans, especially in areas it really mattered. Its just the German Big Cat tanks and wunderwaffe weapons LOOK impressive.
The Cavity Magnetron (a British Invention passed over to the US during the Tizard mission) however gave the US and the British a lead in RADAR technology they NEVER LOST. The US development of a proximity fuse made US and British anti aircraft fire in the last years of the war exponentially superior to the Axis. Advances in analogue computers gave the UK and US access to advanced fire control systems, especially for their ships, that literally crapped over anything Germany ever made.
I could go on, but this idea the Germans were hyper advanced is a myth that NEEDS to die already. They were not. Don't get me wrong, ,they came up with some seriously capable equipment, but they were not so far ahead of their time as many claim.
Its like the fecking Horten 229 flying wing 'stealth' Bomber. The fecking thing never flew except as an unpowered glider (and proved almost uncontrollable). When Lockheed Martins Skunkworks (you know, people who have actually BUILT working flying wing stealth aircraft) decided to build and test an accurate (unpowered) replica based on the original blueprints, they found it had the stealth characteristics of precisely zero.
But people hold this failure up as 'Germany being ahead of its time' while conveniently ignoring the fact people had been experimenting with flying wing designs since the fecking 1920's!
18:38 if you want to learn more about the Comet’s problems, I highly recommend watching ‘Disaster Breakdown’s video ‘What really caused the Comet crashes’ here on TH-cam.
Tl;dr. The metal fatigue was caused by pressurisation cycles. The Comet had a service height much higher than previous passenger planes, where the air was thinner and gave less drag, so the inside needed to be pressurised so the passengers and crew didn’t die yet could still move about. Each time the inside was pressurised, any microfractures in the metal got pulled on and could spread a little. The moment they joined up, the metal would fail along that line, and with the high pressure difference it would… uh… ‘spontaneously disassemble’ as they say.
6:49 It increase the quantity of air flowing through the nozzle. More air, higher density.
Didn't Von Braun have a American school named after him but it was scrapped a few years later because England had to mention the war crimes he committed during ww2, forced labour and the bombing of London with his v2s, still think he's your brother?
The metal fatigue in the Comet was due to the pressurising/depressurising cycle I believe.
The Comet's structural metal fatigue arose from the original squared shape of the passenger windows which encouraged cracking and eventual failure. Circular windows solved this problem.
Jet engines would eventually have replaced propeller engines but war speeded up that process. The same with rockets.
Wikipedia is usually the source for information on most questions like how jet engines work. And TH-cam of course.
The resentment felt by the British towards America after the war when America reneged on a number of technology sharing agreements,coupled with a lack of flexibility over war “loan” repayments (when the Marshall plan was providing billions to rebuild Germany) led to the sale of advanced jet engine technology to the soviets,negating any advantage America may have gained in the air. (British government not people)
"Over the whole period from March 1941 to September 1945, the balance in favour of the United States in the mutual aid books24 was in round terms about $21,000 millions. But by the settlement of 1945 Britain was required to pay no more than $650 millions, or £162 millions sterling."
page 547 British War Economy
Marshall Plan aid 1948-52
Britain 2.7 billion USD, West Germany 1.7 billion
United States: War Loans to UK
HL Deb 27 May 2002 vol 635 cc126-7WA127WA
§Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they owe money to the United States Government as a result of World War Two debt: if so, how much is owed; when it will be repaid; and what representation they have made to the United States Government concerning the debt being cancelled. [HL4422]
§Lord McIntosh of Haringey Under a 1945 agreement, the United States Government lent the United Kingdom a total of $4,336 million (around £1,075 million at 1945 exchange rates) in war loans. These loans were taken out under two facilities:
(i) a line of credit of $3,750 million (around £930 million at 1945 exchange rates); and
(ii) a lend-lease loan facility of $586 million (around £145 million at 1945 exchange
rates), which represented the settlement with the United States for lend-lease and reciprocal aid and for the final settlement of the Financial claims of each government against the other arising out of the conduct of the Second World War.
Under the agreement the loans would be repaid in 50 annual instalments commencing in 1950. However, the agreement allowed deferral of annual payments of both principal and interest if necessary because of prevailing international exchange rate conditions and the level of the United Kingdom's foreign currency and gold reserves. The United Kingdom has deferred payments on six occasions. Repayment of the war loans to the United States Government should therefore he completed on 31 December 2006, subject to the United Kingdom not choosing to exercise its option to defer repayment.
As at 31 March 2001, principal of $346,287,953 (£243,573,154 at the exchange rate on that day) was outstanding on the loans provided by the United States Government in 1945. The Government intend to meet their obligations under the 1945 agreement by repaying the United States Government in full the amounts lent in 1945 and so no representation has been made.
Not complicated at all. The only really important date is when the a/c becomes operational. Having one is all well and good but being unable to give any to the Squadrons makes it a moot point.
Necessity is the Mother of Invention !
Technology often leaps during war because it gets government investment, but there’s no inherent reason why that can’t happen in peace too. It just requires a change in both fiscal and monetary policy to alter how government demand is implemented.
Addendum: a reason this is a little tricky is because the neoclassical economic models governments and banks use are *equilibrium* models that just tell you what dynamic state the economy will settle into if nothing changes (like technology). It makes accurately valuing and planning innovation funding really hard. But all that’s a problem of our modelling, not a fundamental economic issue of peacetime.
We gave you guys radar and jet engi6s
Radar was patented in the US the year before Wattson Watt began experiments following a MoD request for a study on the feasibility of a "death ray".
Post war Pratt and Whitney licensed (that means paid for) the RR Nene jet engine.
The reason you need multiple compressor stages is to keep accelerating (forcing) the air into the compressor to maximise the compression. A single compressor disc, while useful in a relatively small device, cannot provide the mass of air at the compression needed for a jet engine, which is an avaricious beast. Remember also, the compressor discs are turned by being connected by a shaft to the turbine (again, usually multiple stage) that spins in the exhaust flow. This is why they are known as jet or gas turbine engines. It is the connection between the turbine (in the hot exhaust) and the compressor that is the genius of the concept.
There is a belief that the rapid success of the Benelux and French campaigns lulled Hitler into thinking he was a military genius, and that Russia was a mere trifle. The thinking goes that if France had been a more difficult campaign, the Nazis might have built up their strengths better before having a crack at Russia.
Eric “winkle” Brown an extremely interesting person on aviation
An interesting video. I come from a small Hampshire town in the UK, called Farnborough, which has a statue of Frank Whittle, a stones throw from my house. Farnborough is known for it's international airshow held every 2 years. The last one being last week. I can see much of the flying display from my garden, although the display is severely curtailed now due to changes that came about as a result of the Shoreham airshow disaster. My favourite is always the Spitfire with the gorgeous sound of it's Rolls Royce Merlin engines. The RAE, see the test pilot speaking, as it once was is in Farnborough too but is now a commercial airport albeit a smallish one.
the ware and tear was caused by its altitude jets need less oxygen than piston planes this means can fly much higher but they have to be pressurized this causes the fuselage to expand and shrink again causing metal fatigue above ten thousand feet the air is very thin most people would not survive more than fifteen minutes with out the plane being pressurized most modern aircraft fly around thirty six thousand feet the exception being the concord that flew at sixty thousand feet this was partly to do with noise pollution from its sonic boom and its high speed reducing its chance of colliding with other air craft a safety feature in modern planes is oxygen mask in case of decompression to see how metal fatigue happens take a thin strip of metal then bend it one way then back again keep doing this eventual the metal will split and break
The Gloster Co. entered the war with bi planes - the Gladiator and left with the Meteor
it is probably spelled _Gloucester_
@@embreis2257 They changed the spelling to "Gloster" in 1926. This was due to foreigners like Americans, struggling with pronounciation.
Who really won the jet race? No, it's not complicated. Germany did. Simple fact! Just as well for the Allies that Hitler threw away the fruits of victory.
The Nazi’s developed the first production jet fighter, the ME-262,but, hitler insisted on turning it into a bomber instead of staying with its original purpose as a fighter‼️That decision delayed its development and deployment until later in the war‼️By the time it finally reached the fighter squadrons, it was too late to make a decisive difference‼️👀👀👀👀
Frank Whittle is the father of the jet engine. He patented his jet engine in 1930 and is officially regarded as the inventor, not the Germans.
I think you're quite right, vis Hitler's ego....he may have started the war, but he also lost it!
Guess who really won the jet race, the Japanese! They had state of the art jet aircraft hidden underground. The problem was that they had no fuel.
I don't think actual events had any effect on Hitler. He was just straight up a narcissist from the start. His ego meant he could do no wrong in his eyes, when things went wrong it was someone else's fault. We still use miles in the UK, we have not switched to kilometres. So it's miles per hour still for us. Metal fatigue is not simple wear & tear, but more subtle metal damage which is almost invisible.
Wartime aircraft hardly lasted long enough to develop this problem, nor did they fly so high & fast, which largely caused it. It also took X rays to see much of it in the metal.
Just a quick question that is often brought up in Britain. What is the nationality of someone from your country called?
An American can come from Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Peru etc..
A North American is Canadian, Mexican and you, so what are you?
You have a nation but no name for your nationality.
You colonised a country, so are you just colonials.
Please help
To ease your troubled mind you can refer to citizens of the United States of Ameria as Yanks, like the other fook wits on ewe toob.
whittle went to school in my home town of Leamington Spa
Having Square windows effected the first Comets ....
13:32 Yay for Miles per 👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
My two favourtie German WW2 jets just don't get any airtime. The Horten Ho 229 and the Arado Ar 234. Disgraceful.
On the comet airliner, everyone thinks the problem was the square windows but this was largely dis-info. The problem was just the designed thickensses of metal in certain places. Airlines just hadn't gone through this kind of stress test before. Everyone learned from them.
The jet engine, just another british invention! 👌