Is This The Airplane Of The Future?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 109

  • @julianquinn6101
    @julianquinn6101 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Absolutely incredible video!
    All of your vids are top notch, totally deserve hundreds of thousands of views!

  • @jacksonthecat7
    @jacksonthecat7 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I'm watching this before school and have to go but these vids are super high quality for somebody with 1.3k subs!

  • @gonorrheaplayz
    @gonorrheaplayz 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I’m a huge fan of your videos dude, you have insane video quality bro

    • @plane_nerd
      @plane_nerd  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thx man I appreciate it

    • @goodson77784
      @goodson77784 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      gonorrhea lmfao

  • @angelinashcherbakova1568
    @angelinashcherbakova1568 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I've been looking for exactly a channel like yours and this is amazing!!!!!!

  • @alex630710
    @alex630710 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    The Bombardier BWB is gorgeous

  • @lflint3278
    @lflint3278 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    The aliens never gave us permission to use the flying wing commercially.

  • @Kopernicus67
    @Kopernicus67 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Makes sense. Fuselage and wings share same duties, internal capacity, fuel and lift generation all in the same package.

  • @old.not.too.grumpy.
    @old.not.too.grumpy. 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Your forgetting concorde, which, while being a conventional tube plane, did look radically different to every other commercial jet

  • @cheeseburgersarecool6600
    @cheeseburgersarecool6600 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    production is important and the current design of aircraft allows for easy manufacturing
    major parts like wings can be built in separate facilities which speeds up the process of building it

    • @caribbb
      @caribbb 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      True that. Also blended wing or flying wings can’t be easily stretched to make higher and lower capacity versions.

  • @raptorsean1464
    @raptorsean1464 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

    I want $49 "wanna get away" airline fares to come back. 😃 So let's do it.

    • @cookingwithjohn4966
      @cookingwithjohn4966 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Southwest for a one way ticket at $49

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Used to work for Northrop. We had designs for flying wing airliners. These were never pushed forward because the aerodynamic advantages never outweighed other disadvantages. The ideal flying wing airliner would house the passengers in the wing. The wing thickness to make this happen would wipe out all aerodynamic advantage of a wing unless the aircraft flew so slow that no one would want to fly.
    Boeing investigated building a blended wing airliner to replace the 747 and could not find a design that was better the 747.
    People keep on looking at flying and blended wings and keep finding it doesn't work.

  • @melainekerfaou8418
    @melainekerfaou8418 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You've pretty much summarized all the main issues: pressurization, evacuation, centering and stability, roller-coaster ride for passengers seated far from the middle. There's also cargo compatibility, jet bridge compatibility, engine maintenance, absence of windows for passengers, complexity of deriving variant designs.
    If that's not bad enough, the nail in the coffin is probably that the current design is now mostly set in stone through the way certification processes and regulations are written. When you see how long it's been for Boeing to certify the MAX 10 and 777x when they are only incremental designs, I can't imagine how hard it would be to get funding for a BWB project when certification requires basically to get the FAA and/or JAA to agree to rewrite half the rules beforehand.

    • @bondgabebond4907
      @bondgabebond4907 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      More reasons I don't fly. One thing the flying wing has in common with current passenger aircraft is that when it crashes, everyone gets cooked.

  • @Geoffr524
    @Geoffr524 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Something like the Boeing Sonic Cruiser would be a great compromise between a flying wing and a flying tube.
    It would also be safer for emergency deplaning, and easier boarding. This plane operates just under the speed of sound.

  • @MrBloodSacrifice
    @MrBloodSacrifice 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    But will the seats be cheaper?

    • @plane_nerd
      @plane_nerd  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Most likely, yes because if airlines have to spend significantly less on fuel costs, those savings will be passed on to consumers as well.

    • @Lethal_Spoon
      @Lethal_Spoon 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      depends how greedy they are

  • @hamzgamer-s4r
    @hamzgamer-s4r 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    New sub❤

  • @bunkie2100
    @bunkie2100 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    There is a long, detailed explanation as to why the BWB will not be viable. Let me summarize it in a single sentence: the manufacturing difficulties and the limits it places on a design being flexible enough to easily be sized for specific markets means that it is economically non-viable. Plus, you really don’t want to sit very far from the roll center of the aircraft unless you have a supply of barf bags handy.

  • @snarkmark2806
    @snarkmark2806 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    If anything happens with the computer ,even a hiccup, everyone is dead. The flying wing is inherently unstable. The flying wing bomber was created for stealth. You don’t need that in commercial applications.

    • @gort8203
      @gort8203 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I'm not a fan of this blended wing/body design, but it is not a flying wing. First of all a flying wing is not necessarily unstable, it just has a very narrow range of CG where it is stable, along with less control authority than a conventional configuration. I would not wish to fly one for fun. The B-2 is obviously digital flight control so it can do without static stability and still handle normally for the pilot.
      A BWB has a wider range of acceptable CG and more control power with control surfaces farther from the CG and aerodynamic center. It is easier to provide static stability, and I doubt a BWB commercial airliner would be built without a margin of static stability even if equipped with digital FCS.

  • @5-Consecutive-Hairpin-Turns
    @5-Consecutive-Hairpin-Turns 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    i feel like this would be great for cargo aircraft

    • @caribbb
      @caribbb 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I read the USAF is looking to this as refueling tankers too.

  • @KJCharity5268
    @KJCharity5268 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Wow! That is great. I prefer BWB planes! Thumbs up!

  • @ClarenceBurdick
    @ClarenceBurdick 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If one were made on a small scale ,as for 4 people ,it would offer the public a way to fly a very long distance

  • @Qreur
    @Qreur 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    To withstand the pressure differential at altitude, you need a tube.

  • @davidrolfe9571
    @davidrolfe9571 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    While it would be nice to see something different, there are fundamental problems - airliners have a circular cross section because that's the most effective shape to contain the cabin pressure - a blended wing cabin would be much heavier because of strengthening required . In addition existing designs with thin wings and minimum size circular cross section fuselages will have a significantly lower total cross sectional / frontal area than a blended wing design and therefore much less drag. Then as raised in the video there is the problem of emergency exits, windows for passengers, baggage storage and loading. Never say never, but I don't see them coming.

  • @hypercomms2001
    @hypercomms2001 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    It is always the plane of the future, and has... and yet no plane manufacturer has or will them.....

  • @inniyan-ef4nh
    @inniyan-ef4nh หลายเดือนก่อน

    Flying wing ❌
    Flying Dorito ✅

  • @honfmeilingfleet957
    @honfmeilingfleet957 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    some Aliens will think we are their brothers and sisters if they saw that

  • @Solisium-Channel
    @Solisium-Channel 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The B-2 has a computer that constantly corrects the aircraft because it's very unstable for it's wing design.
    Kinda like the 737 MAX with it's bigger engines and MCAS or whatever, but worse.

  • @RnaldFish
    @RnaldFish 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Yes, I do good idea😊

  • @f.u.m.o.5669
    @f.u.m.o.5669 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    1:16 There was flying wings built before it (YB-49 for example), but I guess they technically don't exist anymore.

  • @nickcaci7238
    @nickcaci7238 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Just as mentioned, airport infrastructure and runways issues, cabin emergency egress issues, structural weight and strength issues to pressurize a whooping cabin that is not a simple tube and how could we cope with an extra 500 more passenger deaths at the crash scene.

  • @runny_galaxy1756
    @runny_galaxy1756 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    is it just me or does the b-2 look like something out of star wars

    • @bondgabebond4907
      @bondgabebond4907 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It looks more like something out of WW2, the Horton flying wing that became a thing at the end of the war.

    • @runny_galaxy1756
      @runny_galaxy1756 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@bondgabebond4907 haven’t heard of that before

  • @drgeoffangel5422
    @drgeoffangel5422 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Most engineering problems can be solved with the "flying/ blended wing " concept, given sufficient design and development. No, the major problems will be two fold, as stated in the video, safety in trying to exit in an emergency, and the basic ergonomics of the seating arrangements. As was pointed out, there will be " many " centre aisle seats! Window seats will be at a high premium and probably be first class only! ! As to savings in fuel, yes, obviously great savings could be achieved, and just as well too, as there will be not much room to store the fuel, not if the wings are occupied by passengers!

  • @petermeyerhoff8737
    @petermeyerhoff8737 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Circular, vertical take off eventually super sonic.
    Aka flying saucer. More efficient in flight, greater passenger numbers, don't need expensive runways and airports.

  • @PlanesSpotterAviation
    @PlanesSpotterAviation 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    That future shape looks ugly like a stingray.
    I love the A350.

  • @omkarlagala1158
    @omkarlagala1158 23 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    All the comments saying "this guy deserves thousands of views" or "this guy deserves way more subs" have clearly not seen my channel.

  • @stickynorth
    @stickynorth 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    With Boeing being a dead end as of late it's refreshing to see more entrants into the commercial aviation space again... Especially with the departure of Bombardier but not its primary product, now the A220... That thing is selling like gangbusters even with teething issues..

  • @ShanWu-w5h
    @ShanWu-w5h 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That’s lax airport 2:32

  • @JFrazer4303
    @JFrazer4303 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Northrop's wings were not the first.
    See the 1918 Stout "Batwing", though it had a fin & rudder.
    Of several contenders; Boris Ivanovich Cheranovsky in 1926 flew the BICh-3 first as a glider then with an 18hp engine, though it could stay aloft on partial power.
    He and others like Northrop & the Hortens all tried for the purist's all-wing without any vertical stabilizer. They then tried wing-wip fins which were a little bit less terrible.
    Those who put a fin & rudder at the tail behind the prop, produced good stable safe planes, in the case of the Arup, markedly superior to "Normal" planes.
    Dunne, Payen, Fauvel, Lippisch, Junkers, Johnson. All followed those steps. Northrop and the Hortens tried for the purist's all-wing and the planes were tricky and risky.
    All wanted to put all habitable volume in a wing so of course there were a lot of odd things with big wings for their small size, with a pod for the pilot and the engine at front.. All tried to some extent ranging from various lifting fuselage bodies. Many made good planes.
    Ignored by backers or investors.
    For a more approachable version, look up the Boeing model 754, rather like many designed by Burnelli, of Texas. Look up the Burnelli CBY-3.
    It does not take advanced materials and engines to make planes that get x1.5x the range and payload, on to shorter runways with perfectly normal (better) conventional handling.

  • @ianhollands1641
    @ianhollands1641 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Abig problem is structural in that conventional airliners have an essentially sausage shaped pressurised cabin which is structurally very efficient. The blended wig , by contrast would have a wide flat vee shaped cabin. This is structurally very inefficient and would inevitably result in a much heavier structure. This might well cancel any aerodynamic advantage.

  • @stephenmkatzasc
    @stephenmkatzasc 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I miss the old strata-cruisers & constellations… that was flying… hearing the props spin & hum… those were the days of beautiful flying birds… guess I’m dating myself here…
    If you haven’t flown on one your missing out of a wonderful experience in the air…

    • @archibaldevans2251
      @archibaldevans2251 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The Lockheed Constellation is in my opinion the most elegant commercial ‘tube’ aircraft ever designed and produced. I’m dating myself in saying I had the privilege of flying on them in my early childhood. My father was former military and we flew a lot. Of all the larger aircraft the Constellation was my favorite…

    • @stephenmkatzasc
      @stephenmkatzasc 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Those were the good old days. In 1958 my parents took us to the Orient from Los Angeles. We flew in a Pan Am Stratacruiser. As I recall it was elegant. We wore coat and ties. It took First stp Honolulu on to Guam, Manila and final destination Thailand ..I recall sitting by the window watching the propellers spin & hum… sleeping in a overhead north in PGs looking out a small window @ the stars…

    • @archibaldevans2251
      @archibaldevans2251 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Those really were ‘the good ole days’. Things were simpler and life was much less complicated. People knew who they were, what was expected of them and performed accordingly without complaint. Progressive/Liberalism hadn’t taken over the media, entertainment and education. The S3xual Revolution having yet to turn good women into 304’s. Latin was taught in school so we knew the root meaning of most words. Democracy for instance literally translates ‘Mob Rule’. Women hadn’t taken over the workplace and there was no HR department. When Eisenhower said: ‘Beware the Military Industrial Complex!’ We’d no idea what he was talking about. He should have said (as he’d originally intended): ‘Beware the Military Industrial Congress’. That we’ve had understood! But I digress…
      My father as I’d said was former military, specifically Army Air-Corps which why we flew so much. On a trip in the late ‘50’s (to where I don’t recall) flying in a Constellation my father was particularly agitated as the four engines were ‘out of tune’. The entire fuselage was shaking as a washing machine out of balance. We’d just left the tarmac and were not yet in level flight. My father was cursing at the flight engineer under his breath. As soon as we reached level flight he got up out of his seat a marched towards the cockpit. I could hear him ‘barking orders’ but couldn’t make out exactly what he was saying. It was the scene in the Peanuts movie wherein Charlie Brown is being chastised by an adult but all that could be heard was Wah-Wah-Wah-Wah-Wah…
      One by one the engines began to sing in harmony with each other until they were perfectly ‘tuned’ and ‘humming’. The fuselage ceased shaking and everything quieted. My father proudly strode back to his seat next to me and sitting smiled as the Cheshire Cat the rest of the flight…
      On arrival we disembarked just as we’d boarded walking the mobile stairs and across the tarmac. ‘Baggage-Claim’ was just off to the side of the aircraft and after picking up our luggage we walked the 100 or so feet to a waiting car. I remember looking over my shoulder at the Constellation to clearly see the dihedral in the fuselage and wings. My father said it was ‘s3xy’. The Constellation was the last and the best of that air-craft design. The jet age was coming, everything was about to change but not for the better. And here we are…

    • @stephenmkatzasc
      @stephenmkatzasc 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you for the eloquent story about your father and the love of the constellation. You must be a writer I presume. Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to fly on one. They were beautiful birds. Perhaps someday on my bucket list.
      Today the world is upside down. I’m a bit afraid what the future holds.

    • @archibaldevans2251
      @archibaldevans2251 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I appreciate the nod to my stylized pen. I am though not ‘published’ so merely a frustrated writer. Thanks go to my parents both of whom had quite the vocabulary especially my mother who majored in English…
      Faith my friend the key in whatever that-which we refer to as ‘God’. We are Spiritual beings having a physical experience here to learn and grow. The challenge when challenged is determining what’s the lesson to be learned. I realized long ago whenever fear, trepidation and worry besieges it’s a lack of Faith which the culprit. We’ve little control over anything including and not the least of which our own bodies. ‘Aging (to quote a favorite Uncle) ain’t for sissies!’ The best hope had is to influence by example. Control is an illusion. In fact this is all a illusion in that everything perceived was born of the imagination of a Brilliant Benevolent Divine Intelligence which Creation…
      Row… Row… Row your boat gently down the stream. Merrily-Merrily-Merrily- Merrily life is but a dream… The question begs: What will be your dream? Leonardo Di Vinci, the brothers Wright along with many many others all dreamed man could fly. And here we are…
      If you question Intelligent Design this well worth the 14mins spent- m.th-cam.com/video/4VrcO6JaMrM/w-d-xo.html&pp=ygUWdGhlIGZpYm9uYWNjaSBzZXF1ZW5jZQ%3D%3D

  • @terryrivas9815
    @terryrivas9815 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Safe flight.

  • @dionysus2006
    @dionysus2006 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This concept has been done to death. No, it will not be the airplane of the future.

  • @bradley7506
    @bradley7506 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That’s pretty much the Concorde….

  • @paulcheek5711
    @paulcheek5711 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    see what u can do with back engineered alien tech.. I still want a window seat..

  • @laksi0505
    @laksi0505 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I think it's the future.

  • @kennixox262
    @kennixox262 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I think that over time, say the next 50 years; what will the market accept? Flying is all about the money and the airlines to a point have a lot of sway with the aircraft manufacturers.

  • @3209-f4h
    @3209-f4h 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Ask Howard Hughes…!

  • @basiltaylor8910
    @basiltaylor8910 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You are re-inventing the wheel, nature had blended wing body design sussed millions of years before Orville Wright coaxed his birdcage off the sands of Kill Devil Hills to wobble skywards. Look to the sea and those ooh soo cool manta rays, sting rays, gliding through the water yes cats& kittens blended bodies that work.

  • @kirbyvanduzer6565
    @kirbyvanduzer6565 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It’s interesting and cool but a lot of people will have to go without a window seat there will be very few window seats that’s the problem it’s a nice idea but I don’t think it’ll be popular because of the lack of window seats very few airlines would buy it meaning it’ll be discontinued very quickly it’s an idea that’s doomed to fail unless they can figure out something that could give you a window seats even if it’s on a tv screen that way you can see everything even without window seats

    • @caribbb
      @caribbb 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      There is a windowless concept out there now where digital panels running the whole length of the cabin projecting the outside view. It’s probably a long way off from inflight use though. It might surface in business jets first. Not sure either if that still solves the issue for those sitting in the middle. Also I don’t think this is a big factor for airlines buying new jets. Fuel economy, maintenance costs and capacity are likely at the top of their needs list. Passengers may grumble about having no window but they know in the end it’ll stop once people get use to it. Airlines will like charge a premium for window seats if the sense of movement issues in the outer seats is minimal. There’s a lot to factor in.

  • @MareenaMohamed
    @MareenaMohamed 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Whelp Maldives velana International airport is all ready renewing their airport because it is not done 😲😲😲😲

  • @michaelplunkett8059
    @michaelplunkett8059 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Evacuation in 3 minutes ain't happening.

  • @WilliamBusuttil
    @WilliamBusuttil 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    16-10-2024.
    Check out BMW prototype jet plane, just saying.😊

  • @Xooteryt
    @Xooteryt 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    No actually it’s the plane of the past

  • @RampAgentX
    @RampAgentX 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    still not built after 40yrs

  • @mikef3790
    @mikef3790 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I have nothing good to say about this video. The initial minute or so of commentary turned me off. I lost all interest in listening to the rest of the video. ;-(

  • @apexxy
    @apexxy 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    2003 all over again

  • @anthonynarozniak1875
    @anthonynarozniak1875 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Unfortunately it is not the aircraft of the future......

  • @ArnavWarnav
    @ArnavWarnav 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That CANNOT be the future of aviation. It IS radical.

  • @carlsmith5545
    @carlsmith5545 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    And the United States of America still cant achieve highspeed rail....

    • @michaelplunkett8059
      @michaelplunkett8059 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We invented maglev in 1969 and realized it made no economic sense.
      Guess you missed all the speedy express railroads going bankrupt in last century. See PennCentral.

    • @JanZajic-io2re
      @JanZajic-io2re 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      of course it will and sooner thN YOU THINK

    • @carlsmith5545
      @carlsmith5545 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@JanZajic-io2re Sooner than i think? Lol!!!🤣🤣 I don't think or assume. But, one thing i know for sure, it should of been done decades ago...

  • @robertpeers3742
    @robertpeers3742 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Even with folding wings,these fat bods ain't gonna happen.What was,will be,until anti-grav tech is released....They got it and keeping it hushed.Remember flying cars,touted 50 some years ago? George Jetson,where are you?

  • @BOSTONMASSACHUSETTS-m3v
    @BOSTONMASSACHUSETTS-m3v 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ITHINK THIS PLANE LOOKS UGLY

  • @ened30
    @ened30 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    dosent look very stable lol

  • @tommypaget2294
    @tommypaget2294 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So, who’s going to pay for the $ 900,800,70,500 upgrade to the airport?…..the stupid A380 forced our airport to build special air-bridge to accommodate their stupid A380……then the damn airline stopped using the stupid A380……so,we’re suing the airline for under-usage of the specialized airbridges……..we’re suing the airline $30,000,500 for not using the air bridge. Ok, no need to build these darn specialized airbridges……just park the darn A380 at remote bays…..ok……take 4 hours to board your A380…..highly recommend that the first passengers in begin a card Hanes wit his buddies, cause it’s gonna be 4 hours before the takeoff😂😂😂

  • @zydration3538
    @zydration3538 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nope, just the click bait of today...

  • @kylau1353
    @kylau1353 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i f

  • @kaionski1105
    @kaionski1105 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nice vid, but very poorly researched. At least read Wikipedia" flying wings".

  • @F.u.Belitong
    @F.u.Belitong 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This new wingplane will becomes anothers BOEING unsuccesfull STORY AFTER LOTS ISSUES INSIDE BOEING SINCES MERGER WITH MD. THIS DAY ONLY A HALF OF BOEING CUSTOMERS BELIVES BOEING CAPABILITIES PRODUCING SAFEST PLANES.

  • @joseortega584
    @joseortega584 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Let me translate for you::: the investors in this new model of plane are only interested in profits not passenger safety. They will spin it which every way possible to get through the red tape but at the end passengers will ultimately suffer the consequences.

  • @jessmacc3825
    @jessmacc3825 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This kind of plane will come in the future , I know ,the business class will be in the middle on the sides

  • @joesinkovits6591
    @joesinkovits6591 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Today’s aircraft, with their fuselages and distinct wings, are remarkably similar to birds, and I’ve yet to see a “blended-wing” bird. Maybe nature and God know something we don’t.

    • @Bobsry16
      @Bobsry16 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      A bird is more aerodinamically blended and fluid in shape than a tube fuselage with distinct wings, if you want to dwell on natural biological forms fish and aquatic mammals are ultra smooth too.

  • @sevenlux7093
    @sevenlux7093 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    1:05 Put away your "USA only glasses"! Then you would know that the first flying wings were built by the Horten brothers in the mid 1930s in Germany.

    • @plane_nerd
      @plane_nerd  3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      There have been multiple flying wing prototypes before the Northrop N-1M but none of them were successful. The Horten Ho-229, while it was a very unique and innovative design for its time, faced plenty of technical challenges and crashed during its third flight test.

  • @declanmurphy6427
    @declanmurphy6427 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If it's made by BOEING forget abour it!😂😂😂

  • @Planedudeifly
    @Planedudeifly 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Copy cat😂soooooo sus not funny anymore 🤬🤬🤬 GET OUT OF HERE!!!!!!!!

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Used to work for Northrop. We had designs for flying wing airliners. These were never pushed forward because the aerodynamic advantages never outweighed other disadvantages. The ideal flying wing airliner would house the passengers in the wing. The wing thickness to make this happen would wipe out all aerodynamic advantage of a wing unless the aircraft flew so slow that no one would want to fly.
    Boeing investigated building a blended wing airliner to replace the 747 and could not find a design that was better the 747.
    People keep on looking at flying and blended wings and keep finding it doesn't work.

  • @carlsmith5545
    @carlsmith5545 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    And the United States of America still cant achieve highspeed rail...

    • @GeorgeDoughty-m8e
      @GeorgeDoughty-m8e 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      THAT is all political. Trains were travelling 120-130 mph in the 1930's.

    • @GeorgeDoughty-m8e
      @GeorgeDoughty-m8e 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Trains were moving ae 120-130 mph in the 1930's. Politics in the way.

    • @carlsmith5545
      @carlsmith5545 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@GeorgeDoughty-m8e in the 1930s but today there are trains that travel at 200 plus mph. Japan is now building the cho Shinkansen maglev super train from Tokyo to Nagoya and then Osaka. This moves at speeds of up to 375mph. China is taking Elon Musk's (failed) hyperloop and is making it a really. Also over 300 mph. The far more advanced countries of the far east are the masters of these technological modern marvels of transportation. So much for the 1930s. Highspeed bullet trains and maglev super train technology, the new american dream.....

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Used to work for Northrop. We had designs for flying wing airliners. These were never pushed forward because the aerodynamic advantages never outweighed other disadvantages. The ideal flying wing airliner would house the passengers in the wing. The wing thickness to make this happen would wipe out all aerodynamic advantage of a wing unless the aircraft flew so slow that no one would want to fly.
    Boeing investigated building a blended wing airliner to replace the 747 and could not find a design that was better the 747.
    People keep on looking at flying and blended wings and keep finding it doesn't work.

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Used to work for Northrop. We had designs for flying wing airliners. These were never pushed forward because the aerodynamic advantages never outweighed other disadvantages. The ideal flying wing airliner would house the passengers in the wing. The wing thickness to make this happen would wipe out all aerodynamic advantage of a wing unless the aircraft flew so slow that no one would want to fly.
    Boeing investigated building a blended wing airliner to replace the 747 and could not find a design that was better the 747.
    People keep on looking at flying and blended wings and keep finding it doesn't work.

  • @saltyroe3179
    @saltyroe3179 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Used to work for Northrop. We had designs for flying wing airliners. These were never pushed forward because the aerodynamic advantages never outweighed other disadvantages. The ideal flying wing airliner would house the passengers in the wing. The wing thickness to make this happen would wipe out all aerodynamic advantage of a wing unless the aircraft flew so slow that no one would want to fly.
    Boeing investigated building a blended wing airliner to replace the 747 and could not find a design that was better the 747.
    People keep on looking at flying and blended wings and keep finding it doesn't work.