Why This Plane Will Change Travel Forever
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 มิ.ย. 2024
- In this video, we'll take a look at the future of aviation. We'll explore the concept of aviation engineering, and look at some of the ways that aviation is changing.
╭━━━┳╮╱╭┳━━╮╭━━━┳━━━┳━━━┳━━┳━━╮╭━━━╮
┃╭━╮┃┃╱┃┃╭╮┃┃╭━╮┃╭━╮┃╭━╮┣┫┣┫╭╮┃┃╭━━╯
┃╰━━┫┃╱┃┃╰╯╰┫╰━━┫┃╱╰┫╰━╯┃┃┃┃╰╯╰┫╰━━╮
╰━━╮┃┃╱┃┃╭━╮┣━━╮┃┃╱╭┫╭╮╭╯┃┃┃╭━╮┃╭━━╯
┃╰━╯┃╰━╯┃╰━╯┃╰━╯┃╰━╯┃┃┃╰┳┫┣┫╰━╯┃╰━━╮
╰━━━┻━━━┻━━━┻━━━┻━━━┻╯╰━┻━━┻━━━┻━━━╯
![[TH] VCT Pacific Stage 2 - Week 1 Day 2 // GEN vs T1 | PRX vs TLN](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZkFjjJNwzH0/mqdefault.jpg)
I love these "just around the corner" videos. I've loved them for the last thirty years. 🤣
Hoverboards are real. The future is now. They have wheels but they're called hoverboards. Welcome to the future.
@@samuelcarstens6152 And my Nissan Sentra is actually a star destroyer. I love gen-z fantasyland.
@dave23024
@dave23024 You must believe that Joe Biden is the best president that the U.S has ever had.
I love seeing boomers complain about their own incompetence and whine at changing times.
Fusion energy has probably been 20 years in the future for 60 years.
Why would we go through all that to save 2 hours of flight time while we spend hours (3 hours before departure is usually recommended for intercontinental flight) on the airport to get to the gate and at least full hour to get from the arrival gate to the exit of the airport? People always say '' it is only so many hours to fly there''. But at the end it usually just costs you the whole day. It is everything before and after the flight that is the problem. Not those couple of extra hours on the plane itself.
supersonics make sense only for military operations, certainly not for commercial purposes.
even for military UAVs are the future than these manned supersonic beasts
So true that!
Nice! I have two options to get to my casa in the Peruvian Andes from Lima.......8 hours in a very
Comfortable bus or forty five minutes by air!!!
Airports on both ends are one hour away...hence...the flight is 7 hours including the wait..... T three times the price!!!!
The airport situation is so screwed up and takes so damn much time I will just drive a couple of days instead. Seriously, less stress and I can actually pee instead of holding it for hours.
@@flechette3782 I am with you all the way. I am from The Netherlands but live on the west coast of Norway. It's a 19-20 hour drive if I drive almost non-stop. Just quick stops for fuel and to empty the bladder. It is an EPIC journey. I MUCH rather do that than fly with all the extra bs that comes with it. Just such a shame that it costs 3 times more to drive. 70 euros in tolls each way to start with.
hydrogen & air travel have had such a rich history of safety...
Just don't name the aircraft "Hindenburg 2"!
Hehehehe
@@johnmeyers8588 It was not the hydrogen that caught fire from the LIGHTNING bolt, it was the external paint. Hydrogen flame is blue, the reports said other wise. Just clarifying.
@@steveindar1
hahahaha
Translate to Spanish
Don't you feel like "Ripley" from Aliens? "Did IQs drastically fall when I was away?"
40 miles to the gallon, that's almost three times what my Ford pickup gets. Now it was a VTO I could cut down some trees and get rid of that old truck.
VTOL is certainly the way to go, but Launch will cost Fuel. Nuclear Power is needed for Electricity to replace Fossil Fuels.
Yes it is I live fully off grid, rain catch on an enamel steel roof raised bed garden take care of my own sewage with the Jenkins method and powered by solar.
@@paulgroth3345 Turpentine would be an expensive fuel. Maybe Turpentine and Wood Alcohol?
Modern automotive is hydrogenated. It far less explosive than aviation gas and race fuel. Your truck gets great gas milage as compared with the early 1970's but gas companies have not changed the way fuel is metered and sold. Hydrogenated is much safer. Amazing airplanes.
@@aaronfreeman5264 More and more Solar farms are coming on-line everyday in the USA.
They can't produce anywhere near the amount of electrons per square foot of facility as a nuke plant, however, the fact that they're located much closer to the end users means that transmission lines don't need to carry the ultra high voltages needed to carry electrons the vast distances to the customers as remote nuke facilities do.
And living next door to a solar farm poses no risks to your health.
I don't want to live anywhere near a nuke!!!!
These remind me of myself when i was a kid in the 90s drawing "cool" tanks and planes.
Those airtaxis are maybe something for countries like the USA or other countries with no public transport infrastructure, but in Europe it would have to work against trains. Nearly every city in Europe has a train station and 15min before the train starts is early enough to board it, not the three hours you need to be there before you can board an airplane at an airport. The difference in travel time between a high speed train and airplane is not that much and you are not restricted in the amount of baggage and you can still work on your laptop or use your phone while on the train. Or use an overnight train and sleep while you travel and be relaxed when you arrive.
The Flying V tests were conduceted on a small model ...basically a huge RC plane. The way you put It, It sounds like they developed a fully functional plane.
Its all BS and fake news.
There's so much wrong in this Video
@@labrathor7874, they are... beyond facts.
They don’t even have engines for it???? RR bailed and every other suitable jet manufacturers told them no way soooooo wtf are you talking aboot.
What they need to work on is miniaturizing people so they can fly on that RC plane.
In 2075 we will still be flying in the same jets and at the same speed we were in 1950. Let's see who's right.
That's right,747 took to the skies in 69 while i was still at school "the jumbo jet" the B52 was dropping bombs on Vietnam, Concorde, All this rest smaller than the 747 and slower than Concorde wow such advancements? Motorcycles are much the same just cosmetic and improvements on the four stroke in the last 30 years
@@Johnketes54 The only thing aviation has accomplished in the last 50-60 years is cramming more seats in the same area.
It feels like "air travel is about to completely change" is something I have been hearing all my life...
I should hope the new supersonic plane would out perform Concorde, I made parts for Concorde in 1969, so some improvement since then is to be expected.
some ???
did you just wake up after 50 years in coma ?? do you have any idea how much science and technology progressed in last 50 years ?
@@Mike-rw1jw Ehh. This new plane is going to be slower than Concorde 😉 Or am I missing your irony ? 😄
@@Dani-it5sy lol wannabe smartaxx ... much higher speeds were accomplished 50 years ago.
The technological leap would be in sophisticated software, cutting-edge processors , electronics and communication systems, materials to build, superior aerodynamic architecture and much more .. speed is not even in the equation.
small advice - don't make a fool out of yourself in public
@@Mike-rw1jw Speed is not in the equation. Well I think that is what this plane is about actually. But never mind. You know all these interesting words I guess you hate very educated 😄
@@Dani-it5sy some great internet philosopher once said about arguments on the internet -
"those who do not have anything worthwhile to contribute to a meaningful argument, would eventually rely excessively on smileys"
I absolutely love your videos bro! Keep killing it
I can't wait to see this, pass the Concorde? Why not, but then I can't wait to see the new plane!
Well, that’s a complex task, to outperform the Concorde. At least with regards to the cruise speed, it's already underperforming comparing to the Concorde, as the latter was cruising at Mach 2, which is faster than 1.5 to me, i guess
Range could be the big factor. It's been said that Concorde would have been commercially viable had it been capable of crossing the Pacific.
I just want a comfortable seat and more leg room standard!
anthony s ..........yup, you'll get that at 6 grand a ticket.
Anthony Strunk
You have to fly Asian Airlines for that, especially Korean and Japan for 34 inch pitch in economy. 3 inches more than most airlines at 31 inch pitch. Still cattlecar but a little bit more comfortable cattlecar.
I can’t wait to actually fly on any of these new crafts. Pretty slick ZeroE 🏆
Airlines: “do NOT bring lithium ion batteries on board”
Also Airlines: our new plane is powered by 600 lithium ion batteries
🥴
Imagine off boarding 800 passengers! That’s a full hour at least right there. I’m excited to see !
what happened to the A380...
@@kloppskalli European airplane, does not count.
All of these designs are around since ages, nice thoughts, worthiy enough to pursuit them, but to change travel???
The A380 was designed in a time where you had huge central airport hubs, which concentrated traffic, where a giant long-haul plane made sense for traveling between these hubs to then travel on.
And while they were still developing, the trend went to smaller, still economic, long-range planes that flew point-to-point.
And the 800-seat airplane was in principle dead before it took to the sky.
The Hyperloop is also revolutionary, and a nice toy for engineering students to work out technical solutions - but it does not work.
To put a pod into a vacuum tube at the speed of sound - is combining the issues of the ISS with the issues of mass transport.
In a vacuum tube the passenger pod must be not only airtight, it must be pressure-resistant, have an autonomous life support system, and and and. What happens if a passenger pod gets stuck when several 600 mph-pods are in the tube? How many airlocks do you need?
All that remained from the Hyperloop is a mile-long tunnel in which chauffeur-driven taxis travel with 30 mph for a few minutes. All that is new is the fancy illumination in the claustrophobic tiny tunnel.
But by law all passengers have to able to evacuate a plane in less than 2 minutes.
Hi hi Myron 😀☺️ in India Myron means hair in the scrotum😀😀🤭🤭☹️🙆🙆mayir is pubic hairs 🤢Myron is an abuse here🙆🤣🤣
I say 'give them an Argentina exit but with a parachute.
Yay, we will soon be able to fly these things in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Or in reality, as RC models.
Will try hard to be optimistic here. Lets hope the social problems are resolved to the point where civilian flight will continue to be a reality in the future. Nice video.
I'm impressed someone is aware of the huge lack of REALISM of most of those proposals. 90% of those won't change travel, since they will fail to enter the market. I don't know how many centuries we are dreaming of flying cars, technically we have the technology for at least 50 years, the problem is safety, practical use, regulation and pilot qualification. For most of those concepts, there are similar concerns, one is always economical sustainability... I bet in a few centuries, we will still dream of getting one of those in the air, yet, we would already understand it's impossible.... BUT WE WANT TO BELIEVE.. hahaha.
@@StephenKarl_Integral Driving a car with bent fender or bumper is not usually a big deal. That same bump on an aircraft will require a lot of inspection and testing before it hits the skies again. A minor fault on a car is usually, at best, an inconvenience. For an aircraft, it can easily become deadly.
I love BWBs and all these future technology concepts. Remember, there are only a few modern airliners utilizing composite construction. Aircraft development and certification costs are MASSIVE and it takes a long time and a lot of testing ($$$) to get mission critical new technology through the process.
For sure, the challenges of that design are incredibly complex and difficult. Planes are basically balloons, and they want to take the shape of one when they're pressurized at altitude. A tube handles this pressure very well (hence oxygen tanks and propane tanks and stuff being tubes) but a BWB does not when the entire interior is pressurized (unlike a B2 bomber, which is only pressurized in the cockpit). That's just one example of an extra challenge, but yeah. It's the design I'm most excited about. I wonder if incorporating a "double box tail" like the Synergy plane would make a BWB even more efficient. That design seems to have the wings working off similar principles as a toroidal propeller, which has proven to have huge benefits and a lot of people are experimenting with 3D-printed ones for their drones.
@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ This is spam.
The Soviet Union also operated a Super sonic airliner the Tupolev Tu-144 and it's first fight was before the Concorde
... and many crashes
@@dandavis4469 I know of only one crash at the Paris airshow and the French military could have been responsible for it
@@dandavis4469 I-1 crash of the Concord and 1 crash of TU144. But because it's Russian 1 is many and 1 crash of the British/French we should not count 🙂
@@stephendezouzsa PS. Russian TU144 was the First supersonic civil airplane, it's first flight was 3 months ahead of Concord (just in case if anyone will say that TU144 was copy of Concord)
And they stole the Concorde design. A turd.
Great job! Thanks for using a human narrator - it sounds great!! I've been following Synergy Aircraft (2:09) for about 9 years now. They've been stuck in the same development phase for a LOOOONG time. I'm starting to wonder if they are even serious about launching their product.
I worked on developing the Synergy Alpha with John McGinnis between 2015 and 2017. The project has had issues with on and off investment but they are still working to release the first full scale prototype. It was pretty surprising to see this pop up on my feed and I'm glad to see people are still excited about the design, its a beautiful airplane.
This is not a human narrater. There is at least 2 other Channels that are not related to this one using the same narration system.
@@Genrebenders Ooooh, really?? I’m gonna have to listen to it again! I’ve done some audiobook narration. If AI is this good now, it’s gonna be game over for human voice overs pretty soon.
Synergy was renamed “DBT Aero” (Double Box Tail) over 18 months ago. From what I’ve been told, John McGinnes has been squandering investment after investment for the last 10 years getting chumps to pay for him to toy around instead of actually building a plane.
This will never be built. And is likely to be a scam.
The flying V looks fantastic 😍
the A380 is about 51 kilometers per hour away from supersonic, and that's the largest passenger plane ever
Passenger plans are powerful enough, it’s just very inefficient for there design
Yes, but they doesn't talk about max speed they talk about cruising speed and that is at 900kph for the A380 and not at Mach 2.
@@seanthiar I know that, I didn't even mention that it went Mach 1, all I'm saying is that even if they make a passenger plane that can go Mach 2, it probably wouldn't be half the A380's size.
This was awesome! Flying V looks amazing.
Not going to happen
This is definitely my favourite aircraft along side Boom. I reeeally hope most of all the Boeing Zero E V Flying Wing truly makes it to the sky, on top of ‘this’ Flying V aircraft as well.
That and the Alice electric plane. It looks beauuutiful.
I think the open box concept should be the wings. It would start to look like a biplane connected at the ends.
Love the stainless steel look. Sleek, unique and boss!
We actually had 2 supersonic passenger planes. You forgot the Tupelov TU-144. It was only in very limited use and life but it did reach service.
@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ Jesus is fake troll
Yes, but it was a dangerous junk. Tupolev himself had to approve each flight.
@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ Hail Satan 666
@@privateer0561 The Russian space program was also dangerous junk but they got into space first and landed on the moon first.
He might forgot it because it was just a clone from the Concorde
That “bye for now” is too sudden 😂
There are alot of lessons to be learned from the Concord. One of them was supersonic passenger travel has very limited routes and can only take advantage of speed in certain areas. Also it did not succeed.
So I just did the math, and a 6000 lbs. battery, if we just go by the price of raw lithium, that's $120,000,000 per "battery". And that's not even considering the lithium needs to be refined first.
And imagine a lithium battery fire in an aircraft... like some Teslas!
@@jamessmythe8608 Current lithium carbonate is @ USD 60,000 a ton (2000lb). So USD 180,000 for a battery.
I'm afraid that the progress eagle is going to be only a concept because airports simply would not be able to handle it just due to the ramp size not being big enough (same goes for the flying V but that one seems smaller in comparison). In addition it seems to have a huge wingspan which could cause issues with both the size of the runway and taxiing. So while I like the concept and idea behind it I'm kinda skeptical about it's practicality.
[EDIT]:
I put 'fortress' instead of 'progress' because I can't read
Not to mention; when would we ever need to move 800 passengers?
That's exactly why the A380 left production. It was just too big to be worth the trouble, and would often take off with empty seats, and that was only with 520 paxs.
Don't think the wingspan will be a problem. An A380 has 80m and most of the space between the wingtips is unused space. If you move the wings to the back of the plane and make a triangle out of the plane the space needed is still the same. I guess the landing gear would stay where it is. But I don't think many of us will see these planes fly. KLM says they plan a working aircraft around 2050 !!!! They only have a 3m model with 22.5kg at the moment that worked and that is what they tested at the closed airport in Germany. But that is something the channel forgot to say. Most of the planes in the video are only concepts and exist only in a computer. A working model like the KLM model is rare.
@@seanthiar Eh if I'm to believe the internet the concept pane would have a wingspan of ~96m which is a whopping 16m wider than the a380. And now that I'm looking things up anyway, the flying V seems to be designed with a wingspan of 65m which would likely fit most airports. So maybe not for the flying V but the progress eagle is still a contender for a no on those grounds.
I like the Aeromobile
Flying door to door is too cool for words
Nope. It is flying from airport to airport. Most people do not have half mile long driveways.
Much of these seem to have the same issue back when they started to make Ocean liners bigger way back in the old days. Only so many ports they can land at.
Damn Hydrogen is so promising if not for it being so explosive and volatile
And they run buses on it! It's NOT SATURN 5 ROCKET FUEL OK, It's water that's been split into hydrogen and oxygen and burns in air to produce power from a conventional engine and the exhaust is water vapour, Electric car's and buses catch fire in public places
We need a plane that can save passengers before a fatal crash. Like detaching the cabin and parachuting everyone to safety. Also some new tech or A.I engineering improvements in cockpit & ATC are required. The airbus e and flying V are more realistic.
Most aircraft accidents happen so fast, there is no time to egress.
Well what is gonna detach the cabinet, and the pilots? The plane’s weight will be shifted to the cockpit, and plane accidents are SUPER rare, so that is a waste of development and maintenance money
@@robertheinkel6225 I could paint you a few pictures.
- the head on collisions such as tenerife, the DHL and Russian jet that collided over Germany
- the planes that stall: like Ethiopian, the Jarkata incidents
- the suicide pilots: That plane from Barcelona where copilot crashed the jet into the mountains
- the 9/11 crashes: pentagon, WTC
- the Isreali jet that sliced into a Dutch apartment.
- the plane carrying lithium batteries that caught fire and ended up crashing in Dubai.
Some of these planes took time in the air before the crash. In such cases, people could have been saved.
@@SmilingSkyTH-cam Super rare yes but they happen and when they do, death rate is at 100% most of the time. Every life is worth saving even if it means spending 1bn$ on devt. if jet pilots can eject and they have been plenty of pilot ejections. I am sure we can think of passengers on commercial jets too. ATC could make the decision of a detach
The Aiirbus ZEROe with turboprop looks cool and realistic.
Quite interesting changes in Aviation industries Jet to electric motars Jet
Alot of cool stuff here, my only concern is ( How will these planes handle the cold considering electric cars is bad in cold weather)
also, what security protocols do they have if any of the lithium batteries catch fire?
Have you guys seen how long it takes the fire department to put out an electric car fire? we are talking 20 + hours if not days
Wow 😮 I didn’t know that. Thanks. I also didn’t know EVs have trouble with heat in winter. Never been in the market for one. But know I know I never will 👍
@@kevindarrell3500 stick with petrol or diesel
Because jet fuel isn't flammable?
@@hypersonichobo4263 It is! Just not on contact at room temperature,Heat it up or pour it onto a fire
@@Johnketes54 crashes and accidents have a way of providing enough energy to light jet fuel. But even if they didn't, there's a lot more that's flammable in a plane then just the fuel.
The engineer (guessing he might be) in rollerblades at 2:17 shows a man of efficiency or a man of extreme. I have respect for both in engineering.
Rollerblades are a big deal from south america to europe, and have been for the past 10 years. Thanks to their resurgence I have 2 very good sets of rollerblades in my closet.
In a workshop? Seriously?
I liked the part where you talked about the wing being aerodynamic.😂
Wow. How wonderful.
*In 2025* we'll have brand new supersonic jets that will look like and fly at the same speed that the *Concord* did *FORTY SEVEN YEARS AGO.* If you're astounded or even a tiny bit impressed by this you are *'exactly'* what they're playing you for
Btw, there is no way any of the aircraft shown will actually enter service at the dates he said.
Add like 10 years to each of the dates and it becomes more realistic
@@Mr30friends Technology multiply by leaps and bounds but fossil fuel technology like cars, airplanes etc are deliberately suppressed. I was 11 when I first flew on a commercial jetliner. I'm 68 now and nothing has changed. It's no faster today and the only difference is no free meals, less room and personal screens for each passenger
@@IDIOCRACY-1984 "deliberately suppressed" sounds too conspiratorial in this case. It's just about money.
Concorde was very expensive. And ultimately it failed to be profitable. It was made to showcase French and UK aerospace capabilities. Kind of like a mini space race, but for supersonic travel.
After it (and it's soviet counterpart) proved to be expensive "failures", it seems pretty logical that no one else retried it for all this time.
The same thing happened with the actual space race. Once the achievement was done, the second place wasn't worth the endless billions a country would need to invest on it.
99% of the people flying would prefer their trip lasting a few more hours than the ticket costing their monthly wage.
@@blivit8493 Feel better now *"shit-for-brains"? LOL*
@@Mr30friends I think you're missing the point here. Electronics are to the level of nanorobotry but automotives, commercial aviation and space rocketry have been static for more than 50 years. I don't want my combustion engine to drive for me or even talk to me. After the gas shortage of the 70s I expected 100 or 200 miles per gallon by now. Even factual, actual water and air powered engines that have made mainstream news over the decades are no longer talked about and forgotten. Now filed by the system and the ignorant under conspiracy theory
how about inventing an airplane that can deploy huge parachutes as a solution to airplane crashes, parachutes that are enough to carry the plane in case of aircraft malfunction so the plane will slowly hit the ground.
Or inventing a plane that can deploy cushions or airbags enough to cover the whole plane in case of aircraft malfunction/crash.
WAY too much weight and used too much space. Also crashes are very rare
quite a few light aircraft already have parachutes lol. and no airbag is going to save a a380 from killing everyone over 100 mph.
Most crashes occur in take off or landing so even if you put a huge parachute you won't have the time for it to open properly.
Airbags won't help much when you pass a certain speed limit.
What about 300 ejection seats with personal handles to pull when you feel you don't want to be on this flight anymore ?
@@baronnuuke7821 lol yes!
My Lancair already achieves about 40 mpg doing 200 mph. Not a prototype. Real travel.
"The flying V" sounds like a super hero name😏
Fascinating !!
Not so sure about the Flying V. Imagine you are sitting out in the wing...and so far away from the center of the plane....and the plane banks in one direction. Those in the oppositive wing are either far below you or vis a versa? Disorienting would be an understatement.
Wow, great point. Did not think about that.
Also, how would you evacuate in prescribed time?
That's an interesting thought, but from inside the aircraft they would appear to be beside you.
The distance from each other makes no difference to the angle as compared to an aircraft of current design.
It would be interesting to try to play a game of catch though!
fun
True but they wouldn't bank that much. Only in emergency situations
I'm glad to hear that the price tag of the flying car will be very high. I can't imagine what it would be like if most people started flying to work. Most people can't drive safely in two dimensions. 😄
It will never happen bc do you know how loud that would be ? It would blow ear drums out and stop babies hearts
I'm sad to hear you think us lowly plebs will still be allowed to travel more than 15 minutes walk from your designated sleeping pod...
8:40 The car morphs "into a small personal jet"...zooms in on the propeller. :)
Soon the skies will be as congested as the streets! Now THAT'S progress!!!
Nope it will not happened at least not in the near future with this technology faa would be overwelm imagine the paperwork and politics involved no way goverment would allow that
The green movement doesn't seem to understand that electric powered vehicles cost more to develop and do more harm to the environment that regular fueled aircraft.
I'm sure you have figures to back that up and not just an opinion. Though part of the reason electric vehicles might cost more is that IC vehicles have already been developed to pretty much the limit of their technology, after 100 years of intensive development while EVs have a lot of room to improve and grow.
@@stainlesssteelfox1 How about we upgrade the power grid first to charge all the electric vehicles what we will have soon. And imagine the power required to charge 6,000 lbs of some aircraft batteries. And we know what a catastrophe fires in lithium batteries can be, at 30,000 feet... like some Teslas on the street.
@@jamessmythe8608 Way to move the goalposts. Since you can't argue my original point, you find all new ones.
Electrical grids need upgrading to nuclear with renewable/battery storage providing peak demand load anyway
Oddly enough it takes a lot of power to fly an airplacne carrying 200 passengers several hundred miles whether you're using jet fuel or electrons.
As for elrctrical fires, there you have a point. However, since more people die of vehicle accidents, that is the bigger problem so we should simply ban all motor vehicles. And since afr more people have died in jet aircraft crashes, we should no longer use jet aircraft. TL:DR - No human endevour is completely safe. The only answer is to work to make it safe enough to use.
1:47 NO IT HAS NOT! STUPID TH-camRS NOT DOING ANY RESEARCH LOL (the "flying V" never flew!! it was a MODEL RC PLANE THAT FLEW!)
I was just about to look up the current status of the V-Wing.
The name of this channel gives it away...Beyond Facts. Lol.
And this flying car prototype has been smashed down and project collapsed
THANK YOU
Amazing.
Beautiful designs 👍🏻
-drooling- so much concept
This is amazing! Human talent is limitless 🎉
Yes, we can solve anything - almost. But for that we must be realistic and must not let us be taken away by any flashy promise like those of Elon Musk and all these startup scammers.
No need to be pessimistic, but be realistic. Being enthusiased by everything just makes you confused.
For a transport system it is important that the OVERALL travel time is regarded. The train can be faster when you need hours and hours extra time getting to and from the airport, when the plane is anyhow going just once per day. Say 6 hours flight time, 3 hours to and 3 hours from the airport make 12 hours - the travel consumes the complete day. A few hours more don't change that.
Like the US car industry has advertised for bigger roads, more parking lots, and so on - and now the people live further away, the traffic jam is still taking the same time, and the parking lots are so large and so far away from your destination that it takes ages to get there.
A more intelligent complete design of a city, where people can live close to where they want to be, with a performant mass transport system would be way better, more economical, more ecological, cost less time, and so on.
@@feedingravens I agree with everything but the last paragraph. In the US, we see mass transport as a negative, we don’t want to live near it, because it brings with it ‘city life’ that we don’t like. We love leaving in bigger open spaces and drive our own cars whatever time we want. Lersonally, we’ve always moved to a different town/county where mass transport is practically non-existent. We like our country-style living. If people like to live in the city - they move into the city. Although the latest trends show the opposite.
Right brother be like : u people can beat us
NeoTesla : hold my current
Prototype aircraft like this are great for exploring new technologies. However, good aircraft design is being wise with compromising between mutually exclusive design parameters. There is a reason that airliners, no matter who builds them, look substantially the same. I don’t expect to see any of these designs progress to a commercially viable airliner for at least 25 years.
You showed two different aircraft when talking about the Overture, one with rectangular ducts like Concorde, one with conventional round nacelles which matches the Overture shown on Boom's website. What is the other one?
Overture does Mach 1.7. Slower than Concorde.
The Overture is nothing but renders at this point which is why every render has a different engine configuration. Essentially there is no modern commercial engine available today for them to use and all of the main engine manufactures have flat out said that supersonic jet engines are not a priority for commercial development where the key focus is efficiency. So will it have 2 engines? 4 engines? box engines? round engines? Even they don't know.
@@thesneakinmonkey That’s why this channel is called “Beyond Facts”. Overture is another pipe dream that is going to fail, and none of these other ludicrous concepts will come to fruition either. The aviation industry, and airlines in particular, are notoriously conservative. When you consider the immense structural (and infrastructure-al!) barriers oh such as hydrogen distribution and storage, hangar space, pilot training, etc., it is no wonder that we have been flying in nothing more than iterations of a tube +2 wings for almost a hundred years now.
I wonder how the seating in the KLM's flying wing will be situated? I can see many people having motion sickness if they're not facing the same way as the pilots
Achtung dieses Video ist nur FAKE NEWS
Thanks 🇺🇸
About time
Alas, only a sprinkling of "Facts" atop mountains of CGI and hope.
Awesome!
I’m glad Kermit got a voiceover job after the muppets.
I want one of those tic tac UFOs.
There’s been projects like this, starting up for the last 25 years… so far, no prize-winner
I remember one starting in the UK,Even quicker than Concorde, Take of with jet engines,Then to ram jet then onto air breathing rocket engines not actually leaving the atmosphere, The British lost interest so over to America and heard nothing since
@@Johnketes54
I can’t count all the dead SSBJ business jet projects I’ve heard of.
Let’s just hope that the U.K. imposes the same restrictions, on the supersonic American aircraft, that the US imposed on Concord
Hydrogen combustion may actually make sense. The trick may be in optimizing hydrogen "mining."
"Beyond Facts" Cant' argue with honesty.
The design looks like a boomerang!
Had to stop halfway as I kept waiting to hear him say “Wait there’s More” in his shouty voice that never pauses for breath..
lol managed to smash that like button :)))) I died.
Ahh I remember ...
0:20 - There were 2 commercial supersonic transport aircraft: The Concorde and the TU-144
You will never get me on a plane with 800 others… ever.
And I have been waiting for that flying car and ANYONE can handle since the 1950s. Hell of a corner!!
The vast majority of these aircraft will never be seen anywhere aside from these cool CGI clips
The transforming car is a great ides as long as you don't hit the transform button while in flight lol 👀, or while ur parked in front of a burger joint waiting for ur order 🤣👍
7:40 - That was the Best plug for subscribe!!
I admire your optimistic voice.....but be honest....2023...and this is the best to look forward to? Let me remind you of an old movie called 2001:a space odyssey...i saw this as a kid....2001...2023...ya feel me!?
Good job on the information
The flying V is a cool concept, and there are likely no flight issues. However, there will be logistic issues with it: for starters, how will it fit inside hangars?
Make new bigger wider hangars? I don't know, just a thought. Seems easier than saying we can't develop these technologically advanced planes because they won't fit in present day hangars.
@@GizmoRob176 Yes, new hangars will be required. And what do we call that? A logistical issue. And just one of many. Are these issues insurmountable? Probably not. Are they obstacles that will slow adoption of this new tech? Absolutely.
Final product will have the same 65m wingspan as the A350, and fit the same number of passengers. Suppose to be 20% more efficient however.
*Author:* the only commercial supersonic aircraft was Concorde
*Tu-144:* am I a joke to you?
KLM's Flying V is a beautiful craft!
Wow... seems great. Improvement is good
The Mighty Ducks perfected the Flying V back in the 90’s.
Love the news and net zero flight makes me salivate… scares me also but… of course it does.
Yes I smashed subscribe
People can barely get out of their driveway without killing themselves. Ain't nobody flying them lol
Beyond facts? Well this video truly lives up to the name.
Will it get me to and from the Airport faster in heavy traffic ? Will checking in and going through TSA be faster ? and how about Baggage Claim will that be faster too ? I have spent more time doing these things than on the flight itself !
Incredible how nobody is coming up with "safer" aircrafts ...people just want to go faster or use different fuels..
I smashed like button
With the limits of range on electric vehicles how will that affect their performance numbers during adverse weather conditions and air traffic control holds for aircraft already departed from an airport?
Love all the way from Garden Reach Kolkata West Bengal India 🇮🇳.
Good job
For the EP ,can you change batteries in mid flight ?
the future is here, airplanes are iconic inventions
We'll see. The Concord was so expensive to operate that it was subsidized by the governments of France and the UK, but when one of those governments didn't want to spend what it would take to repair and upgrade the aircraft, its days were numbered even before the tragic crash which ended the program completely.