Would love to see a video on the paint used on modern planes. To create a paint flexible enough to withstand the vibrations of flight but strong enough withstand the friction. Sounds like it would be an interesting chemical dilemma.
I’m sitting in my chair, at 1G. I feel fairly comfortable with a light pressure against the back. I am wearing a g-suit that inflates as I stand up, to prevent passing out. I easily accelerate towards the refrigerator to obtain some liquid refreshment. I’m proud to wear the wings of a Couch Pilot, 1st Class.
Greg Hartwick Dude!!! That’s one of the funniest, witty and as someone has already stated “Underrated” comments ever. I almost pissed my pants reading it. In my defense I already had a few scotch and sodas. Anyway, you win the Internet for a month, sir.
Tom Scott flies with the red arrows, real engineering flies with with the thunderbirds. There's definitely some joys with being an educational youtuber
@Ned Kelly No due to design limitations, he was un able to 'sustain' it due to energy decay. I myself employed a electric guitar and a hi mu amplifier.Not only was I able to sustain full 'G' but as well employing the floating Floyd 'stick' equipped on the guitar I was able to perform flawless maneuvers. Dive bombing and immediately recovering and then pulling back on the 'stick' to reach the stratosphere! 'Blacking out' only when my angry wife 'pulled the plug' and 'crashed'
Coming from a background in aerospace engineering, this video is excellent! Factually correct and easy to understand. Would love it if some of my old professors had showed us something like this. Props for even using the "standard" body-fixed axis orientation.
It's the best description of what a fighter jet is. We've already achieved a level of technology that allows us to achieve feats our ancestors would consider to be acts of gods. However most of our technological breakthroughs go to increasing the efficiency and scope of killing each other. We are genius apes that are refusing to get off the branch.
I have followed your channel for a couple of years now and I just wanted to leave a short thank you for the videos you upload. I am no "Engineer" but I like to think I am rather mechanically minded and i really enjoy the detail and effort you put into these videos. Again. Thank you.
According to Google translate: An bhfuil na Sasanaigh fós anseo -> Are the English still here Ná bí ag labhairt Béarla -> Don't speak English Tá ocras orm -> I am hungry
Excellent video (I am an aerospace engineer). FYI there have been attempts to make g-suits that use fluid-filled bladders, instead of air. Apparently their response time is much faster, allowing better performance.
AF Pilot here. The airspeed on the Heads-Up Display is in knots, not MPH. And it's "indicated airpseed"; so at 16,000ft your groundspeed is a lot higher, because the gauge is in thinner air than on the ground. Great video! Sorry you got sick!
My uncle Roy Allen was the lead mechanic for the Thunderbirds for several years after the Air Force told him he had to retire (mostly because they didn't want to pay his severance package if he stayed any longer). He went on to work on the development of the F-35. I watch this channel a lot. I think it's pretty cool that you've been even closer to those planes than I have (close enough to touch one), and I own one of the the ground crew insignia pins. Well done!
The avatar state is a defense mechanism designed to empower you with the knowledge and experience of all the previous avatars. -Avatar Roku. Maybe that's why he tried for avatar state.
Plane actually needs 3rd very important thing. Strong enough controls to combat the air in said high speed. Doesn't matter how strong your wings and structure of plane in general is, if it can't move surfaces in order to make drastic movement changes in high speed.
Rentta planes used cables and leverage directly for a long time, Then direct hydraulic controls, and eventually ‘fly by wire’ (electrical wire, not cables) meaning a computer was involved. All of these were to allow higher G and more precision control feedback than humans could provide.
@@MusicBent Minor tidbit regarding fly-by-wire, FBW aircraft still use hydraulics; each empennage has its own hydraulic device and they are electrically managed by a computer.
Negative G's are horrible. Got to go on a formation flight flown by retired f-16 pilots (in a blackshape prime, about 50 steps down from an f-16). The +4G was fine, however anytime the slightest bit of negative G hit i felt like puking.
@@mahrezkh1894 Nah the negative Gs weren't intense enough to force any considerable amount of blood to my head as far as i experienced, it just made your stomach twist and turn like nobody's buisiness. Imagine going down in an elevator times 50.
Stukas flew at very low speeds, like 200-300km/h so the initial drop wasn't supposed to be that bad. Imagine the second drop of a roller coaster(not the first where you hardly have any speed)
Jealous! Great video :) Regarding the derivation of equations to calculate wing loading when in turns; in straight and level steady turns, the wing loading due to the angle of bank can be calculated by g=1/cos(theta), the increase in stall speed is V(s)=sqrt(1/cos(theta)). (where theta is the angle of bank). G-suits were used by the US in their P-51 and P-47 fighters from the later months of 1944 onwards, I don't think they ever became common use amongst the British in WWII - although I was unaware of them being used by Seafire pilots!
Trust vectoring is rarely used in a dogfight. It's most useful purpose is for engine efficiency in super cruise, at least that's what the engineers have said. Pilots may use it completely differently in a pinch! In a dog fight you typically want to keep your energy as high as possible, which means not slowing down. But thrust vectoring can be used for some radical maneuvers. But typically those are very dangerous and will usually get you killed by whoever is shooting at you because your speed just drops too low. Again these are generalizations so there's always lots of exceptions to the rules. For example, maybe you need to just get your nose around real fast on somebody so thrust vectoring may help with that, but modern missiles can shoot off bore with great efficiency so often that's not necessary. I guess it could be used when a gun fight. It would be great to hear from a modern pilot that uses thrust vectoring regularly!
I mean nowadays dogfight are pretty much useless due to the fact high tech missiles exist. They can outperform and out-track every one so fights usually happen kilometers away from one another. The only area where having a gun is even somewhat useful is in CAS roles (god bless the titanium bathtub) but it is mostly useful against people without effective AA (which still represent most of today's targets) and lose effectiveness when you are talking about fighting against missiles. To be fair I am somewhat interested to know why there isn't more long range missile platforms that shoot cruise missiles and araams from 40 km away. I mean at this point shooting the missile down with another missile is probably more effective than trying to dodge it.
Your videos are a pure joy to watch. I've been watching them with my Dad - we connect over our mutual aircraft nerdiness. Thank you for helping the connection. I've bought him a Nebula subscription for Christmas this year.
@@limiv5272 Yeah it's hard to tell if a pilot died while he misses his landing, slides across the deck, and drops in front of a Carrier moving where he just landed in the water. Really fucking hard to tell if he died or not.
the video is masterpiece!!! It covers hands on experiment, physics equations, history of war, aircraft design, evolution of aeroplane, material used for design, I can't imagine how much effort has been put to create such a MASTERPIECE!!!!!! Blows my mind.
I love then ancestors analogy you made. It’s so awesome to think about the hundreds and hundreds of thousand gals and guys behind oneself. Great video as always.
Hey real engineering, I have a possible request. I love seeing your videos and the sheer quality and work being put into each one, but we never see the behind the scenes on how the video was made. I think it would be really cool if you did a step by step on how you make videos, and maybe a bit of history on how you evolved your video creation, and maybe even how you went to expand with your network watchnebula. Thanks for the great videos you put out
My favorite part 1:53 "During that vertical climb I reached about 4.8Gs There is literally no scenario in human evolution that simulates the forces your body feels when a fighter jet decides it's time to change direction. I felt like my brain was being rewired as it happened, like my brain was going to go into the avatar state and ask my ancestors for advice on how deal with this shit but not a single one of them even knew what an F-16 was. The closest any one of them even got to this level of G was when my grand pappy stood up too fast whilst digging potatoes in 1932 and got a little lightheaded "
Really excited that someone finally decided to do something about TH-cam's tyrannical approach on how it treats content creators. I can't believe i enjoyed an embedded advertisement, but will give nebula some attention for sure!
Yeah, quite an exaggeration there. Just to make sure, I did a quick google search, and there's tons of articles talking about birds rutinely experiencing G forces greater that those experienced by humans in modern jets.
You truely have one of if not the greatest engineering channels (in my opinion). This channel has helped me through many exams. Keep up the clear and interesting content mate. Cheers and don't ever stop doing what you're doing. Much love from down Under mate 🛩️🚀💡🍻
The highest G force I’ve ever experienced was the time I fell asleep while driving and impacted a retaining wall at 80mph, I was 6’7 260lbs at the time so no idea how much force exactly.
I'm assuming you don't mean at 90 degrees, because just off the top of my head I don't think you'd likely, if at all, survive that. At some point the large aorta rips loose from the heart, as I understand it, and that is the limiting acceleration/jerk limit.
I've spend some years in design of rollercoasters, forces are real. We consider the heart line during the ride. Decades ago was the reference coordinate-system the main axle of chassis. 4,5G in vertical direction was allowed, but nobody considered the additional acceleration at the heart. It caused 5,5G accelaration in passengers heart. This was overkill. Today, we considering the heart line. The heart line gives the path and any curves of the structure will be given. 5G vertical, 1,5G horizontal and 2G side accelaration is "ordinary". Great vid!
2:09 "It felt like my brain was being rewired as it happened like my brain was trying to go into the Avatar state and ask my ancestors for advice on how to deal with this [ __ ] but not a single one of them even knew what an F-16 was - the closest any of them got to this level of G's was when my grandpappy's stood up too fast in 1932 while digging potatoes and got a little lightheaded" 😂😂
Hey, I've got a lithograph of the huge mural (13:45) at Nellis AFB. Home of the Thunderbirds. Awesome painting. Got it back in '91 during my AF ROTC days.
3:00 peregrine falcons experience ~30gs at the bottom of their dives. But that is lateral to their body, so they don't have the same problems as fighter pilots do.
It is amazing to watch planes fly... but what really pulls me in, is watching the surfaces doing their jobs, like the leading edge slats on the F-16 dropping down as the plane takes to the air, and slowly raise up.... it is like watching the suspension on a car, it just....it seems awesome to me to watch these things working.... Am I weird?
modulus of elasticity The modulus of elasticity equation is used only under conditions of elastic deformation from compression or tension. The modulus of elasticity is simply stress divided by strain: E = σ / ε with units of pascals (Pa), newtons per square meter (N/m2) or newtons per square millimeter (N/mm2).
Most pedantic of corrections: G is the gravitational constant, what you're talking about is g. Awesome video, glad you're getting the payoff you deserve for the work you've put into this channel!
Overall a great video, but one error: The Panther wasn't the Navy's first carrier jet. That honor belongs to the McDonnell Phantom, though the Panther was right behind it and is better remembered.
This was quite a waste of fuel and money just to experience 4,5g. In almost every glider you can experience 5,3g, in some 7g. A flight would cost between 5€ and 100€. This is also way more impressive, since you might have a wing span of 15-30m and an aspect ratio of over 40.
6:43 "In order to rack up high G's in the air, the plane needs to have two things: 1: A powerful engine capable of reaching a high airspeed" As a glider-pilot I feel offended. :D My plane has no engine at all and I have surely had pulled some high G's before. Only drawback is, that high G's (or rather the manouvers that cause them) cost a lot of kinetic energy, which a glider can only obtain with potential energy aka height. So pulling high G's equals loosing a lot of hard earned altitude. Anyway keep up the nice work! As an civil engineer and technical interested person myself I am realy enjoying your videos!
Your definition of “high G” is clearly not the same, lol...60 degree banks in a 172 at 100 knots only produce about 1.5 Gs, so I highly doubt that even those kinds of loads could be experienced in a glider.
That’s literally what he stated in the video. WW1 pilots had to limit their high G maneuvers to short bursts if they wanted to stay flying. Your situation as a glider pilot is even worse
@@ozzman1997 please don't just assume things. gliders are light and have a big wingspan which is able to generate quite some forces, so combined with the low weight quite some Gs. There are glider aerobatics as well by the way. Gliders probably can't create the same forces as a fighter jet, but those 4.5G from this video are definitely possible. EDIT: Actually, here a guy passes out in a glider, definitely more than 1.5G, a comment of the guy states "around 5Gs": th-cam.com/video/waM_fE_YEyk/w-d-xo.html
@@ozzman1997 , it's relatively easy to get to 3-4g in a glider, and even on a paraglider. A 172 is a fine plane, but it's not a very capable once you're doing anything exciting ─ although I suppose there are some that have been modified for acro.
Real engineering fades in and out of “real engineering” to “real tactics”. Really cool and kinda sad seeing how everything revolves around war, but at the sane time interesting. Still, love the videos
Whenever i do a turn in Warthunder:OVERLOAD 9G LOST CONTROL Me when i see nerdy boy from western Ireland getting his share of Gs: thats one unlucky chap suffering for the name of science
The video is great, but I think there is a detail you didn't clarify well enough. The indicator of Gs in the HUD doesn't show "g forces", in fact it is an adimensional coeffcient. it shows the ratio between the lift generated by the wings and the weight of the airplane. Thus, on level flight it shows 1, lift=weight. When turning as you explained the lift increases and thus it shows a value greater than one.
3.5 G's is the most i've ever felt on Lagoon Amusement Park's "Cannibal" coaster. Even that will knock you out if you don't brace for it. The fact that anyone, suit or not, can withstand 9 G's is insane.
God I wish I could've become a combat pilot, seems like the best job in the world to me. Not after breaking my left arm 5 times sadly, got rejected 😅 Anyway great video, keep up the good work.
Half of humanity just saw the Top Gun 2 trailer, half of those are still pondering that "cobra" maneuver in the trailer, and then you release this. Brilliant timing sir!
2:03 Cough* Cough* F1 cars cough* cough*! No seriously, Lewis Hamilton pulled 6.5 lateral Gs in Australian GP qualifying in 2017 and all F1 drivers experience 4.5 Gs+ going through Maggets and Becketts in Silverstone!
Lateral Gs are a bit less hostile to the human body, not saying it's easy but having experienced both types I know which type I'd rather take daily ahah
That's not human evolution though And they brake at 10g's, but the car can only maintain that kind of g loading for a very short period of time. Otherwise the tires would overheat and fail.
@@PGomes99 i know, but if you take into account the amount of time you have to correct course if you end up passing out in an F1 car is lower as compared to a fighter jet, but yea, you are right, I would rather have a crash in an F1 car than a jet!
@@chrishall2594 that's fine, there's not an aircraft currently built that can fly with the precision and accuracy of a bird, bat or insect, especially not at the weight/strength ratio or energy efficiency. Apples and oranges.
@@chrishall2594 im pretty sure humans themselves couldnt fly for shit. I bet a bird would do a lot better than us though if it was sat in the seat of a fighter plane
I mean yes. There is a reason I get invited. I have my morals though. I cancelled a huge contract with the RAF this year because their agent (I stress it was their agent, not the RAF) wanted me to promote the RAF as a place to work directly. No thanks. I'm not about that.
I hate to be a nit picker but the caption for the lift on a wing for the aircraft says Lockheed F-16, when it was developed and produced by General Dynamics. Otherwise great video!!! Love this channel and every video is watched multiple times over!
Fun fact: Every game in the Ace Combat series has you pulling ridiculously unrealistic Gs, except Ace Combat 3. AC3's physics are more akin to a simulator, and the lower level planes are about as maneuverable as modern fighter jets, with the exception of more powerful engines. The later planes do get maneuverability which is much more extreme, achieving G forces outside the range the human body can tolerate, but even then, it's not inaccurate. The current fighter jets can handle much higher than 9 Gs, but are limited because of the pilots, and in AC3, the cockpit has you laying down in the plane, instead of sitting, which is a position in which the human body can tolerate G forces much easier.
Hey, I've got a great idea for one of your future videos: Energy regeneration for trains that run down long mountain passes. For example, there is the Cajon Pass in California that has a dozen heavy freight trains per hour that run up and down that part of the mountain. If they simply had some way to capture the energy of trains coming down that hill, and use it (or 50% of it, more likely) for the next train that is going 'up' the hill, a few million dollars of fuel per year could be saved by the railway companies. The best solution that I see for this is to have a few dozen specially modified 'pusher' electric locomotives that would be stationed at the top and bottom of the pass, with overhead wires on only that portion of the line, and those locomotives would not actually connect to the trains, they would simply be located at the downward end of the train and either 'push' the trains up the hills, or 'retard' the trains speed as they went down the hills, putting the recovered energy into the overhead lines to be used for other 'pusher' locomotives that will be going up the hill. You can buy old decommissioned locomotives for next to nothing at scrap yards and convert them to all-electric use very cheaply, no problem there. The only big expense will be the installing of the overhead lines and the waiting spur tracks at the top and bottoms of the pass.
This why the imperial system needs to go die in a fire already. I don't know, conflicting information online. The Thunderbirds read through the script and didn't correct it, so I will trust their call.
Well technically, one knot is defined as one mile per hour... one *nautical* mile per hour, that is, while mph usually means *statute* miles per hour. So technically, he's not wrong, the imperial system should go die in a fire. (Source: wikipedia)
@@RealEngineering I just assumed it's in knots since that's the standard measurement for like, every new plane in existence, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Thunderbirds modified that
@@Th3Shrike No, a nautical mile is *defined* as one arc minute around the equator, which happens to be around 1.15 statute miles... and yes, statute mile ≠ nautical mile, but technically, the display is still in "miles per hour", just with a different mile.
The F-16 has always been one of my most favorite planes. In addition to being so maneuverable, it just looks So. Damn. SEXY. As much as I love the capabilities and looks of the Raptor, the Falcon is still, in my mind, the sexiest looking plane there is.
English: “the” Germans: “die, das, der, den” Make up your mind By the way, “s” in English is just “s”. If we want it to sound like “sh” then WE JUST ADD AN “h”
@@JustDoinFlorida "English: “the”" Pafetic, conways nomeaning of gender (like most europian languages would for every word) but is just an extra word that makes speech longer. "die, der, das" un viss jau vienmēr paliek tas pats. "By the way, “s” in English is just “s”. If we want it to sound like “sh” then WE JUST ADD AN “h”" Than please explain to me the spelling of these words "sure" and "school".
Great video, but I do miss the discussion about angle of attack and drag, and technical terms like specific excess power, turn rate v turn radius, level bomber v dive bomber, etc. That being said, great video, especially as an introduction to the topic of G’s. More at the mandatory: Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators :)
@@nickh7902 You are right! The airplane wings produce the real force, where the radial component accelerates the airplane against its inertial mass . The reaction to it is commonly but inaccurately called centrifugal 'force'. Like you said the magnitude of this component is M×v^2/r. where r is the instantaneous radius of curvature of the trajectory. The vertical component M×g supports the airplane's weight on a level turn. The wing lift is L=√[(M×v^2 )^2 + (M×g)^2] In summary you are correct, his comment is wrong. Also incorrect @ 8:18 is the shear diagram, which is not linear, unless the lift distribution would be constant, which it never is on a wing. Disappointing is the sloppy physics by Real Engineering. Why does an airplane survive a g-load? Because above the maneuvering speed the angle of attack is limited such that the structural design enveloppe is not violated. Every airplane wing prior to certification is tested in a rig to limit load to ensure it can take the design load multiplied by the safety factor, usually 1.5 before destruction. The limit loads are defined by regulation in civilian A/C
In addition to what Comrade Stalin said, fighter jets like the F 16 generally will not commit, such manuvers because they are not designed for any high negative g. Also negative g reduces the ability of the pilot to aquire, target and shoot down an enemy fighter.
Great video, one thing: at 12:02 you said "duralium", when the alloy is called "duralumin", coming from Dürener Metallwerke, a factory in Germany where the alloy was initially made, and aluminium.
We also just released a video over on Real Science detailing how the U.S. eradicated Malaria. th-cam.com/video/JXST_9ach1w/w-d-xo.html
Would love to see a video on the paint used on modern planes. To create a paint flexible enough to withstand the vibrations of flight but strong enough withstand the friction. Sounds like it would be an interesting chemical dilemma.
I like that avatar reference👌
Real engineering can you make video about flywheel energy storage and use of it in our daily life and maybe in the future.
Yup I saw it when it came
Good stuff ,please keep posting these documentaries.
I’m sitting in my chair, at 1G. I feel fairly comfortable with a light pressure against the back. I am wearing a g-suit that inflates as I stand up, to prevent passing out. I easily accelerate towards the refrigerator to obtain some liquid refreshment. I’m proud to wear the wings of a Couch Pilot, 1st Class.
Underrated
Greg Hartwick
Dude!!! That’s one of the funniest, witty and as someone has already stated “Underrated” comments ever. I almost pissed my pants reading it. In my defense I already had a few scotch and sodas. Anyway, you win the Internet for a month, sir.
@@damianketcham cringe
@@ianmorris1612 Not cringe
@@drewbeans read who I was replying to, stupid
Smoothest face reveal in TH-cam history
Ronan Linnett 🤯🤯 I had no idea he looked like that
He has shown his face multiple times...
He has his own vlog channel
Is he the bearded person?
I thought that was Verratasium for a sec
3:47 “because not all G’s are born equally”
The single most gangster thing R.E. has ever come out with.
When the u hit the G, some pass out
Watching this remembering the good times when I could travel and do cool shit. I miss you 2019.
I feel that
@@alanknight7912 me too dude, me too...
I live in Germany and I can't travel anywhere. Return my trip to France covid!
Yeeeeee
do an episode on the insane engineering required to tear down government tyranny
Tom Scott flies with the red arrows, real engineering flies with with the thunderbirds. There's definitely some joys with being an educational youtuber
Jacob Eccles time for someone to fly with the blue angels
@@Systox25 "Hey this is Destin from SmarterEveryDay. Did you ever wonder how fighter pilots......"
@@Systox25 Sam: (Wendover) but airplanes.
@@uselessadv tbf, destin probably has flown a lot, given his previous job.
Tom Scott passes out at 3.5 G in a centrifuge.
Dude, I want to ride in a fighter jet so bad
Could you say- you wawn't that?
The highest G i ever pulled is the right side of the piano
The Student Official ... Oh poo....
Don't you press that G?
I managed a sharp G.
Hahaha lol 😂
@Ned Kelly No due to design limitations, he was un able to 'sustain' it due to energy decay. I myself employed a electric guitar and a hi mu amplifier.Not only was I able to sustain full 'G' but as well employing the floating Floyd 'stick' equipped on the guitar I was able to perform flawless maneuvers. Dive bombing and immediately recovering and then pulling back on the 'stick' to reach the stratosphere! 'Blacking out' only when my angry wife 'pulled the plug' and 'crashed'
As a fellow engineer, I appreciate this channel more than I can put in words. Keep up the good work!
The first person who pulls off a weightless maneuver is the real OG.
Bah Dum Tiss
Took me a second for it to tick.
Looooool
...
Oh, parabolic flight?
AHHHHHH I felt so dizzy just watching this. What an awesome opportunity and such an interesting video. You're... climbing to new heights.
Congrats and props on flying with the Thunderbirds! How'd you pull that off?
I lost it at the avatar state comparison and "Are the English still here?" XD
I had to let my great great grandmother down lightly. She has been anxious to get them out ever since the Black and Tans burned her house down.
@@RealEngineering wtf
Real Engineering lol
Real Engineering I hope she’s passed enough time in the afterlife to burn all Churchill’s hats
@@RealEngineering He means the Royal Irish Constabulary Special Reserve, not racism.
Coming from a background in aerospace engineering, this video is excellent! Factually correct and easy to understand. Would love it if some of my old professors had showed us something like this. Props for even using the "standard" body-fixed axis orientation.
I really liked the term, “genius and stupidity of man”.
Is that reflective of mankind?
I'd say so.
I loved it
The dolphins will be saying it in the future when they're swimming through our cities.
It's the best description of what a fighter jet is.
We've already achieved a level of technology that allows us to achieve feats our ancestors would consider to be acts of gods.
However most of our technological breakthroughs go to increasing the efficiency and scope of killing each other.
We are genius apes that are refusing to get off the branch.
I have followed your channel for a couple of years now and I just wanted to leave a short thank you for the videos you upload. I am no "Engineer" but I like to think I am rather mechanically minded and i really enjoy the detail and effort you put into these videos.
Again. Thank you.
According to Google translate:
An bhfuil na Sasanaigh fós anseo -> Are the English still here
Ná bí ag labhairt Béarla -> Don't speak English
Tá ocras orm -> I am hungry
Pints? - We are going for pints whether you like it or not.
@@RealEngineering Haha awesome that you answered! I assumed that the word pints didn't need translation :D
@@RealEngineering I was really hoping for "An bhfuil cead agam dul go dtí an leithreas?"
why didnt they hit 8G to KO you? 😂
So far in school I only learnd tá ocras orm(probobly the great famine)
Excellent video (I am an aerospace engineer). FYI there have been attempts to make g-suits that use fluid-filled bladders, instead of air. Apparently their response time is much faster, allowing better performance.
"The Genius and Stupidity of Mankind"
I lost it right there, LOL
yep
what do you mean, lost it? you laughed at it? why?
AF Pilot here. The airspeed on the Heads-Up Display is in knots, not MPH. And it's "indicated airpseed"; so at 16,000ft your groundspeed is a lot higher, because the gauge is in thinner air than on the ground. Great video! Sorry you got sick!
Lol - the ancestor cutscene was great
That was true art
funniest joke in long while.
Stuka pilots were dope at negative G's
Man avatar state was a reference to avatar the last airbender
Yea i kept repeating it
My uncle Roy Allen was the lead mechanic for the Thunderbirds for several years after the Air Force told him he had to retire (mostly because they didn't want to pay his severance package if he stayed any longer). He went on to work on the development of the F-35. I watch this channel a lot. I think it's pretty cool that you've been even closer to those planes than I have (close enough to touch one), and I own one of the the ground crew insignia pins. Well done!
"The closest any of them got to these G's was when my grandpapi stood up too fast while picking potatoes." 😭😭😭 feckin dead
Emoji=cringe
The avatar state is a defense mechanism designed to empower you with the knowledge and experience of all the previous avatars.
-Avatar Roku.
Maybe that's why he tried for avatar state.
@@TheOfficialPanning redditors be like
"This is an experience only the genius and stupidity of man could facilitate."
That is an amazing sentence.
Plane actually needs 3rd very important thing. Strong enough controls to combat the air in said high speed. Doesn't matter how strong your wings and structure of plane in general is, if it can't move surfaces in order to make drastic movement changes in high speed.
Rentta planes used cables and leverage directly for a long time, Then direct hydraulic controls, and eventually ‘fly by wire’ (electrical wire, not cables) meaning a computer was involved. All of these were to allow higher G and more precision control feedback than humans could provide.
*nervous zero noises*
Hydraulic actuators are nothing new and have been around for a century. Important sure, special they are not.
@@MusicBent Minor tidbit regarding fly-by-wire, FBW aircraft still use hydraulics; each empennage has its own hydraulic device and they are electrically managed by a computer.
@@jhk8396 correct! Another cool thing about fly by wire is how it made unstable designs feasible!
You’re a hero educating the public with your videos. Good on you man!
Stuka pilots were dope at negative G's
Negative G's are horrible. Got to go on a formation flight flown by retired f-16 pilots (in a blackshape prime, about 50 steps down from an f-16).
The +4G was fine, however anytime the slightest bit of negative G hit i felt like puking.
@@ric84 cuz the blood goes up to your brain instead of your legs
@@mahrezkh1894 Nah the negative Gs weren't intense enough to force any considerable amount of blood to my head as far as i experienced, it just made your stomach twist and turn like nobody's buisiness.
Imagine going down in an elevator times 50.
Stukas flew at very low speeds, like 200-300km/h so the initial drop wasn't supposed to be that bad. Imagine the second drop of a roller coaster(not the first where you hardly have any speed)
Imagine a jet dive bomber
Jealous! Great video :)
Regarding the derivation of equations to calculate wing loading when in turns; in straight and level steady turns, the wing loading due to the angle of bank can be calculated by g=1/cos(theta), the increase in stall speed is V(s)=sqrt(1/cos(theta)). (where theta is the angle of bank).
G-suits were used by the US in their P-51 and P-47 fighters from the later months of 1944 onwards, I don't think they ever became common use amongst the British in WWII - although I was unaware of them being used by Seafire pilots!
We definitly need a video about thrust vectoring and it's use in dogfight
av8b and f35 eh ?
but risk of stalling is too high when in a dogfight
He's talking about the f22's thrust vectoring. Not the f35 and av8b
@@chikoopandya isnt the the same principle ? be it engine nozzle swaying or duct redirection or panels closing in (same as revers on the viggens)
Trust vectoring is rarely used in a dogfight. It's most useful purpose is for engine efficiency in super cruise, at least that's what the engineers have said. Pilots may use it completely differently in a pinch! In a dog fight you typically want to keep your energy as high as possible, which means not slowing down. But thrust vectoring can be used for some radical maneuvers. But typically those are very dangerous and will usually get you killed by whoever is shooting at you because your speed just drops too low.
Again these are generalizations so there's always lots of exceptions to the rules. For example, maybe you need to just get your nose around real fast on somebody so thrust vectoring may help with that, but modern missiles can shoot off bore with great efficiency so often that's not necessary. I guess it could be used when a gun fight.
It would be great to hear from a modern pilot that uses thrust vectoring regularly!
I mean nowadays dogfight are pretty much useless due to the fact high tech missiles exist. They can outperform and out-track every one so fights usually happen kilometers away from one another. The only area where having a gun is even somewhat useful is in CAS roles (god bless the titanium bathtub) but it is mostly useful against people without effective AA (which still represent most of today's targets) and lose effectiveness when you are talking about fighting against missiles. To be fair I am somewhat interested to know why there isn't more long range missile platforms that shoot cruise missiles and araams from 40 km away. I mean at this point shooting the missile down with another missile is probably more effective than trying to dodge it.
Your videos are a pure joy to watch. I've been watching them with my Dad - we connect over our mutual aircraft nerdiness. Thank you for helping the connection. I've bought him a Nebula subscription for Christmas this year.
That random clip of a plan sliding across the deck of the carrier and going off the side lmaoo
A pilot dying. Yeah fucking hilarious.
@@MrComputerCoder We don't know for sure that anyone died that day
@@limiv5272 Yeah it's hard to tell if a pilot died while he misses his landing, slides across the deck, and drops in front of a Carrier moving where he just landed in the water. Really fucking hard to tell if he died or not.
point break is annoying .
People have laughed at other people dying since the dawn of man. It's not a strange thing to do
the video is masterpiece!!!
It covers
hands on experiment,
physics equations,
history of war,
aircraft design,
evolution of aeroplane,
material used for design,
I can't imagine how much effort has been put to create such a MASTERPIECE!!!!!!
Blows my mind.
Real Engineering Curses: Oh this is for reals!
I actually had that censored, but in my rush to get out for pints with the ghost of my grand papi I forgot to add it.
@@RealEngineering Replying Real Engineering is best Real Engineering.
The first person who pulls off a weightless maneuver is the real OG.
I love then ancestors analogy you made. It’s so awesome to think about the hundreds and hundreds of thousand gals and guys behind oneself. Great video as always.
Hey real engineering, I have a possible request. I love seeing your videos and the sheer quality and work being put into each one, but we never see the behind the scenes on how the video was made. I think it would be really cool if you did a step by step on how you make videos, and maybe a bit of history on how you evolved your video creation, and maybe even how you went to expand with your network watchnebula. Thanks for the great videos you put out
My favorite part 1:53
"During that vertical climb I reached about 4.8Gs
There is literally no scenario in human evolution that simulates the forces your body feels when a fighter jet decides it's time to change direction.
I felt like my brain was being rewired as it happened, like my brain was going to go into the avatar state and ask my ancestors for advice on how deal with this shit but not a single one of them even knew what an F-16 was. The closest any one of them even got to this level of G was when my grand pappy stood up too fast whilst digging potatoes in 1932 and got a little lightheaded "
Was it worth typing all that for 26 likes?
I am pretty curious for the stream.
Really excited that someone finally decided to do something about TH-cam's tyrannical approach on how it treats content creators. I can't believe i enjoyed an embedded advertisement, but will give nebula some attention for sure!
"I Call upon the ancestors for knowledge of combating G-Forces" *ancestors* "Uhhhhhhh, hell if I know"
I’m so happy you got this great opportunity. Very deserved.
"This is not a scenario any animal in the past 4.5 billion years of evolution on Earth has experienced."
Birds?
Birds ain't shit dog. Flappy fucks
If you know any bird that flies at transonic speeds
A bird doesn't have enough weight to be pulling that many G's
Yeah, quite an exaggeration there. Just to make sure, I did a quick google search, and there's tons of articles talking about birds rutinely experiencing G forces greater that those experienced by humans in modern jets.
@@Luchoedge Yeah, I heard the line and was like "I wonder how many Gs birds pull" and ended up seeing way higher numbers than humans can tolerate.
You truely have one of if not the greatest engineering channels (in my opinion). This channel has helped me through many exams. Keep up the clear and interesting content mate. Cheers and don't ever stop doing what you're doing. Much love from down Under mate 🛩️🚀💡🍻
The highest G force I’ve ever experienced was the time I fell asleep while driving and impacted a retaining wall at 80mph, I was 6’7 260lbs at the time so no idea how much force exactly.
Jesus
I'm assuming you don't mean at 90 degrees, because just off the top of my head I don't think you'd likely, if at all, survive that. At some point the large aorta rips loose from the heart, as I understand it, and that is the limiting acceleration/jerk limit.
@@MrJdsenior Or a basilar skull fracture (common in racing deaths)
In the most respectful way, how are you living
I've spend some years in design of rollercoasters, forces are real. We consider the heart line during the ride. Decades ago was the reference coordinate-system the main axle of chassis. 4,5G in vertical direction was allowed, but nobody considered the additional acceleration at the heart. It caused 5,5G accelaration in passengers heart. This was overkill. Today, we considering the heart line. The heart line gives the path and any curves of the structure will be given. 5G vertical, 1,5G horizontal and 2G side accelaration is "ordinary".
Great vid!
When people draw giant G's in the sky, thats a high G maneuver.
You're not wrong
It reminds me of US Navy pilots drawing penis in the sky
@@John-mh7oy or a hot air balloon
r/technicallythetruth
2:09 "It felt like my brain was being rewired as it happened like my brain was trying to go into the Avatar state and ask my ancestors for advice on how to deal with this [ __ ] but not a single one of them even knew what an F-16 was - the closest any of them got to this level of G's was when my grandpappy's stood up too fast in 1932 while digging potatoes and got a little lightheaded" 😂😂
We Demand More of Such Video
Tzwac dastag I’ve never seen ground stabilized 360 footage from a jet like that. Super cool if we got the raw footage without music or narration
What an incredible opportunity! Congratulations, and thank you for sharing it with us.
At 16:24 That jet be like, "They see me rollin, they hatin..."
What an absolute amazing video, thank you for this, and congratulations on making this video!
16:24 I love how when you talk about the wing getting less efficient you show that plane sliding off a carrier 😂
Hey, I've got a lithograph of the huge mural (13:45) at Nellis AFB. Home of the Thunderbirds. Awesome painting. Got it back in '91 during my AF ROTC days.
3:00 peregrine falcons experience ~30gs at the bottom of their dives. But that is lateral to their body, so they don't have the same problems as fighter pilots do.
Good point, also woodpeckers can withstand more than 1000gs
@@alexturk6389 they luckily wrap their brains with their tongues to dampen the Gs. Wish we can make stuff like that
@@jhk8396 Wait what?
Lateral ?
I learn so much with your commentary! Thank you so much. I look forward to more and more!
It is amazing to watch planes fly... but what really pulls me in, is watching the surfaces doing their jobs, like the leading edge slats on the F-16 dropping down as the plane takes to the air, and slowly raise up.... it is like watching the suspension on a car, it just....it seems awesome to me to watch these things working.... Am I weird?
I love your video! Educational and humorous! Thank you for the opportunity for me to learn something during my break from busy schedule
Wow perfect timing with Top Gun trailer
modulus of elasticity
The modulus of elasticity equation is used only under conditions of elastic deformation from compression or tension. The modulus of elasticity is simply stress divided by strain: E = σ / ε with units of pascals (Pa), newtons per square meter (N/m2) or newtons per square millimeter (N/mm2).
Most pedantic of corrections: G is the gravitational constant, what you're talking about is g. Awesome video, glad you're getting the payoff you deserve for the work you've put into this channel!
Overall a great video, but one error: The Panther wasn't the Navy's first carrier jet. That honor belongs to the McDonnell Phantom, though the Panther was right behind it and is better remembered.
I am actually very impressed that your airspeed barely changed while you were pulling that 4.6Gs vertically.
F-16 has a Thrust to Weight Ratio of .9-1. Given enough air in the intake, it would be able to hover hypothetically.
3:35 That view is badass. So very cool
I believe someone has experienced that when they thrown out of a catapult maybe in the middle ages.
aaaah... but then he was unable to pass on his genes
+G maneuvers: In future aircraft. Piolets may sit in a rotating sphere and control the aircraft via heads up display only.
0:40 Closed Captions: [Music]
Damn straight.
This was quite a waste of fuel and money just to experience 4,5g. In almost every glider you can experience 5,3g, in some 7g. A flight would cost between 5€ and 100€.
This is also way more impressive, since you might have a wing span of 15-30m and an aspect ratio of over 40.
6:43 "In order to rack up high G's in the air, the plane needs to have two things:
1: A powerful engine capable of reaching a high airspeed"
As a glider-pilot I feel offended. :D
My plane has no engine at all and I have surely had pulled some high G's before. Only drawback is, that high G's (or rather the manouvers that cause them) cost a lot of kinetic energy, which a glider can only obtain with potential energy aka height.
So pulling high G's equals loosing a lot of hard earned altitude.
Anyway keep up the nice work! As an civil engineer and technical interested person myself I am realy enjoying your videos!
Your definition of “high G” is clearly not the same, lol...60 degree banks in a 172 at 100 knots only produce about 1.5 Gs, so I highly doubt that even those kinds of loads could be experienced in a glider.
That’s literally what he stated in the video. WW1 pilots had to limit their high G maneuvers to short bursts if they wanted to stay flying. Your situation as a glider pilot is even worse
@@ozzman1997 please don't just assume things. gliders are light and have a big wingspan which is able to generate quite some forces, so combined with the low weight quite some Gs. There are glider aerobatics as well by the way. Gliders probably can't create the same forces as a fighter jet, but those 4.5G from this video are definitely possible. EDIT: Actually, here a guy passes out in a glider, definitely more than 1.5G, a comment of the guy states "around 5Gs": th-cam.com/video/waM_fE_YEyk/w-d-xo.html
@@ozzman1997 , it's relatively easy to get to 3-4g in a glider, and even on a paraglider. A 172 is a fine plane, but it's not a very capable once you're doing anything exciting ─ although I suppose there are some that have been modified for acro.
@@ozzman1997 A 60 degree level bank is exactly 2G, regardless of plane or speed. If it is capable of pulling a level 60 degree turn - it is doing 2G.
Good for you making your own streaming service I applaud you
2:15 i felt some Exurb1a vibes there.
Real engineering fades in and out of “real engineering” to “real tactics”. Really cool and kinda sad seeing how everything revolves around war, but at the sane time interesting. Still, love the videos
Whenever i do a turn in Warthunder:OVERLOAD 9G LOST CONTROL
Me when i see nerdy boy from western Ireland getting his share of Gs: thats one unlucky chap suffering for the name of science
What if someone made a choker that activate when you exceed your pilots g tolerance in war thunder? Sounds like what michael reeves would do
I was thinking of that when watching him flying. I am talking to Jeff rev
@Eric Hung Oh yes
The video is great, but I think there is a detail you didn't clarify well enough. The indicator of Gs in the HUD doesn't show "g forces", in fact it is an adimensional coeffcient. it shows the ratio between the lift generated by the wings and the weight of the airplane. Thus, on level flight it shows 1, lift=weight. When turning as you explained the lift increases and thus it shows a value greater than one.
FH Phantom was actually the first American jet powered carrier based fighter (which would later become the F2H)
3.5 G's is the most i've ever felt on Lagoon Amusement Park's "Cannibal" coaster. Even that will knock you out if you don't brace for it. The fact that anyone, suit or not, can withstand 9 G's is insane.
God I wish I could've become a combat pilot, seems like the best job in the world to me. Not after breaking my left arm 5 times sadly, got rejected 😅
Anyway great video, keep up the good work.
Mensh did you break it 5 times or in 5 places?
Four times in one place near the wrest and one time up the arm. I was a very 'energetic' kid so I was REALLY accident-prone.
Half of humanity just saw the Top Gun 2 trailer, half of those are still pondering that "cobra" maneuver in the trailer, and then you release this.
Brilliant timing sir!
2:03 Cough* Cough* F1 cars cough* cough*! No seriously, Lewis Hamilton pulled 6.5 lateral Gs in Australian GP qualifying in 2017 and all F1 drivers experience 4.5 Gs+ going through Maggets and Becketts in Silverstone!
Lateral Gs are a bit less hostile to the human body, not saying it's easy but having experienced both types I know which type I'd rather take daily ahah
That's not human evolution though
And they brake at 10g's, but the car can only maintain that kind of g loading for a very short period of time. Otherwise the tires would overheat and fail.
@@PGomes99 i know, but if you take into account the amount of time you have to correct course if you end up passing out in an F1 car is lower as compared to a fighter jet, but yea, you are right, I would rather have a crash in an F1 car than a jet!
Yup
16:24 the plane’s just Tokyo drifting on the aircraft carrier… my two brain cells cannot comprehend this.
3:03 I'd assume birds are evolved to handle higher than 1G in short bursts when theyre hunting/dodging
Ain't a bird alive that can fly the way and speed we can
@@chrishall2594 that's fine, there's not an aircraft currently built that can fly with the precision and accuracy of a bird, bat or insect, especially not at the weight/strength ratio or energy efficiency. Apples and oranges.
@@chrishall2594 im pretty sure humans themselves couldnt fly for shit. I bet a bird would do a lot better than us though if it was sat in the seat of a fighter plane
Chris Hall peregrine falcon can nosedive around 242 mph.
Dont forget about woodpeckers as well, they've evolved to withstand hundreds of G's repeatedly
Highest G's I've ever had was in a waterskiing crash, 30-0 mph in 0.25 seconds was almost 5.5 G for a short time.
"somehow this nerdy boy go to fly thunderbirds"... hmm could it be because you present the military in a 'cool' way
I mean yes. There is a reason I get invited. I have my morals though. I cancelled a huge contract with the RAF this year because their agent (I stress it was their agent, not the RAF) wanted me to promote the RAF as a place to work directly. No thanks. I'm not about that.
@@RealEngineering fair play mate, I'm glad it's something you've given some thought to
I hate to be a nit picker but the caption for the lift on a wing for the aircraft says Lockheed F-16, when it was developed and produced by General Dynamics. Otherwise great video!!! Love this channel and every video is watched multiple times over!
Thank god i'm not feeling this kind of body stress in Ace Combat.
Play War Thunder m8
Eww... Ace Combat
Fun fact: Every game in the Ace Combat series has you pulling ridiculously unrealistic Gs, except Ace Combat 3. AC3's physics are more akin to a simulator, and the lower level planes are about as maneuverable as modern fighter jets, with the exception of more powerful engines. The later planes do get maneuverability which is much more extreme, achieving G forces outside the range the human body can tolerate, but even then, it's not inaccurate. The current fighter jets can handle much higher than 9 Gs, but are limited because of the pilots, and in AC3, the cockpit has you laying down in the plane, instead of sitting, which is a position in which the human body can tolerate G forces much easier.
Thanks for all your hard work on these videos!
Not gonna lie, that footage of you in the plane made me a little queasy just from watching. Hope you didn't have to use the sick bag.
Hey, I've got a great idea for one of your future videos: Energy regeneration for trains that run down long mountain passes. For example, there is the Cajon Pass in California that has a dozen heavy freight trains per hour that run up and down that part of the mountain. If they simply had some way to capture the energy of trains coming down that hill, and use it (or 50% of it, more likely) for the next train that is going 'up' the hill, a few million dollars of fuel per year could be saved by the railway companies. The best solution that I see for this is to have a few dozen specially modified 'pusher' electric locomotives that would be stationed at the top and bottom of the pass, with overhead wires on only that portion of the line, and those locomotives would not actually connect to the trains, they would simply be located at the downward end of the train and either 'push' the trains up the hills, or 'retard' the trains speed as they went down the hills, putting the recovered energy into the overhead lines to be used for other 'pusher' locomotives that will be going up the hill. You can buy old decommissioned locomotives for next to nothing at scrap yards and convert them to all-electric use very cheaply, no problem there. The only big expense will be the installing of the overhead lines and the waiting spur tracks at the top and bottoms of the pass.
4:31 shouldn't it be in Knots instead of MPH?
This why the imperial system needs to go die in a fire already. I don't know, conflicting information online. The Thunderbirds read through the script and didn't correct it, so I will trust their call.
Well technically, one knot is defined as one mile per hour... one *nautical* mile per hour, that is, while mph usually means *statute* miles per hour. So technically, he's not wrong, the imperial system should go die in a fire.
(Source: wikipedia)
@@hadinossanosam4459 1 nautical mile is defined as about 1.15 miles, so 1 knots is roughly 1.15 MPH
@@RealEngineering I just assumed it's in knots since that's the standard measurement for like, every new plane in existence, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Thunderbirds modified that
@@Th3Shrike No, a nautical mile is *defined* as one arc minute around the equator, which happens to be around 1.15 statute miles... and yes, statute mile ≠ nautical mile, but technically, the display is still in "miles per hour", just with a different mile.
Riding a moderate intensity roller coaster is about as intense of a G force I've ever experienced, and I'm happy to keep it that way.
My ancestors didn't know shit, the only situation they experienced Gs was when my grandfather stood up to fast picking up potatoes.
How did you get invited? Backseating a blue angel or a Thunderbird is probably my biggest bucket list item. So envious!!!
The F-16 has always been one of my most favorite planes. In addition to being so maneuverable, it just looks So. Damn. SEXY. As much as I love the capabilities and looks of the Raptor, the Falcon is still, in my mind, the sexiest looking plane there is.
For me it's the Gripen from Saab
For me I favor the F 22 or F 14
F-15 & MiG-29 all the way boiz, but taste in planes is subjective :P
I like the YF29 or the ASF-X Shinden II. Guess I dig forward swept wings😍
That is some absolutely breathtaking footage..
Stuka (Shtuka). If a german world written in german starts with s its is read and pernounced sh. Unlike english germans has easy rules to follow.
Even more easy in Hungarian: "s" is always "sh". The "English s" letter (which we also have) is written as "sz"... ;)
English: “the”
Germans: “die, das, der, den”
Make up your mind
By the way, “s” in English is just “s”. If we want it to sound like “sh” then WE JUST ADD AN “h”
Actually only if the s is followed by t or p
@@AttilaAsztalos Just as easy in latviešu writing "š" is always "sh" and "s" is always "s".
@@JustDoinFlorida "English: “the”" Pafetic, conways nomeaning of gender (like most europian languages would for every word) but is just an extra word that makes speech longer.
"die, der, das" un viss jau vienmēr paliek tas pats.
"By the way, “s” in English is just “s”. If we want it to sound like “sh” then WE JUST ADD AN “h”" Than please explain to me the spelling of these words "sure" and "school".
Excellent video, thanks for explaining, didn't understand a word of what you explained but still enjoyed it.
Great video, but I do miss the discussion about angle of attack and drag, and technical terms like specific excess power, turn rate v turn radius, level bomber v dive bomber, etc.
That being said, great video, especially as an introduction to the topic of G’s.
More at the mandatory: Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators
:)
8:50
Centrifugal force doesn’t exist. It is really inertia! Mv^2/r gives you centripetal force, which points to the center of the circle👍
Wrong
Real Engineering
Wait can you please explain why? I’m genuinely trying to understand. Thanks!
@@nickh7902
You are right!
The airplane wings produce the real force, where the radial component accelerates the airplane against its inertial mass . The reaction to it is commonly but inaccurately called
centrifugal 'force'.
Like you said the magnitude of this component is
M×v^2/r.
where r is the instantaneous radius of curvature of the trajectory.
The vertical component M×g supports the airplane's weight on a level turn.
The wing lift is
L=√[(M×v^2
)^2 + (M×g)^2]
In summary you are correct, his comment is wrong.
Also incorrect @ 8:18 is the shear diagram, which is not linear, unless the lift distribution would be constant, which it never is on a wing.
Disappointing is the sloppy physics by Real Engineering.
Why does an airplane survive a g-load?
Because above the maneuvering speed the angle of attack is limited such that the structural design enveloppe is not violated. Every airplane wing prior to certification is tested in a rig to limit load to ensure it can take the design load multiplied by the safety factor, usually 1.5 before destruction.
The limit loads are defined by regulation in civilian A/C
OH man that's an incredible experience! I'm unbelievably jealous.
What about Low-G maneuvers?
You mean negative G maneuvers?
Regular flight or high negative g?
You mean 0 G manouvers?
That's basically like an elevator accelerating downwards
In addition to what Comrade Stalin said, fighter jets like the F 16 generally will not commit, such manuvers because they are not designed for any high negative g. Also negative g reduces the ability of the pilot to aquire, target and shoot down an enemy fighter.
Love this video. Congrats man!
That was hilarious the avatar reference and you lucky son of a b**** that looks like soo much much fun.
Great video, one thing: at 12:02 you said "duralium", when the alloy is called "duralumin", coming from Dürener Metallwerke, a factory in Germany where the alloy was initially made, and aluminium.