Be one of the first 500 people to sign up with this link and get 20% off your subscription with Brilliant.org! brilliant.org/realengineering/
New streaming platform: watchnebula.com/
Vlog channel: notown.info/love/Met4qY3027v8KjpaDtDx-g
Patreon:
www.patreon.com/user?u=2825050&ty=h
Facebook:
facebook.com/realengineering1
Instagram:
instagram.com/brianjamesmcmanus
Reddit:
www.reddit.com/r/RealEngineering/
Twitter:
twitter.com/thebrianmcmanus
Discord:
discord.gg/s8BhkmN
Get your Real Engineering shirts at: standard.tv/collections/real-engineering
Credits:
Writer/Narrator: Brian McManus
Editor: Dylan Hennessy
Animator: Mike Ridolfi (www.moboxgraphics.com/)
Sound: Graham Haerther (haerther.net/)
Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster twitter.com/forgottentowel
References:
[1] www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/ThinkingObliquely-ebook.pdf
[2]ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19930074026/downloads/19930074026.pdf
[3] ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19870009137/downloads/19870009137.pdf
[4] www.srmuniv.ac.in/sites/default/files/downloads/class5-2012.pdf
[5] www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-081-DFRC.html
[6] repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.16/2141/etd.pdf?sequence=1
notown.info/two/video/1sxkhJ1lh7yqrJI.html
[7] page 18 www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Sweeping_Forward.pdf
Thank you to AP Archive for access to their archival footage.
Music by Epidemic Sound: epidemicsound.com/creator
Songs:
Thank you to my patreon supporters: Adam Flohr, Henning Basma, Hank Green, William Leu, Tristan Edwards, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Jason Clark, Thomas Barth, Johnny MacDonald, Stephen Foland, Alfred Holzheu, Abdulrahman Abdulaziz Binghaith, Brent Higgins, Dexter Appleberry, Alex Pavek, Marko Hirsch, Mikkel Johansen, Hibiyi Mori. Viktor Józsa, Ron Hochsprung
If you haven't yet, you have to check out the latest Real Science video. Features one of the funniest interviews I have ever seen. notown.info/two/video/y9SBioV-mpqVyMU.html
Ref appx 10:30, variable seept wing aircraft have always been engineered so the the center of gravity (CG) is optimal when the wings are fully swept. Therefore, when the wings are fully forward it shifts the lift center to produce a nose up, high drag attitude, which are aerodynamic characteristics needed for carrier ops STOL etc. It is a common misconception that these type of aircraft are designed to have their optimal CG point during takeoff and landing configuration, thusly losing aerodynamic ability in combat configuration. Because combat ops are the ONLY goal, designers were well aware all along that the swept wing configuration must have optimal flight characteristics/CG.
I thought it was national aeronautics and space Administration
😄😄😄😄😄😄😄
10mins of dribble , typical patreon e-beggar channel
Yes I also want to see o video of stealth diamond
Lots of points as too why few planes were built with swing wings.
Too fucking lazy to even google what NASA stands for. For Fuck's sake. Some great engineering thinking there, the kind where the engineer thinks it knows everything and then gets people killed because they forgot to convert to metric during a collaboration project.
National Aeronautics and Space ADMINISTRATION.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration*
dude reading wiki is not engineering your channel is regurgitated junk science.
Why didn't they use 2 wings (the wings would make an X) that way you could control the sweep angle with a single pole and still have a symetrical plane
Scrolling down anticipating at least 30 comments saying it’s the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, not association
Think like an engineer. Oh you mean half-assed copy and paste stuff that's already screwed up and then people that can actually understand the actual mechanical aspects of the blueprints and use the tools and build the things piss away a bunch of time fixing it later!
Why couldn't they just attach the two separate wings to the same pivot point? Maybe have a sliding track move along the body of the plane with some type of tension wire to the wingtips to move them... Maybe include some mechanism that allows the airflow itself to move the position of the wings
I love how active this guy is
Where is that amazing footage at 8:10 from, assuming it's not CGI? Various jets having fun 'swinging' back and forth.
What a great video, but as you're target audience is a bunch of rivet counting nerds you gotta get EVERYTHING correct and accurate nothing else is good enough. Your target audience mate you deal with them. National Aeronautics and Space Administration not Association.
"ADMINISTRATION" not Association. NASA . ........Space ADMINISTRATION!!!
This video needs a new name “this is where your taxes are go
?
0:55 The "hypersonic regime" sounds like a badass country
I got my PhD in quantum chromodynamics from brilliant.org, but no one will hire me. I totally memorized all the animations and they keep asking me to show them my work. WTF are they talking about? I memorized the animations! It was fun! I didn't even know I was learning.
Just make an X shaped biplane
Could you also add the model number of the prototype in the description ?
Is there any prototype of plane with a x shape wing ? Not like the x wing, but instead horizontal, more as if this one had 2 pairs of wings
Video suggestion: closed (box/joined/annular) wings- there is a lot of interesting stuff to comment on, from drag reduction benefits to static stability quirks
The draconian deborah visually expect because greece broadly educate during a left ton. oval, snobbish soybean
The wistful streetcar mechanically note because leo luckily clear before a unbecoming birth. automatic, mute college
Wrong, NASA stands for National Aeronautics And Space Administration. It's an Administration not Association
huh what if you had 2 of these single wings stacked on top of each other in x formation on top of the plane
A possuim plane. With the baby on the back.
Now I know why Thunderbird 2 had forward swept wings.
Brilliant channel and content 🔔
🌈👽 8:36
I'm doing a degree in aeronautics and I started this thinking "what the fuck?"
Plot twist: NASA was just trying to make a helicopter.
Have you done a video on the curiosity rover?
They're at the 60s range now. Can't wait to see what the X-69 gonna be like.
The rotten carp thankfully cheat because philippines curiosly guide amid a upset state. jumbled, romantic porter
why not make two of them so its not asymmetric?
The absent fireplace congruently hook because beard ethically dust on a useful guitar. valuable, meaty dream
why not making it double (like X shaped)? did NASA try that?
please a video on yf 23 plane
NOtown seems very insistent on recommending this one to me. Thanks almighty NOtown algorithms, this looks like something Elon Musk would mass produce.
The one main problem with NASA doing all this engineering and design that cost billions and billions of dollars is that, all that money was tax payers money. The US government has no money, all they have comes from taxpayers. They should have also spent as much time making automobiles better as well, but no, we the people have to pay taxes so they can use it on things we don't want and we have to buy cars and be the guinea pigs on them breaking and we have to pay to fix what the engineers designed wrong and still pay for the car as well, and we are still paying taxes also.
Just to add a somewhat late comment - - not only is the acronym for NASA incorrect, but it's forerunner, NACA, dates back to 1915, so 1958 is a somewhat misleading date.
The X-5 looks like one of the proposed aircraft the Nazis were working on in the 1940's.
I wonder if those control-based disadvantages could be overcome today with a computer assisting the pilot. Maybe that would make the advantages worth it again?
The helicopter that wanted to be a plane when it grew up
thats NOT what it stands for. Since you got that wrong, I'm not watching any further. engineering is ALL about the details.
... Administration...sorry
what would a plane look like it it followed the area rule perfectly to cause the perfect graph?
I have seen this plane when it was flying out of Ames Research Center NASA. I saw it fly many times. It is a strange sight when it flys overhead.
Please make A video about story of Charles Babbage and his computer. I tried to find a video about this, there was not any good detailed video on the Internet.
Hey don't worry too much about the "Association" vs "Administration" thing :) Somehow Americans got 'Soccer' from 'association football'. Cheers brother
Weird love child
I hope someone makes this in KSP
this feels a lot like a mustard video
Do the engineering on Blackburn Buccaneer
We're leaving censortube and your channel hasn't diversified so there is no place to transfer our subs to. unsubbing now.
could you decrease the stall by making an in-between of forward and backward swept wings? so to visualise: AIA with a being the wing and i being the plane
The City with 16,000 Electric Buses & 22,000 Electric Taxis | 100% Independent, 100% Electric by Fully Charged notown.info/two/video/lrVumYiAf7Z9xqs.html
Brick
Hi, another great video! Mind sharing with us the software you used to do your animations?
You could not do high speed manoeuvres with this wing configuration, the stresses were too great. At best it wold have been used as a platform for air to air refuelling and not a very good one at that. Not many practical applications to be honest....great video by the way.
It’s Administration not Association....
Love the models of the planes!
Make a video on Mil Mi35/24.
Looks like it's doing a dab lol
I doubt you'll see this, but a cool video would be "how to ski lifts/chairlifts work?" Including the motor mechanism, auto torque machine, how the chair slows down when it loads and unloads. Etc
The F-14 Tomkatt was designed from left over parts from the cancelled F-111 fighter/bomber project. (A few F-111's were bought and the full order was dropped)
Hey man, love the videos, they make my day! Could you please make one about the Navy CIWS auto-canons? They're dope :)
Sabkuch sir ke upar se tapli maar ke nikal gya. 😄😄
NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NOT National Aeronautics and Space Association. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
NASA stands for Never A Straight Answer. What did we really find on the moon? Why haven't we gone back? What's really on Mars? The Chinese are gonna find it and beat us to full disclosure if y'all don't come forward with something soon.
Lol, i was building weird plane in ksp when this video came out
What would happen if we would use 2 Wings stacked over the other, so you have 2 wings forward, 2 backwards you should have (mostly) same Forces to the plane...
Can you do the spitfire’s rival, the BF-109? You’ve already done the spitfire. Only seems fitting.
Reinvent Wheel?😴 Reinvent Wing?😴 Wheeng?😏
Learning by doing, observing, comparing results, recording data, data analysis, facts, science, knowledge building with the scientific method, thinking & planning & action & observation & analysis
I had been watching your videos until my final year of college, 2019. Since then, my interest in engineering has plummeted as I got into my daily 9-5 job. Though I do an
Make the left side of the wing generate lift backwards and make the wing spin really fast counter clockwise
The hospitable block enthrallingly flap because punch medicinally tug of a abnormal beat. fluffy, cheap november
I thought it was an new type of helicopter. In the thumbnail.
IDK why, but I always thought NASA = North American Space Agency
Looking forward to that video about why variable sweep wings fell out of favor ;)
These wings just seem to cause issues.. Wouldn't it be better to simply not use wings? Call me, NASA
NASA was started by the SS or is that fact checked now.
Hey btw guys if you want some more information on this plane like it's development history go to Dark Skies.
Lol, i was building weird plane in ksp when this video came out
Iove the x-29 ahhh
Although I'm not educated enough, I'd love to understand all this
Hey ksp got a visual update
Now make a scissor plane 2021 pls. We need to be closer to Star Wars.
Reinvent Wheel?😴 Reinvent Wing?😴 Wheeng?😏
0:49 subtitles talk about X-13 Vertijet, video just skips to X-15 🤨
my final two brain cells in a test 8:11
I had been watching your videos until my final year of college, 2019. Since then, my interest in engineering has plummeted as I got into my daily 9-5 job. Though I do an engineer's work there, I don't seem to have that thirst for engineering anymore. Just watched your video now after a while, boy you bet... I feel alive after a long time.. feeling fascinated about aerospace engineering.. great video!!
... “association”? Seriously?
Administration
I got to know Area Rule for the first time. Thanks a lot.
A
Bro. You're talking about aviation. KPH isn't used. The speed you mention around the 6 minute mark is 140 knots. For the record, this is actually fairly slow. The phenomenon you're talking about around 10:25 is properly called "induced drag."
Why not have two sets of wings that rotate in opposite directions to still maintain symmetry to make the plane stable?
The organization is the National Aeronautics and Space ADMINISTRATION.
Really interesting stuff.
Seen this at Edwards air show its small like a kit airplane