Air Force 'Extra Large' - The Supermassive Boeing Pelican - LARGEST CARGO PLANE EVER!

[@captain_commenter8796]

Pelican: I got turned down and couldn’t fulfill my job! Spruce Goose: *First time?*

[@alexander1485]

Caproni Ca.60 be like: I got more wings than both of you combined

[@gryph01]

🤣🤣🤣

[@Tony-112]

I said "hop, in!"

[@SiliconBong]

Did the puppies make it?

[@duellingscarguevara]

@@Tony-112 Freemasons run the world?

[@Tom-Lahaye]

Imagine the sound of those 80,000 hp contra rotating props, the Antonov An-22 which had 15,000 hp engines was loud as hell already, and that's up to this day the largest turboprop plane, with a payload of 'only' 85 tonnes and a wing span of 64,5m.

[@themuffincat]

Ear go boom

[@starfoxdelta]

@@themuffincat we dont need ears where we are going 😎

[@davidhollenshead4892]

Asymmetrical bladed propellers would be needed...

[@HistoryintheDark]

Giant plane go BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[@olsmokey]

What a shame the Antonov 225 doesn't exist any more. Damn Russians.

[@That_Guy5575]

6:10 A modern American super transport cargo plane carrying a 1950’s-era Soviet super heavy tank? Now that’s something I’d love to see IRL Pelican+Object 279= Badass!

[@rodrigonogueiramota4433]

Ryanair be like: I like the part where I can put 1 million people on it

[@SamuHell782]

If you had said 'in it' I'd be inclined to agree. But since you said 'on it' I curse you wholeheartedly for giving them the idea!

[@noggamcstogga1756]

How much for the outdoor seats?

[@ArcherNoble]

Remember no bathrooms on board gotta get all the extra seats.

[@Globovoyeur]

Reminds me of the discussion about whether to say astronauts are "on orbit" or "in orbit."

[@66PHILB]

Seats? Michael O'Leary doesn't want people to sit down. If you pack people in tight enough, they'll hold each other upright!

[@alkatiawri3741]

this plane is just a super sized plane which was put on some serious steroids

[@domtweed7323]

It's almost big enough to take all the money they could have spent on universal healthcare.

[@thegrumpysurfer1806]

@@domtweed7323 you must be terrible at parties

[@domtweed7323]

@@thegrumpysurfer1806 I love parties, specifically Socialist Partys ;)

[@Cat-y4w]

Square an 225 lmao

[@nenengajadah302]

@@thegrumpysurfer1806 j

[@minorityblogger]

Biggest problem was possibly due to someone taking reality into consideration. For instance, 3,000 Troops and so much equipment, but w/ Troops in mind - can you imagine a fully loaded Pelican going down? In just one accident or attack losing an entire Brigade!?! It would be an irresistible target to any and all enemies! Sometimes it’s not a matter of can we do it but Should we do it!

[@nooboftheyear7170]

That was my thought too except that they didn't really need to land that close to theatre, perhaps shaving a couple or few thousand miles off but still a bit too much like eggs in a basket to me.

[@gj1234567899999]

But that is the same issue transport ships have. Transport ships have been sunk killing thousands of troops at a time. Does that mean you shouldn’t use ships to transport? I would argue that a ship moving at 17 miles and hour in the sea is a far more visible and vulnerable target and it takes a week to cross an ocean rather than a few hours the plane does.

[@nooboftheyear7170]

@@gj1234567899999 still has risks; it could be possible to work around them but even then who should know it or know how

[@lordbeerus7803]

Which gaddamn airport is going to handle that?.

[@dansands8140]

@@lordbeerus7803 Probably any of them. The prop engines would allow it to stop on a fairly short runway, and military troops don't need an airport terminal building.

[@jgr7487]

can you imagine this giant carrying civilians & cargo? that would have been amazing! I have been in love with the Pelican since it was announced in tech magazines in the early 2k.

[@IshijimaKairo]

surely would have gotten more people out of Afganistan.

[@paulshipley6024]

@@IshijimaKairo If the runways could handle it.

[@robertkirchner7981]

Can you imagine its wake? 747s following it would be dropping like flies.

[@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis]

@@robertkirchner7981 are you sure? It’s a turboprop, and would probably fly slowly in crowded areas.

[@matthewwilson5019]

@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis hes not wrong.

[@AverytheCubanAmerican]

Boeing tech #1: "So, what do we call this thing?" Boeing tech #2: "How about 'Pelican?'" Boeing tech #1:"Why 'Pelican?'" Boeing tech #2: (hides Xbox and copy of Halo under pile of blueprints) *"Oh, no real reason..."* You could've done an entire episode just on the engines alone! It looks like you could walk upright through the exhaust pipes on those behemoth turbo props

[@nathanchildress5596]

I really hope this concept gets revisited. We know that the ground effect dramatically increases lift and efficiency, and with the supply chain issues the world is currently having, a massive long range cargo plane feels like the future.

[@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis]

I agree.

[@rudolfthecat1176]

I don't think the massive scale is a good idea, the Antonov an-225 would see competition if the idea was viable... The 225 only gets used for special deliveries and spends more time on the ground than in the air, not to mention that with such a massive size, you need to be as close to 100% sure that it won't fail.

[@matthewwilson5019]

@@rudolfthecat1176 you forgot one important thing and thats money, it would take lots of money to keep a large plane flying

[@obelic71]

Flying freighters just above the ocean surface would indeed have a market place. They would take the role at sea like freighttrains on land. Faster but moderate more costly to operate then river barges. For long commercial hauling the current efficient containerships beats every form of transport of transporting cargo at very low cost.

[@thelovertunisia]

The ground effect is problematic in turbulent conditions which can create instability.

[@ilovestarship]

This looks kinda nice ngl. I think its gonna look nice with jet engines. It’s probably gonna need a lot of engines like 8 i guess or 6 with the new rolls Royce massive engines.

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

More like 20...

[@Willon]

@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter srick 6 GE-90s on it and it would fly

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

@@Willon idk, it has 2.700 T MTOW, maybe at least 15 ^^

[@puzz8930]

Turboprops=weight,jet engines=speed so with a cargo props are a better idea

[@richardmillhousenixon]

@@puzz8930 While the terminology wasn't used correctly, we're talking turbofan engines, not turbojet engines. Turbofans are (almost) never designed for speed, just efficiency and thrust.

[@christianharris4800]

Thank you so much for making this video. I've been hoping to see a video on the Pelican transport for a long time. I still remember seeing it in Popular Mechanics when I was still in school. Still fills me with awe.

[@FoundAndExplained]

Glad it was helpful!

[@robertbell2775]

@@FoundAndExplained --- Guys, can you call me? Are you in AU? This was interestingly timed. Cheers, Rob.

[@hobbyhermit66]

Can't wait to see that ess arr 72. The SR71 was awesome.

[@dennisrogers8107]

Umm ya. The SR 71 was amazing. I guess the 72 must be so amazing we don't even know about it?????

[@BlackEpyon]

Yeah, but it was superseded by spy satellites. The thing also leaked fuel like crazy. Something about how the wings needed to expand in supersonic flight (due to thermal expansion), making the pieces not fit so well on the ground.

[@manoellotti8440]

ass air 71

[@hawkthephoenix4701]

@@dennisrogers8107 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_SR-72

[@myMotoring]

so cool. it looks like a gigantic flyting boat from the 30s

[@Juso0815]

yeah right, i actually thought it is, until he said 2020

[@themuffincat]

It was

[@thatguyalex2835]

@@Juso0815 I thought it was from the 1950s-1980s, a bit after the 1930s flying boat era.

[@SupremeLeaderKimJong-un]

An "Airship" strictly refers to lighter-than-air Aircraft such as Zeppelins and Blimps. A water-based airplane is known as a seaplane, or flying boat. So what you're telling me is I could use this as a nuclear reactor and the enemy will never know what's coming? If no one else is brave enough to make this a reality, then we will! Unlike them, we have guts, we've been through so much because of them. We have what it takes to stand up

[@aguywhoplaysgames]

Daddy Kim! :D

[@Linkpizzard]

keem kardaseehan

[@Hatredunion]

North Korea is a failure of a country

[@nathanhartanto2544]

Always wanted to know about this thing. Never found too many well-written articles on this and now there's an eighteen minute video on it. Nice.

[@FoundAndExplained]

Glad I could help!

[@jgr7487]

@@FoundAndExplained could you make a video on its civilian version? this is harder to come by than the military version.

[@FoundAndExplained]

I will try to find out more.

[@jgr7487]

@@FoundAndExplained if you don't find, you can always make your own conversion, just like what you did with the Antonov.

[@danielmarsden4573]

7:26 What’s a Soviet Object-279 doing on an American military aircraft?

[@musewolfman]

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed that

[@Silver_Prussian]

They stole it to make so they can make a decent tank

[@BlackEpyon]

Was wondering what that was.

[@udontknowme7798]

The Soviet Object-279 tank was better than all the American tanks from the 21 century, even it was built in the end of the 1950's. And it also looked better with a decent tank!

[@BlackEpyon]

@@udontknowme7798 Better? Depends on the metric you're measuring. Ground pressure? Definitely, with the four-tracked design. The shaped hull is meant to allow it to weather a shock-wave without tipping over. But being from the tail-end of the 1950's the fire control system is ancient, and of the three prototype units they produced, I only know of one that's in a museum. Who knows about the other two, or what kind of condition they're in.

[@raine8553]

I wonder where he finds all information about these planes

[@e.sstudios1015]

*The Internet*

[@antr7493]

@@e.sstudios1015 LOL INternet

[@aurorajones8481]

Shut your mouth! *wraps hand over your face ---- Looks around*

[@isakjohansson7134]

@@e.sstudios1015 The deep web

[@pavanbiliyar]

90's Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, and Aviation Week magazine subscriptions had tons of info, much of which haven't seen work past prototype or concept; but they were fun reads when I was young.

[@ozankale8558]

Fitting this with a nuclear reactor and electric powered engines would be amazing, it probably has the capabilities to be a flying aircraft carrier

[@mannansiedo7609]

Cl 1002 still bigger

[@demcomp]

Actually how anout no to the Nuke Reactor.. If one of those is shot down, crashes, or has a fuel leak... On top of that, you'd need to use a lot of shielding around the reactor core which would dramatically increase weight of the craft, which would ultimately reduce the cargo capacity. But with a Nuke reactor, it would save on fuel costs.

[@stalker5299]

@@demcomp fusion power would eliminate the radiation leakage risk

[@demcomp]

@@stalker5299 oh I didn't know we had perfected fusion power...

[@stalker5299]

@@demcomp i didn't know you wanted to build it in 2 days

[@MarkoIloski]

Rip Antonov 225

[@SamuHell782]

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder anyway.

[@shirty2]

I wish this giant meme was built for the simple reason that I could fly hand-flown ILS approaches in to Kai Tak in stormy weather on flight sims!

[@domtweed7323]

America: Builds supermassive military planes. Americans: "Universal healthcare please" America: "We can't afford it."

[@davisdf3064]

"cam we have some money for education, Healthcare and help the homeless?" The government: "Sorry fam, all those trillions went to making wars happen, here's five dollars to share between them though"

[@marcobsdc1697]

You should make a video about the Supermassive Boeing Pelican as a passenger plane

[@FullyStaged]

Do the Boeing Sonic Cruiser, that was a great concept.

[@idioticed4379]

Looks like something I would make in a videogame lmao

[@badguy1481]

I remember seeing videos of C-130's (with turbo props) landing on dirt runways and kicking up so much dirt they were almost covered. The ability to land in these unimproved runways would CERTAINLY be a requirement for such a large capacity aircraft. A PRIME reason why standard jet engines for this aircraft would be impossible (because of the FOD problem).

[@joriss5]

Even concrete runways at large airports are probably to weak for such weight. Huge military airlift aircraft, like the Galaxy, aren't really made for unimproved runways, they're simply too heavy for dirt.

[@badguy1481]

@@joriss5 Hard to say. Note: This concept aircraft had many more undercarriage tires than ALL commercial jets. So...It's hard to say the load bearing capacity for paved runways to hold such a plane. And, be that as it may, in order for the aircraft to be viable it would HAVE to be capable of landing close to the front (i.e. unimproved runways!)

[@mutantryeff]

The band 'Pelican' is amazing to see live.

[@dankshark4808]

This could actually fit in a "yo mama" joke...

[@carlosandleon]

Yo mama's so fat they cancelled production of the largest airplane designed because she still can't fit in it.

[@davisdf3064]

You mama so fat they needed a CL-1201 to carry her to the closest city

[@dankshark4808]

@@carlosandleon exactly

[@dankshark4808]

@@davisdf3064 right...

[@troybirch]

Between Covid and this Howard Hughes is looking more brilliant than ever.

[@nerdwatch1017]

Man I could imagine the civilian version of it would be a ton of fun to fly on!!! Sadly I’ve only flown on single level national level planes!!! I really wish I could fly just once on the bigger more awesome & powerful planes

[@ripxxxtentacion8342]

Bruh

[@nerdwatch1017]

@@ripxxxtentacion8342 what??

[@Porelorexeus]

I've been waiting for the Pelican! Besides that gargantuan nuclear plane it really gives you an idea of what can really fly!

[@seanbigay1042]

Lufthansa 747: Tower, what are the intentions of that absurdly huge transport looming behind me? Pelican: I'M GOING TO EEEEAT YOOOUUUU!!!

[@merafirewing6591]

Lufthansa 747: Nani!?

[@SomeRandomYouTuber_]

"how many landing gear?" *y e s*

[@FoundAndExplained]

76!

[@plebulus]

@@FoundAndExplained that's insane!

[@BoBaH_BoBaHoB]

Very large flying coffin! I like it!

[@stephenmeier4658]

I'm shocked that puppie's lives were put in danger just to feed your desire for subscriptions.

[@davidhollenshead4892]

My Avatar is bummed out that he didn't shoot the puppies down...

[@alexander1485]

@@davidhollenshead4892 he woulda shot the kittens down

[@SJR_Media_Group]

I used to work for Boeing, left just before the Pelican was officially announced. It was a gigantic plane. I remember when we were developing a super large version of the 747, to compete with Airbus A380. The super 747 project was scrapped due to limited market for large passenger planes. Even the A380 is coming to an end. The Pelican dwarfed the super 747, A380, and AN 225. The counter rotating props were a smart design because they remove any torque induced yaw. The Russian Tupolev Tu-95 Bomber used counter rotating props with great success.

[@richardmillhousenixon]

You can just as easily eliminate torque induced yaw and roll by having an even number of single-prop engines and running the right (starboard) engines clockwise (if looking at the plane from the front) and the left (port) engines counter-clockwise

[@henryfleischer404]

It does seem pretty impractical for wartime use. It's a single, probably unarmored target, carrying massive amounts of supplies and/or soldiers. I can't think of a better thing to attack, if you are defending against the US.

[@coboldelphi]

You don't deploy a brigade of troops in a middle of a war zone with a airplane. The initial invasion force, secures an area, gains air superiority first and/ or utilizes a friendly area adjacent the hostile area. This would be no different than the unarmored, unescorted c17s and c130s that are used in combat areas all the time, just on a larger scale.

[@user-ro1cc8tz6d]

@@coboldelphi plus you could put a radar on that thing that would f̶r̶y̶ detect any incoming aircraft

[@stron2004]

These tough texture really brings some authenticity.

[@ChessMasterNate]

Yes, I remember this concept. Did not know it was axed. The biggest change I would make is making it capable of landing on the water...even if it can't take off from the water. Just for emergencies. Fully water tight, just move like a boat until it can meet ships to tow it. And be able to deploy the landing gear, so it can beach itself without damage. There should also be emergency bladders that can fill the cargo areas, in case there is a hole in the aircraft when it lands on the water. It would be hilarious if it actually had a big wide beak that opens, which actually is not that crazy. You have to load the plane somehow, and a beak as a ramp, allows rapid loading and unloading. The cockpit is so small relative to the aircraft, that it would be high and out of the way. Really wonky is the possibility that it could open most of the way as it lands to create a lot of drag, slowing the aircraft, making it easier on the brakes. Not so great for a passenger version ;)

[@moteroargentino7944]

A proper seaplane has a reinforced hydrodynamic hull along with rudders and stabilizers. All of which adds cost and weight. I think it defeats the purpose, if transoceanic flights don't have it, neither should the Pelican. That kind of safeties were applied in the early days of aviation when navigation was less precise and engines less reliable. Nowadays with meteorological radar and satellital data it's easy to avoid storms and engines are much more refined. I would be more worried about enemy fire, putting all your eggs in one basket is risky.

[@BrianRamirezIAteASock]

"See that plane? Its filled with puppies. And Candy." *Puts a jet crosshair on it* "I'm going to shoot it down if you don't subscribe" XD Shit made me sub so quick lol

[@bombardierdash8297]

If this happened and passed I WOULD SCREAM

[@alexander1485]

I would take pics while you are screaming and frozen in place.

[@robinmcara793]

The saying "Never put all your egg's in the one basket" comes to mind. Imagine the loss of life, not to mention the loss of trained Military personnel if one of these Pelican's crashed, if they were made, I believe that inevitably one would crash as the plane is so big & clumsy. You may loose 3000 troop's before you get to the battle. It would have been an amazing plane but putting 3000 troops in one plane is testing fate IMHO. Would still love to see one tile though. I've seen the huge Antanov plane take off, it's really something. Plz do a video on vertical take off in passenger jets, will it be used with passengers on board? It look's insane. Some people would pass out lol. Was it done to save fuel instead of a slow gradual climb? I would love to know more on this topic, take care, peace from Scotland.

[@DocWolph]

"Beauty is often found in a design's function and its actual ability to perform that function. As it is said, 'Function before form'."

[@holeshotshane6344]

This would've been very helpful during the Afganistan evacuations

[@BusterBuizel]

I’m starting to hear the Project Wingman soundtrack just by looking at this thing

[@SephirothRyu]

The Pelican would have been such a perfect name too. Since Pelicans like trying to put anything smaller than them in their mouths to try and eat it. See: any number of videos you can search for about pelicans eating things like pigeons or other stuff.

[@mattm7220]

Am I the only one who can't look at the Phantomworks logo without seeing Darkwing Duck? 😅

[@GG.823]

Antonov 225: Finally, a worthy opponent. Our size will be legendary *after sizing up* Antonov 225: ok i take it back... Pelican boeing: lucky you are not fat as i do

[@NoLongerlnService]

kinda looks like if a kx and a an-225 had a baby

[@Entity_BlackRed777]

The Boeing Pelican concept should be made before 2030, for I can sound record it at high altitudes to see how loud the prop sound is!!!!

[@AshLmfao]

Hey, i have a suggestion for a video to do. My suggestion is the Kawasaki KX-03, a giant japanese ww2 plane design that would have had the largest wingspan of any plane at that time, having a very similar purpose to the Boeing Pelicans military variant. It would’ve also had (i think) 16 propellers, and around 4 jet engines. You should check it out

[@PR-1]

Looks like he did it! :D kzbin.info/www/bejne/gZWtXmpvqtl_ecU (Not sure if you already saw, just sharing incase you haven't)

[@FoundAndExplained]

Special thanks to Ridge Wallet for jumping in to sponsor today's video. The built quality on them is very impressive and the range of designs makes me want to collect them all like pokemon cards!. Get yours for 10% or check them out here: ridge.com/FNE

[@e.sstudios1015]

Can I use Ridge wallet to defend myself against a crook?

[@powerhousepaperairplanesrogers]

I wonder what they have on the drawing board🤔

[@brightax7502]

Pin it

[@edsonsouza9270]

Likes please.FAE. thank you. 👍

[@Gothic_Zoey]

If I wanted to contact you privately about one of your videos How can I do that

[@cuchococh4977]

That Object 279 being carried by this thing is pretty is a very nice touch

[@alexander1485]

it should have been a Chrysler TV8

[@bloodyslatts1452]

I'm interested in this "sub-audible" space plane about 4 minutes and 18 seconds in. Stealthy, is it?

[@nagasako7]

Of all the crazy designs. I feel Boeing Pelican probably came the closest to actually being made. Something that was 5x Bigger than Antonov 225. Being due to 787 production issues, Boeing had to focus on getting 787 done right.

[@scottl.1568]

Nevermind the fact that you'd need to build a bunch of giant reinforced runways just to fly it and a bunch of humongous hangars just for maintenance...

[@johnstuartsmith]

It's not likely that the countries that we would like to invade would be nice enough to build those giant reinforced runways for our military's convenience.

[@Omnihil777]

-- Subscribed -- Awaiting candy and puppies -- If delivery not completed by end of month, I'll activate the space laser -- - end transmission

[@willyolio9590]

I wonder how much cargo a ground-effect, partial-airship design could lift. Blend the rejected #2 design with the final design.

[@PhotonFlightTeam]

You got it in one. TURTLE AIRSHIP

[@craigrmeyer]

Those wild sci-fi engines though. 650,000hp total, according to Wikipedia. That's like 130 5000hp PW150A's, off of 65 Bombardier Q400's. Holy cats there wouldn't even be enough wingspan to fit them all on it.

[@AdjutorMusic]

favorite episode thus far. this plane was something special.

[@jamesdamron2065]

PELICAN his Beek holds more than his belly can!!!😂😂

[@Homoprimatesapiens]

Big question. Will the airstrips or landing strips be long enough for this Pelican?? All airports would be transformed as well to accomodate this behemoth. Its doubtful if international aviation will give some thumbs up for this.

[@nathanchildress5596]

Well it does have a high-lift design, so I bet it’s take off/ landing speed wouldn’t be high. The C5 Galaxy can take off on short runways, and that’s a pretty big plane

[@joriss5]

It looks slow, so runway length is probably not a problem. their strength would maybe be one, however, like the width (it's two times larger than the standard maximum wingspan airports are designed around).

[@aussieboys5448]

Aussie Aussie Aussie

[@bartskinthepro3138]

This is SOOOOOOO HUGE 🤯

[@brianrigsby7900]

14:33 imagine the smoke show when touching down!😂

[@Abdullah-mn6sw]

This is very interesting. I thought this was supposed to be copy of Ekranoplan and not land on a runway.

[@nathanchildress5596]

The trouble with ekranoplans is that it takes a lot of power to lift out of the water, and they can’t fly over big obstacles. The Pelican was trying to get the efficiency while still being flexible enough to fly inland

[@RmsLusitainia]

That plane looks like it has the aerodynamics of a shipping container

[@przemysawotarzewski557]

"Imagine a full potential of transport aircraft such as the Pelican during a war" - why yes, I would love to be able to exterminate thousands of troops and destroy thousands of tons of military equipment with a single missile! -- Enemy Army General ;-) No, the practicality of this project is IMO not debatable - it is simply impractical. Similarly to Adolf H.s gigantic tank designs, or railway guns. It's too costly, too easy to destroy, to big of a loss in the event of any incident, too dependent on available infrastructure (imagine being able to transport thousands of troops to a remote location in 96 hrs, but first you need to spend a year building a special airstrip in said location ;-) ). Even the practicality of the Pelican as a civil cargo craft is highly questionable. An incident would entail a huge financial loss - in terms of both cargo and craft. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine that there are only a few scenarios, where you actually need to transport a huge amount of cargo from point A to point B. I would think that most cases benefit more from being able to distribute the cargo to several different locations using smaller craft? There must be a reason why there's only one An-225 in operation today and nobody is willing to build another :-)

[@BlackEpyon]

The reason the AN-225 is even in operation is because of the occasional need to transport super-heavy or bulky items. Similar to the Guppy's and Beluga's, It's not normally used for conventional cargo or civilian transport. It's just not practical to use it that way. They've got the parts sitting in that hangar to build another if they need to, but I don't think the demand is there right now.

[@spartanonxy]

It is large enough to mount its own active defense system which I imagine if using it for military you would mount.

[@kiddsosa5906]

P0

[@tomyrody4412]

"FIELDMASTER! A Human Pelican is inbound!" "It is of little concern." "It carries Demons." "Hmmmm...then perhaps, we shall have good fight. How many?" ".....all of them" "............" "And they all have tanks" ".....ahhh, wort..."

[@stephentroyer3831]

Your 3d models are beautiful, and having the props rotate looks great. Please increase the rotation speed for those props when the plane is in the air, or slow down the background to make awesome slowmo flying shots. A plane going fast with slow props breaks my suspension of disbelief.

[@ryansmith1312]

Yes I agree, and as someone who has been lucky to hang around airplanes a lot in person, I've seen a lot of poor renderings of spinning propellers in 3D graphics and games because people try to copy video. IRL props are nearly invisible unless they are spinning very slowly and / or only two bladed. ( Or I'll admit counterrotating, as this plane). Different types of cameras produce various weird effects but the simplest and most realistic way to render a prop at cruise or takeoff power is a nearly transparent disc.

[@pahtar7189]

One problem the Pelican would have encountered is that there would be very few runways in the world that could support it. Even the A-380 suffers from limited access.

[@Globovoyeur]

I wonder what its fuel usage would have been, and how long a runway it would have needed.

[@mgabrysSF]

Keerist. The landing systems on these mega planes has been 'problematic' for decades. Trying to imagine a fire propagating across that insane landing arrangement. Those 'tires' better be made of a metal mesh. Plus the fact it's a monoplane prop driven, essentially makes it a spiritual successor to the Spruce Goose.

[@Underbottom.Sandydown]

The ridge company was really banking on the fact nobody's ever heard of a money clip before :/

[@jeromebarry1741]

The Pelican was conceived and noodled into Powerpoint early in America's War on Terror. The Pelican was abandoned and forgotten when America understood that wars abroad against Terror could be managed quite well with existing transport.

[@serge7633]

Great content enjoyed your show :)

[@FoundAndExplained]

Thanks for coming

[@_MaxHeadroom_]

I have no idea how I've forgotten to subscribe this whole time I've been watching this channel

[@fridaycaliforniaa236]

You always find a way to explain really interesting subjects =)

[@DarwinsChihuahua]

I got the National Lampoon reference in your intro. Nice!

[@K-Effect]

You could've done an entire episode just on the engines alone! It looks like you could walk upright through the exhaust pipes on those behemoth turbo props

[@-tokyogamer-9503]

Engineer: how many landing gears do you want? Boeing: yes

[@corm7538]

I know someone who has worked for Boeing Phantom Works all the way back to it's days as part of the St. Louis, Missouri based McDonnell Douglas he started working for McDonnell Douglas in the late 1980s and I think he's work for the now Boeing Phantom Works for 30 or 35 years now. He could never talk that much about his work all he would ever say was, "If I could tell you the things I've help work on it would blow your mind."

[@topphatt1312]

US Army: Ayo I was thinkin… Could you just build a thicccccc boi Boeing: Ayo I gotchu fam

[@alexander1485]

US Government: Ayo I was thinking, lets put a billion wheels under it plox

[@MidnightWalk303]

In the beginning. "Today is sponsor is-" Ad of marines. Perfect timing

[@edsonsouza9270]

Legal the Big Avion. New Antonov? ✈

[@edsonsouza9270]

In portuguese: Legal o Grande Avião. Novo Antonov? ✈

[@Ethan.YT.]

It looks old but at the same time it looks futuristic

[@karlossargeant3872]

I Love this Video on The Never Built Planes Concept is Awesome Video!!!!

[@commonsense4207]

Air Force one has a Fly Office That is a Fly Office Building LOL

[@andrewnguyen2234]

Would love to see you maybe cover the USS Argo from Godzilla

[@zeejoo]

9:59 is a good example of why I think you'd benefit from a script editor or video editor who's only job is to point out mistakes. In this scenario, the word cavernous is pronounced like "tavern" but "cavern-us"

[@cosmicdebris42]

I think it is beautiful, and what a sight it would be flying overhead. I'll bet Howard hughes, if alive, would be onboard with the construction of this Colossus.

[@SIMPDUDE]

Read the title as 'The new EXTRA LARGE Air Force One'; was like 'that is too ridiculous'

[@michaelanuradha-khufu74]

I heard of this plane a few years ago but could never find the name or a video on it. Major Thanks!

[@Frankilling1971]

the surprising thing is not its large cargo but the fact that its TURBOPROPELLER!!!111!!!1

[@r1ot_gaming]

"So if I..." "Yes, 1 million people, you can fit" "crash it..." "Yes,... wait what?💀"

[@YourOldUncleNoongah]

This is making me think of the German Messerschmitt Me 323 Gigant

[@ED2302]

The design looks cool

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

@Found and Explained >>> FWIW: *_I_* think the *_Boeing Pelican_* would have been *_BEAUTIFUL._* *I ❤️ TURBOPROPS*

[@noobepro_7146]

Me : Wow colossal plane Airline and military : Wow colossal price

[@mikeabc5355]

Worst thing that ever happened to Boeing was acquisition of McDonald Douglas and adapting its management, until than Boeing was truly a best aircraft manufacturer that produced legendary airplanes like 707 and 747.