NASA's Weirdest Experimental Plane

Be one of the first 500 people to sign up with this link and get 20% off your subscription with Brilliant.org! brilliant.org/...
New streaming platform: watchnebula.com/
Vlog channel: / @brianmcmanus
Patreon:
www.patreon.co...
Facebook:
/ realengineering1
Instagram:
/ brianjamesmcmanus
Reddit:
/ realengineering
Twitter:
/ thebrianmcmanus
Discord:
/ discord
Get your Real Engineering shirts at: standard.tv/co...
Credits:
Writer/Narrator: Brian McManus
Editor: Dylan Hennessy
Animator: Mike Ridolfi (www.moboxgraph...)
Sound: Graham Haerther (haerther.net/)
Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster / forgottentowel
References:
[1] www.nasa.gov/s...
[2]ntrs.nasa.gov/...
[3] ntrs.nasa.gov/...
[4] www.srmuniv.ac....
[5] www.nasa.gov/c...
[6] repository.lib...
• Why Fast Jets Have Swe...
[7] page 18 www.nasa.gov/s...
Thank you to AP Archive for access to their archival footage.
Music by Epidemic Sound: epidemicsound.c...
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

[@RealEngineering]

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. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6CtiISEnJyYncU

[@sabbirkobir1482]

I have request, can make a video on diamond shape wing planes.

[@michaelfrench3396]

Nasa is an acronym for National Aeronautic and Space Administration. There are no national entities known as "associations" in the United States.

[@g-dub545]

It is National Aeronautics and Space Administration

[@skittlyscooter1779]

(I'll put an image in the discord), in aero-and-astronautical-engeneering

[@aresjerry]

Your accent sounds less heavy in this video

[@tekuaniaakab2050]

“Johnson you got a plane design for me?” Shows the asymmetrical winged plane. “Sorry sir i think it didn’t glue right let me....” “Johnson..... *you’re a genius* !”

[@eun5oo280]

Shit, here we go again.

[@ivoryas1696]

Tekuani Aakab I can relate to that! 😂

[@PiotrBarcz]

Good one xD

[@jansenart0]

The absolute chrome-plated steel BALLS on the test pilot who actually got INTO that thing.

[@RealEngineering]

It was fairly well behave in most situations. Test pilots gradually expand the flight envelope. They never tested the plane to stall, for the reasons stated in this video, but with enough altitude the wings would be unswept and recovered.

[@mosesfox52]

There are also flight simulators they practiced in for a long time. Obviously it’s only a simulator so yeah still a pretty brave pilot.

[@jansenart0]

@@mosesfox52 I mean, if something broke on the swing or even on one of the control surfaces...

[@retardationnation869]

I'd say anyone who gets into a test plane to fly it first has balls of steel

[@methos1999]

What I always find fascinating is when you hear test pilots talk they like it's just another day at the office. Clearly they are too busy to think about being scared.

[@michael-macc125]

Would love to see Flite Test have a hand at making a model of this!

[@kolbeadams3794]

Bro I love that channel

[@bloodbound696]

Put this on their social media pages

[@Hoshimaru57]

Hell yeah!

[@1_in_8billion]

Please

[@Omlet221]

Tom Stanton also does cool experimental things like this

[@davidryder3374]

I once read a test pilot's autobiography wherein he said that if a plane looked good, it generally flew well. With that criterion in mind, this plane must've flown like ass.

[@crackedemerald4930]

It flew 50% good 50% bad all the time

[@R3aper9048]

Pilot I want you to test this plane. How well does it fly? Yesn't.

[@Levin12377]

Marcel Bloch (later Dassault) if i remember well EDIT: Yup he said "Un bel avion est un avion qui vole bien" or "A beautiful plane is a plane that flies well" in english.

[@bellini98-1]

Well I do believe that in the mind of a test pilot "looks good" has quite a different meaning that it has to you and me ahahah. I'm pretty sure that someone who's all career has been centered around planes and testing new planes will have quite some instinctive understanding of planes aero and their behaviour, and surely they translate in his opinion about what it means for a plane to "look good"

[@Mobius118]

Means the F-22 raptor must fly like the absolute BEAUTY that it is

[@Duvstep910]

Even though i have no intention of being an engineer; this stuff is still interesting

[@davidtoddvlogs3486]

I believe thats one of his main channel goals if I'm not wrong.

[@Sheridantank]

You can learn a lot from it too. Understanding some engineering subjects can help you figure out why something doesn’t work, how to fix something, or how to design/make something.

[@martinross9093]

I don’t think 0,1% of viewers intend on becoming engineers

[@TheDoubleBee]

Having an understanding of engineering and being scientifically literate is not just for engineers and scientists, it's helpful to everyone, even in everyday life.

[@Sheridantank]

@@martinross9093 I’m almost certain more than 1% of viewers want to be an engineer. I want to be an engineer, so unless 999 others of you say you don’t, your stats are wildly wrong. But 100% of them enjoy learning about it.

[@darkless60]

RE: “You probably know where this is going” Me: Nope lol

[@bigdoggo5827]

I'm on my 4th year of engineering and is not that simple to understand

[@darkless60]

@@bigdoggo5827 we're not all undegrad students in engineering lol

[@joemmac]

NAS"A" is "ADMINISTRATION" not "ASSOCIATION".

[@mikeksp9177]

Better than people who think the a is for agency

[@RealEngineering]

ha, shit. One of those things that just slips through and you never even bother to check. Mortified

[@somjittalukdar1360]

Right, it is Administration

[@joemmac]

@@RealEngineering Given this is the first thing you say in the video and it is so basic, you might want to fix and reupload... otherwise your video loses credibility.

[@keepcalmandfarmon5401]

@@RealEngineering It happens...still a good video!

[@Manuel-gu9ls]

Finally an engineering video I’ve been waiting forever

[@jerryormston3916]

I wonder what the seven people who clicked thumbs down didn't like.

[@Manuel-gu9ls]

@@jerryormston3916 in my comment?

[@arunpillai3007]

@@Manuel-gu9ls no, to the video

[@medielijah]

Screaming sarcasm can make you deaf too

[@CausticLemons7]

I wish we could get new videos everyday! But I'm perfectly happy with less frequency if it's means higher quality.

[@Solphoenix]

Last time I was this early to a real engineering video nasa still had a big budget

[@superdupergrover9857]

*_BIG_

[@pluto9067]

Damn

[@JonathanRootD]

Ok boomer.

[@mervynlan7727]

So your like 60?

[@sunny-sq6ci]

hate to break it to people like you, but nasa has a annual budget bigger than most country's spend on their national defense. in addition, nasa is no longer saddled with the shuttle, which was an enormous money pit that never made it an economic operation that nasa was anticipating

[@4rsh193]

This video was posted right when I was going through some bad things today, atleast this made me feel happy. Thank you, and have a great day.

[@RealEngineering]

Hope you feel better soon. This year has been rough for a lot of people. Me included!

[@4rsh193]

@@RealEngineering thank you and I hope the best for you aswell and yesh thie year has been very bad, thank you.

[@omidrastin3745]

@@4rsh193 you mean bad sites? 👌😉😉

[@Buzz_Light_Beer]

Keep your chin up!

[@4rsh193]

@@omidrastin3745 no like parents mentaly abusing bad mate

[@ApparentlyGod]

I wonder how this idea would work in a biplane type scenario. Having a top AND bottom mounted wing assembly that function opposite of each other.

[@iamjimgroth]

The forward swept wings have another advantage: they look cool as heck.

[@yaboimahilez9916]

Agreed fully

[@AdmiralWillisLee1942]

The Su-47 approves of your statement.

[@jebise1126]

@@AdmiralWillisLee1942 well... that one fell apart mid air

[@cvspvr]

@@jebise1126 yeah, but it fell apart in style

[@mauricejohnmac]

Did the Su-47 crash? I've never heard of it. Btw, I thought it's a very beautiful plane. Better looking than the X-29.

[@haloadic2424]

I think the best thing about this channel is how he can make me feel like I understand what he is saying, only for me to realize im still too dumb to figure out what just happened once it ends.

[@daytoncoates4930]

*describing how to make helicopter “Okay, so what you’re gonna do is make a flying machine with blades horizontal to the ground, that spin to give it lift” “Alright boss, helicopter’s all built” “Oh damnit Jerry, not like that!”

[@Isopropyl_Alcohol]

Let's be real here, isn't every new experimental plane *weird*? [After watching the video] Yea... this one's definitely weird.

[@creepingjesus5106]

Or to look at it another way: if an experimental plane isn't weird, is it really experimental?

[@Isopropyl_Alcohol]

@@creepingjesus5106 Aye good point!

[@amblincork]

Yes - some of the narrators language is distinctly un - engineer like !!

[@Isopropyl_Alcohol]

@@amblincork I'd believe him if he taught me that, he sounds very credible to me.

[@creepingjesus5106]

@@amblincork It's not really university lecturer level, it's more a popular science approach, and I think he does pretty well. Funnily enough, some of my favourite lecturers when I've been studying engineering, are the ones who get to ten minutes into their hour, then spend the remaining fifty minutes digressing in increasingly nerdy directions, and trying to cram five hours' worth in! Wouldn't work too well on KZbin I think...

[@icterio1]

1:54 Now, that shot revives Top Gun memories or what?!

[@hobog]

Revvin up the engine; listen to her howl and (groan?)

[@coreys.9426]

@@hobog Roar 😉

[@danielomalley3505]

i don’t mean to nit pick but it’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration not assoctiation love your vids though!

[@RealEngineering]

I done goofed.

[@mikesmith7249]

I'm glad someone else noticed this.

[@DatRandomDJ]

@@RealEngineering Whoops! Quick! Edit the video and re-upload it before anyone notices! Jk we still love you ❤

[@belg4mit]

Indeed, it's a governmental administration, not a trade association.

[@loturzelrestaurant]

@@RealEngineering Hi and Hello. I gather people for a good cause: I wanna provide people with Links leading to bad or toxic people. Mobber, Racists, Sexists, Bullies, more. I got the Links and i need help with reporting them. KZbin is in a bad state and i think you heard of that. Many complain about it, its strike-system and its CEO: Susan. But... I mean... complaining about the State of the world is nice and dandy, but... how about acting? Doing something? So i made a Wiki where i store Links for all to use. Yeah, unorthodox, i know, but whatever. Its my Try to help. You can at least pre-emptive 'block user' regarding the Racists and all those, but you can also do one thing more and report them, so YT becomes a better place. I know this was random and also overly summarized, but think about it and consider. You can make a difference. I tried to explain it as good as possible, but the Wiki will tell and show you more, i guess.

[@TheaL8r_01]

I really appreciate the term “Frankenstein’s monster” rather than the common misconception of “Frankenstein”

[@alephkasai9384]

I thought the author said it was fine to refer to the monster as Frankenstein? Or am I misinformed

[@sadrevolution]

I always think of Young Frankenstein, where Gene Wilder corrects the pronunciation of his name to "Frahnkenshteen."

[@Immediately_]

As frankenstein is now public domain. I use XKCD's rendition of the story, which has named the monster frankenstein.

[@andrewb.7890]

Frankenstein created a life and abandoned it. Frankenstein IS the monster ;-)

[@adhithasimhanraghavan7516]

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!!

[@Brunoscaramuzzi]

A watched a video were the pilot tested this oblique wing and it was easy to control. All this issues now are much easy to overcome wiri flight by wire. It is strange, but works pretty well.

[@dsc4178]

The going "through the science and engineering" videos are your best, always enjoyable.

[@khavaliar]

Except for the nikola video.

[@The-ch1rz]

4:40 in all fairness, a lot of modern fighters use their stabilators at the back to control roll as well as ailerons

[@michaelguzzi1]

Man I love this thing, been looking forever for some good plans to build an RC version of it

[@ethanbennett9000]

Found any?

[@michaelguzzi1]

@@ethanbennett9000 Not yet!

[@zoetje1760]

@@michaelguzzi1 What’s “RC” exactly?

[@michaelguzzi1]

@@zoetje1760 In this context it's short for Radio Control

[@zoetje1760]

@@michaelguzzi1 That would've been cool! I'm not an engineer, but that can't be too hard, can it? I think two small electronic engines like the ones in cheap commercial drones should do the trick if you made it out of styrofoam.

[@emeraldeyes9202]

I feel like an important aspect of the plane wasn't discussed in this video, that the oblique wing (60 degrees sweep angle) was never intended to fly transonic. It was flown during research to collect data by flying a real aircraft, rather than wind tunnel tests. The oblique wing design was proposed by Robert.T.Jones, to fly efficiently in both transonic and supersonic speeds. This aircraft, the AD-1, flew at max, 170 knots where the main idea of the design was to fly at supersonic speeds. Any challenges this aircraft came upon were not really a surprise. The idea of the oblique wing design was to fly at 0 degree sweep angle at low speeds and gradually at 60 degrees sweep angle at supersonic speeds. The AD-1 was really a scaled down NASA version of a passenger oblique wing design by Boeing.

[@RealEngineering]

Maybe I make trivial mistakes for the comment engagement. Maybe I'm an idiot. We may never know.

[@topper007style]

Smart.

[@topper007style]

But also, "Administration"...

[@HispAnakin42]

Can you do the spitfire’s rival, the BF-109? You’ve already done the spitfire. Only seems fitting.

[@_M4X15]

I'd assume there isn't anything espessialy interesting about it from an engineering standpoint so he hasn't made a video about it. Maybe he could talk about fitting the cannon in the center of the propeller but that's not unique to the BF109

[@HispAnakin42]

@@_M4X15 I mean I have to agree with you because he hasn’t made anything about it, but when you research the plane many people say it was a state of the art plane and just leave it at that. So it leaves me wondering.

[@SuperUltimateLP]

@@_M4X15 maybe the focke wulf 190 is interesting bacause of its aircooling system ?

[@ethanbennett9000]

What about the 262?

[@sam08g16]

I miss the time when "engineers" tried to make planes that flapped wings like birds

[@pixelfairy]

some flying robots are made this way. look up ornithopters

[@omidrastin3745]

not trying to show off, but flappy wings are extremely efficient when subject is small like bird.

[@matheussanthiago9685]

@@omidrastin3745 hmmm, drone birds

[@johnnytweed]

Yeah me too. I was but a wee lad. The good ol’ days.

[@Æ321-0]

Ya, University of Toronto Institute of Aerospace Studies had some neat ornithopters : kzbin.info/www/bejne/m4iciaagodGAbKM

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Of all of the videos I have watched from this channel, this is the one I most had to rewind and re-watch. Aerodynamics is very interesting to me, and simultaneously confusing at times. Thanks for explaining this plane and the topic so well!

[@Norweeg]

I’ve never seen this plane before. Thanks for sharing!

[@flighteaglediy8220]

Thank you so much for referencing your sources!!! I know it may seem like an ardours and pointless task, but your references assisted me a lot whilst conducting a EPQ style research project. Don’t stop referencing!

[@JustAnotherMetalhead]

That was so well explained, i wish my University had that Gift

[@homefilix6869]

3:15 What software does he use to animate and design these?? They're elegantly amazing!

[@vietle8157]

Probably After Effects

[@ekimoleksander6068]

After Effects

[@dieabsolutegluckskuche5174]

He also learned blender during quarantine :)

[@AbdulGoodLooks]

He would probably tell you to learn that on Skillshare #sponsored #money

[@ALT11i]

Lol, i was building weird plane in ksp when this video came out

[@SpoilerAlert__]

Keblar space program?

[@nishithasapukotanage2952]

Tis a warning ole’ chap

[@abeke5523]

@@SpoilerAlert__ kerbal*

[@fastfiddler1625]

I'm just an Airbus pilot, but I love these. Basically, flying that thing with the wings pivoted would be kinda like flying single engine all the time. But 7° bank for level flight would get really screwy to get used to.

[@revenevan11]

Yeah I wonder if the same modern control mechanisms that made it unnecessary for fighters and the like, could also make it more practically controllable with modern autopilot features, especially on some sort of drone plane. That said the reasons to do so are still pretty few lol. It would be strange to always have to he rolled like that. Could be even more disorienting in IMC if you need to stay rolled to fly level and straight based on the configuration of the wing.

[@fastfiddler1625]

@@revenevan11 Oh man. At least in IMC you could do something like have the attitude indicator fake wings level and recalibrate based on speed and pivot. Plus, modern fly by wire planes do so much magic behind the scenes to mask control issues, they COULD make it work. To my knowledge, modern fighters are nigh uncontrollable without the computers, so it would just be up to software to work out. But at this point, it's like 🤷‍♂️ why bother?

[@bbirda1287]

You'd develop a weird crick in your neck, like putting the TV in your living room at a corner angle from the couch. You'd have to alternate forward sides each flight

[@simonw2631]

8:43 where did you find that amazing shot of Concorde taking off !??? I love it !

[@leveretth]

Love that cross deck pendant jumping up to attach itself to the tailhook of the forward moving F-14 at 2:00!

[@ReaperUnreal]

Did I spy a Mustard-style model there? There's clearly some knowledge sharing going on in Nebula.

[@mystfire]

Noticed that as well. Looked exactly like Mustard’s style.

[@dragossorin85]

This has been enlightening because when I was little I've played with radio settings and intercepted conversations on wich operation NACA was mentioned multiple times but never knew what that stood for

[@SuperUltimateLP]

*Richard Vogt* had drawn up plans for this kind of plane in 1942 when he still worked for the company Blohm+Voss in germany, after the war he moved to america (in operation paperclip) and worked for the US Air Force. i wouldn't be surprised if some of his drawing were the cornerstone of this design.

[@avanishmishra4768]

It is called “National Aeronautics and Space Administration”

[@dadbear5316]

This came out on my birthday! Thanks for all the awesome engineering! I'm planning on going to NAU for mechanical and electrical this year!

[@shooteroffuture]

Now that’s what I love to see from this channel! Less politics of today, more of engineering!!! Great vid! Now I’m looking for another Irish to put up an amazing show today! And McGregor is about to deliver big time!

[@junitoortega8656]

I appreciate the subtle sound of the rotating wing in your explanation at 3:40

[@Thaleans]

How about 2 of that wing that makes X shape when swept?

[@DarxusC]

I was thinking something similar. If you kept the intersection inside the plane, it would avoid a pocket between the two airfoils. You could probably even make it functionally entirely symmetrical, so I wouldn't hate it. (Even though I totally admire them for trying this.)

[@MarloSoBalJr]

That's what I was thinking. Why have a wing that performs asymmetrical just reduce fuel & drag

[@bakkerem1967]

Won't work, as the aft-wing will be positioned in the drag of the front wing. They tried this with the Caproni Ca.60 (exactly 100 years ago), which had 3 triwing installments after one another. It was supposed to fly across the Atlantic, but never made it out of Lake Maggiore in one piece.

[@Thaleans]

@@bakkerem1967 Thanks!

[@warriormes6012]

but what if one wing set was low deck and one set was high deck, like a biplane?

[@MrWhiteVzla]

The animations on this channel are getting better and better. These are the best animations I have seen, yet!

[@jackw.2]

i love this channel, keep up the great work

[@sdwboss]

Hello Mr Engineering. Just heard a mistake in your information. At 3:02, you said "airliners cruise just below critical Mach number". This is not correct. Airliners usually cruise ABOVE their critical Mach number.

[@crackedemerald4930]

We have real engineering but where's fictional engineering?

[@AxxLAfriku]

Let me get this straight: You comment something that is unrelated to the fact that I have two DANGEROUSLY DASHING girlfriends? Considering that I am the unprettiest KZbinr ever, having two hot girlfriends is really incredible. Yet you did not mention that at all. I am quite disappointed, dear cra

[@MoskusMoskiferus1611]

@@AxxLAfriku. Understandable...

[@justanerd414]

kurzgesagt?

[@CK-xs3vq]

History Channel

[@RealEngineering]

Funny you should say.....we are cooking some ideas up for a Fake Engineering series that will talk about Sci-Fi technology. Not on this channel though.

[@carrotylemons1190]

I can’t get over how good the renders are

[@johnp9402]

I saw the thumbnail pic and I was like WTH? Lol

[@Lexoka]

I'd love to see a plane with two symmetrical oblique wings, starting superposed, and pivoting into an X figure. It would probably generate too much drag, but it would look super cool.

[@RobertGuilman]

I'm a simple man, i see Real Engineering video, i stop everything i currently do to watch it.

[@tontoepfer]

Your production value and quality really has increased a lot over the years! Great video!

[@rbesfe]

RIP any chance of actual discussion in the comments

[@revenevan11]

@Lupus Didacus I think they're referring to the mistake in the very beginning of the video; the last A in NASA is Administration, not Association. Everyone is going to comment pointing out/correcting that lol.

[@Brotherbear75]

Hardly likely to spark it.... or maybe....

[@kurumi394]

I wonder if computers with their abilities to perform hundreds of flight attitude corrections every second could make this concept come back to life again

[@andrewlum1402]

Hey Brian, youre the best

[@BezBog]

As a kid I had a toy model of this plane I can remember already at age 5-6 how bizarre it appeared to be able to rotate the wing almost like a propeller.

[@roger72715]

Association? I'm like.. When did that happened?

[@mulgerbill]

Renowned British designer/inventor Barnes Wallace first posited a single piece swing wing in the 50s, his postwar aeronautic concepts were well ahead of materials science of the time

[@joewickham554]

2:50 I see Andy Niven's diagrams get drummed into everyone

[@kuroraiko986]

As someone with very little understanding of the underlying physics here, the last bit about variable sweep wings moving center of lift backwards as the sweep angle increases made me wonder if anyone has modeled or tested this design: If you had arms spacing the pivot joints away from the fuselage, the wings could take advantage of the simpler mechanism used here, get the advantage of the symmetric tension, and also keep center of lift centered around the pivot arms. I'm not sure what kind of geometry would solve for the variable distance between the inner edge of each wing and the fuselage, but I feel like it could be fun to play with in Kerbal Space Program or something 😃

[@RobertGuilman]

"Real Engineering" channel really gave the "Mustard" channel a run for their money when it comes to content about transportation engineering

[@747simmer4]

i still prefer mustards style of video

[@almerindaromeira8352]

KZbinrs are starting to copy each other. Some months ago half as interesting copied economics explained on a video about Australia.... This is only going to get worse

[@AFA_TRES]

I love how active this guy is

[@adavyasharma6359]

Nasa: So are you thinking a forward swept wing or a backward swept wing? Engineers: Yes

[@Vito_16]

Thank you for your time and effort..

[@martinross9093]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but does the swept wings also reduce drag by decreasing frontal area?

[@TheYang2208]

you are correct, he mentions this in the video.

[@plica06]

@Martin Ross It is decidedly so.

[@martinross9093]

@@TheYang2208 oh, must have overheard that part

[@turbofanct6679]

I was waiting for an explanation on this odd design and plus I’m completely in love with this man's accent! Very very interesting and educational video, my compliments

[@soccerguy2433]

1:58. This clip of the F-14 is being played backwards. interesting

[@ozziepilot2899]

Most people would not know what side slip is, so maybe 30seconds to explain cross controls e.g. Left rudder & right Aileron = side slip with rapid altitude loss , love your videos btw

[@anishbaradhi1318]

I was going to say it is the National aeronautics and space ADMINISTRATION NOT ASSOCIATION but a bunch of people already commented this but anyway great video

[@bryceterry5302]

k then why comment

[@joannaatkins822]

This was a very interesting video, thank you for covering this fascinating topic

[@pjt480]

National Aeronautics and Space "Administration"

[@anthonyboyer9824]

Well it seems to me the logical next step would be to have two pairs of centrally mounted wings. One that sweeps forward, the other sweeping rearward. When straight, they would form a single, wide wing. In this way, it would make sense that the advantages of constant center of lift and structural forces are combines with the symmetrical sweep of traditional wing. Having 4 wings, it could be surmised that the wings can be kept shorter to than normal to somewhat offset the additional drag of the extra wings. Besides, a plane with X-shaped wings would look pretty great.

[@SeaMushroom98]

Hi. NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration, not Association

[@ingenium5831]

This video is really good. You point out important points and explain them in such a way that it is easy to understand. And more importantly, I could not spot any error or oversimplification. Keep up the good work. I had never a closer look to the oblique wing concept and thus this video was really interesting. For those of you who want to know more about the x-planes: NASA has some pretty interesting and free e-books.

[@jeanbonnefoy1377]

0:24 Administration, not Association 🤭🙄

[@paulgush]

3:40 chordwise flow is the component perpendicular to the centerline of the airplane, not that parallel to the leading or trailing edge. And it happens not just because of the geometry of the wing, but because there spanwise pressure gradients due to sweep

[@mattpenguin3030]

0:20 Administration* As it is an agency of the US gov’t BTW, 1:50 NACA = National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

[@alexs_toy_barn]

i graduated with degrees in both mechanical and aerospace engineering, and i'm so glad i work in the mechanical and not aerospace field

[@Aduthan]

Seems am a tad too early for comments!

[@hardware_geek8136]

Same

[@TechKidShazil]

@Alexandre Limberger he looks 15...

[@drockjr]

FYI, I love your merch! The graph paper journals are so Flippin awesome. The covers are soft, the quality is high, and they just make my life easier. The pocket one is dope too

[@latemhh5577]

Alternative title: World's most expensive plane

[@SamBrownBaudot]

The best example I've seen yet of "picking the wrong trade-offs".

[@20_percent]

how many came here just by looking at the display pic?..

[@menguardingtheirownwallets6791]

All of those problems can be solved by using a bi-plane arrangement, with the top wing rotating one way, and the lower wing rotating the other way.

[@deltadoobyd1621]

Idea: What drugs NASA scientists use when making their planes

[@ssik9460]

RP-1

[@dpeYoutube]

Having worked with scientists before. Coffee, lots and lots of coffee

[@WhiskyCanuck]

At some point I remember NASA had a cool modification of an F-111 where the wings can change their curvature, not like regular flaps but resembling a birds wing where the wing can be curled.

[@Yavorivanovvv]

Im 14 and im just super interested in engineering! I just wanted to type something cause im the 115th comment! :D

[@liamriley9816]

Build amazing things that will push humanity forward my friend 🙂

[@Yavorivanovvv]

@@liamriley9816 thx bro

[@matushonko7223]

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

[@kelpf0rest]

Oof, sorry man. The second "A" in NASA stands for "Administration". This one's gonna have to go up there with CGP Grey's original Tekoi video. #yikes 😬

[@chrisborozan5129]

That is so cool! Thank for putting in the effort that is needed to show the world some of the unique aviation designs around! Other Rutan Designs, LongEz, Varieze, Voyager (the airplane), Cat bird, Boomerang, Beechcraft Starship, Spaceship One, and many others. The guy just keep on building interesting things and came at it from an engineering background. If you ever end up in America and want a ride in a LongEZ let me know.

[@Michael_Scott_Howard]

NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.. please at least try googling nasa next time.. how embarrassing😳

[@maniacal_engineer]

Airliners do not cruise below critical mach. If you sit in an overwing exit row seat and the angle of the sun is right (morning flight east to west, port side) you can see the shadow of the normal shock on the surface of the wing. The shock is denser=> different index of refraction => a light/ dark band forms on the wing. Airliners cruise with a normal shock on the upper surface of the wing at about 80-90% chord.

[@ASJC27]

Yes, very disappointing that such a channel spreads misinformation. I left a similar comment about this and about another mistake - the change in frontal area has zero effect on drag (if this was true variable sweep aircraft would sweep back almost immediately after takeoff). It's only affecting wave drag at transonic/supersonic speeds and at subsonic speeds it increases induced drag. That's why the F-14 kept its wings straight until Mach 0.7.

[@maniacal_engineer]

@@ASJC27 exactly. the equation for induced drag has aspect ratio in the denominator.

[@rolanmanzano8695]

Hey NASA's final letter "A" does not stands for "Association", it's "Advocacy". This is me nicely correcting you.

[@ianm551]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, administration....

[@JulesBrunoJjBaggy]

It's administration

[@maxhahnenkamm78]

Administration

[@rolanmanzano8695]

3 people just killed my sarcasm instantaneously

[@danco.9883]

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is an independent agency of the U.S. federal government responsible for the civilian space program, as well as aeronautics and space research. NASA was established in 1958, succeeding the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.

[@saturnv2419]

Fun fact, F-14 can fly with asymmetric wing swept angles. This is actually not by design but by accident when one mechanism failed to retract swept angle.

[@patrick1532]

The test pilot for this thing was just built different, my god.

[@robbylebotha]

When it came to fu*ks, he probably gave none. Legend

[@jflight1691]

Ooh looks like I've got a new NASA paper to read, thanks!

[@tomf3150]

Reading technical journals mr Scott ?

[@JohnJaggerJack]

Thanks for saving us common mortals from the boredom that are lockdowns and quarantines.

[@glassfish777]

Nice video! Not enough people talk about the oblique wing these days. Should also mention that RT Jones always viewed the oblique wing as a super sonic transport. A lot of the later work on them was centered around oblique flying wing airliners. See chapter 6 of your first reference.