The Boeing YC-14; Taking on the King

[@thelandofnod123]

STOL is Short Takeoff and Landing, rather than Slow. Great video though.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

Yep, misspoke on recording, apologies.

[@thelandofnod123]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters Certainly no need for apologies, your content is epic.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

​@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters>>> I caught that too, but NO PROBLEM, DUDE!!

[@Justanotherconsumer]

@@dustyak79is it a British WW2 era Cookie from Lancaster? Those are not tasty.

[@ericdeer5887]

@@Justanotherconsumerway too spicy!

[@meaninglessmovies9891]

Back when the YC-14 was in testing, Air Force Magazine and Aviation Week & Space Technology ran countless articles about it. I was very disappointed when the program was canceled. Fast forward to 1987. I'm on my honeymoon in Tucson, AZ, and we're driving around the perimeter of Davis Monthan when I spot the tail of a YC-14 sticking up from a chain-link enclosure across the road from Davis. The gate is open, so I pull in to . . . what would become the Pima Air Museum. At that time, they were just beginning to pull the collection together, and there were acres of amazing prototypes that I had thought were all lost to the scrappers. Included in this were the YC-14 prototype and the YC-15. My wife and I spent two days rooting around there. Pima is much better organized and built today. There's an indoor hall filled with interesting aircraft, and the outdoor displays have signs and guides. If you're interested in getting up-close to some of the most significant airframes of the last 75 years, Pima needs to be on your list.

[@Freesavh1776]

What a great honeymoon! Better than any of those boring honeymoon spots. Like Hawaii, Fiji, Thailand, ect. ect. ect... I know it would have been for me. Getting up close to historic aircraft that you thought were lost forever to the scrappers. 👍🇺🇸

[@Sweety1915-nono]

Saw the same frame at Pima a few months back (in the middle of the heat wave). Genuinely the best air museum I've ever been to, though I recommend a visit outside of middle of summer to appreciate the outdoors collection!

[@meaninglessmovies9891]

Fortunately for me, my wife is also a pilot and aviation enthusiast! Back then, Tucson wasn't nearly as built up as it is today. And you could wander out to places like Marana which, at that time, was just starting to accumulate mothballed airliners.@@Freesavh1776

[@Freesavh1776]

@@yonatan62 that sounds so awesome. I'm on the East coast so making it there is a daunting ordeal for my situation right now. But 1 day I will make it out there.

[@FlexibleToast]

Imo Pima is only second to the USAF Air Museum in Dayton Ohio. And really only because Dayton has the X planes. Both are great and should be a must visit for any aviation enthusiast. One more that people need to visit is the EAA AirVenture air show in Oshkosh WI, along with the museum that is there as well.

[@johncashwell1024]

A key value in the An-72 and the YC-14's unique engine mount design meant that they could use rough airfields and also use fields or other open, unprepared areas without worrying about FOD ingestion.

[@KF99]

Interestingly this concept proved to be a major disappointment - in case of An-72 it was very difficult to handle in case of engine failure, because it wasn’t only thrust asymmetry, but also a lift. STOL capabilities were quite limited and mostly achieved by high thrust to weight ratio. And this engine placement caused lots of drag in cruise flight - there was an An-74TK-300 with conventional underwing nacelles, it proved to be much more efficient, only 3 were built, and, interestingly, one of them was Gaddafi’s personal jet.

[@immikeurnot]

It could be, but given how much was stolen by the Soviets, that's where the safe bet is. Communism doesn't foster creativity except in ways to lie and steal.

[@thelandofnod123]

@@KF99 I suspect we may hear more about a better design in the upcoming YC-15 video, a design concept that made it into service on a related aircraft later. 😉

[@shawnmiller4781]

@@KF99I hadn’t heard that but it makes aerodynamic sense

[@robertdragoff6909]

I’m surprised that nobody thought of putting two more engines in under wing pods as backups in case one of the two stol engines conking out or to supplement the lifting power for bigger loads….. Just sayin

[@andrewtaylor940]

It often gets overlooked what an astonishing feat in all of human history, the development of the US’s airlift capabilities during WW2 was. especially in the Pacific. They literally shrank the globe in the span of just 2-3 years. They went from needing weeks to move men and materials across the oceans, to in some cases hours. There is a famous story told by a German officer. That when he and his men captured an American soldier in France some time after D-day, they found in his pack a fresh chocolate cake. Still in the package sent from home. He said that was the moment he knew that Germany would not, could not win. His Army could barely send them food or ammo, across a few hundred kilometers. And here was this lowly American Private. And for him the American logistics could send a chocolate cake to a battlefield halfway around the world. And deliver it still fresh.

[@jehoiakimelidoronila5450]

The lengths America would do is astounding. But what happened to the German, though?

[@米空軍パイロット]

While everyone else focused on weapons and being tough, we focused on being comfortable, and it paid off

[@moss8448]

echos of the Battle of the Bulge movie...logistics son

[@andrewtaylor940]

@@jehoiakimelidoronila5450 He ate the cake

[@urgo224]

@@米空軍パイロット Like the 2 ice cream parlor Liberty ships that demoralized the shit out of the Japanese.

[@whyjnot420]

Damn, I could almost feel the deceleration from those thrust reversers through the screen.

[@covertops19Z]

I was living and working in Seattle when I saw the YC-14 take off from Boing field, for the last time. Never to be seen again. It was beautiful to see it lift off so effortlessly.

[@johnwoody9505]

I went to Boeing in the mid 1970s to deliver a GEC 905 computer they were using to develop the software for the flight control system to control the planes engines in a takeoff system failure. The lift generated by the wing was not just from forward motion but also from engine exhaust gases blown over the wing flaps due to the engine being mounted on top of the wing. I'm not an aeronautical engineer, I was a service engineer for the GEC 905 computer installed at Boeing for later engine flight management control software. What a great plane it was, it had not flown when I was there and I just loved the time I spent there. The hangar it was in was the hangar Boeing had set aside for their SST development, the walls had load of posters of the proposed plane, shame the project was canned. Must be nearly 50 years ago I delivered the 905 computer to Boeing, the 905 was delivered to the hangar, powered it up and it passed all the tests straight away. Those were the days, such fun with those early computers. Digital, mainly Texas SSI chips, I seem to recollect, 18 bit architecture, processor cycle time around 1 micro second. Those old computers used to fail every now and then with all those edge connectors utilised. Over the years I worked on them I found at least two 16 pin DIPS (dual in line package) not actually soldered in at all!!! It is strange how people today often think that digital PCB based computers did not exist 50 years ago, well they certainly did, I along with many others worked on them!! Cheers, John.

[@warped-sliderule]

Thanks for the memories! I was one of the crew at Graham Ranch at Edwards, in the desert dirt strip shots. The YC-14 seemed to defy gravity and it was obviously the best aircraft for a dirt strip. All other cargo aircraft throw dirt forward toward the engine intakes when thrust reverser used. What could have been...

[@grumpy1948]

I drove the M60A2 tank during loading test at Edwards. We put the tank on the plane…Memories

[@grumpy1948]

The tank bumper number was B-67 from B company 1/67 2 nd Armored Division Hell On Wheels.

[@warped-sliderule]

@@grumpy1948 that's cool. we all played a small role. did you take part in C-141B program?

[@Bearkiller72]

@Ed Nash's Military Matters: 2:59 STOL stands for Short Take off and Landing, not "Slow". 😉😁 Otherwise yet again a superb presentation! 😎✌️

[@wkelly3053]

Perhaps the “O” really means “or”. I can’t see the acronym being spelled STAL. That would never fly. Excuse the pun.

[@FlexibleToast]

​@@wkelly3053I suspect it's just one of those crappy acronyms that uses two letters from one word and ignores the and. Short TakeOff and Landing.

[@Boeing767DriverAA]

Never forget my ride on the YC-15 at Scott Afb 1977

[@johncamp2567]

Fascinating documentary presented so nicely that I had to subscribe.👍 Thank you!

[@johnforsyth7987]

Thank you for another very informative video. The YC-14 was one of the best aircraft that the USAF never put into production. It was definitely an aircraft ahead of its time. I am glad the USSR showed the basic design was a good idea.

[@gort8203]

You can't say it was ahead of its time when its time never really arrived. Ask yourself, other than the Russian YC-14 knockoff, how common is the use of upper surface blowing in modern jet transports.

[@johnforsyth7987]

You make a valid point. That said, I have seen some new aircraft designs that may use it. @@gort8203

[@m.bertram7706]

I remember seeing these two prototypes sitting at Boeing Field when I was a kid in the late 70s. It was cool to see them again many years later at the Pima Air Museum.

[@jb6027]

Thank you very much for the imperial units sub titles.

[@Paladin1873]

One of my ROTC instructors came to us directly from the C-141 product improvement program that resulted in the B version (which my younger brother would later serve aboard as a navigator). He told our class that when he began work on the upgrades he encountered a problem engineers were having with a lubrication oil delivery system. Someone had decided the plane needed to remain airborne over 24 hours, so this required developing a reserve oil reservoir and the means to pump it where needed. He was a pilot, not an engineer, but he quickly realized the team was designing a Rube Goldberg device. He pointed out that there was no place in the world where a C141 would have to fly that would take 24 hours to reach, so why were they wasting their time on this project goal? The powers-that-be eventually agreed with his logic and the entire system was scrapped, saving weight, cost, and sanity.

[@mikenodine6713]

And the nuclear cruise missile launch platform concept was moved from the 141 to the C5 Galaxy instead. The C5 was far better equipped for that mission, not just the several days of continuous flight from aerial refueling, but the bunk beds and coffee maker built in just behind the cockpit for the relief pilots to rest between inflight rotations on and off duty. That was the real reason for the 24 hour mission/loitering capability requirement. Whether any C5's were actually equipped with nuclear cruise missiles or not remains classified to this day as far as I know.

[@mikenodine6713]

You can google "Rapid Dragon palletized munition system" if you don't believe me about the 141 and the C5 cruise missile launcher platform concept development program. They also studied equipping a 747 as well back in the 1970's. Rapid Dragon is the same concept program being developed today for the C130 and the C17.

[@Paladin1873]

@@mikenodine6713 No, we never put any nuclear armed cruise missiles aboard a C-5. By the time the cruise missile program came along we had long since stopped flying with nukes aboard our aircraft (Chrome Dome missions) because we had too many Broken Arrow incidents. We did once air drop a Minuteman missile out of a C-5 and successfully launched it. It was largely a publicity stunt intended to let the USSR know we had such a capability if we wished to develop it further. I've little doubt the concept scared the hell out of some Soviet war planners.

[@ComfortsSpecter]

Alotta places Explicitly given how widespread the Starlifter was

[@godblessamerica7048]

When I was stationed at Davis-Monthan AFB, I had a badge for entering the boneyard since my shop had facilities inside the area in the mid-80s. I remember seeing the YB-14 on display at “Celebrity Row.” I thought that the large engines looked odd. It looks like it is still there. “Aircraft serial number 72-1873, the first aircraft, is on display at the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona. Aircraft serial number 72-1874, the second aircraft, is in storage at the 309th AMARG boneyard at Davis Monthan Air Force Base.”

[@somethingelse4878]

One of the best channels on YT

[@sloppydog4831]

When I was a teenager, many moons ago, I saw a picture of the YC-14 on the cover of a small hardcover book. The book covered lots of Cold War aircraft, and the only thing it said was that the aircraft used the Coanda effect. Never knew what aircraft it was and what was it for, until now. Thank you for making this video.

[@philhand5830]

I saw a YC-14 do a crash and dash at Little Rock AFB around '76 or '77 time frame... I'll never forget those two top mounted jets... I saw no more of it 'til this article....

[@TairnKA]

I remember reading about this aircraft in the Boeing News. ;-)

[@BNU30C]

Awesome information. Looking forward to the YC-15 video!

[@blakedawson2129]

My dad was the 1st flight and delivery crew chief at Boeing for that airplane.

[@WilliamBugeater64Simpson]

Excellent video. Thank you for the wonderful work. I was stationed at Edwards AFB, during the time the YC14 and YC15 testing was taking place. It was most excellent to see the aircraft put through their paces during the testing.

[@johnladuke6475]

Look at that thing just spiring into the air like it's afraid of the ground. It may have an odd-looking design, but you can't argue with results like that.

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated looking forward to excellent insights as always from you.

[@MH5XXXX]

YC-15 = THE C-17 GLOBEMASTER 3 from McDonnel Douglas Acft Co. I worked one the FLOOR build area on her for about 12yrs. GREAT PLANE, air crews love her.(i have talked to a few)!

[@wkelly3053]

I had a chance to see the YC-14 up close in either ‘76 or ‘77 (hard to remember) as a young teenager touring Edwards AFB. An entire design and mission analysis of this airplane is published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and available for purchase by anyone. The AIAA has published a series of these studies. The one about the Northrop F-5 is also particularly interesting.

[@Paughco]

I remember driving north past Boeing Field on I-5 back in the late '70s and seeing a YC-14 parked on the Boeing ramp. Pretty cool airplane. I like the whole coanda concept, but do believe that the C-15 is the better aircraft. Glad we still have the C-130s. Wish we could've kept our old C-123s, maybe with turobprops.

[@Monkey_Spunk]

This is the best thing I ever saw.

[@michaelhorning6014]

"... capable of replacing the C-130..." And with those words, we all know how this will end.

[@callenclarke371]

There's a lot of ground to cover in terms of the 'XC' and 'YC' denizens of USAF and USAAF history, Ed. This is a fascinating aircraft, one that I've only recently found info about. Yours is the first video where I've been able to enjoy footage of this remarkable design. Well done and looking forward to the YC-15 video! Keep 'em coming!

[@gort8203]

Those vertical tape flight and engine instruments were the fashionable standard for USAF jets in that era.

[@kirkmooneyham]

Yes, the C-141 had tape gauges, as well.

[@ed12151]

I can remember reading articles about this in Army Times while I was in the Army at Ft. Bragg.

[@robbudden]

I F@@KING LOVED this plane as a eighties kid. I just loved it and the Coaler. They both looked great

[@thelandofnod123]

Watching these videos brings back memories of ploughing through Janes All The Worlds Aircraft at the library after doing my Saturday paper route (I parked my bike at the library, which was half way through my run) and studying all the aircraft I’d never seen before.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

(1) Great video, Ed...👍 (2) As much as *I ❤️ BLEEDAIR BLIMPS* -- and *TURBOPROPS* in general -- I think the YC-14 looked TOTALLY COOL. (3) THIS is the FIRST VIDEO I have ever seen showing BOTH YC--14s FLYING IN FORMATION.

[@mirthenary]

Nice to finally see it in use, have known about it for a long time

[@ComfortsSpecter]

Incredible History Beautiful Art Goodest work

[@washingtonradio]

YC-14 and AN-72 were probably designed with similar requirements in mind and thus a form of 'convergent evolution' occurred as the 2 design teams basically came up with similar concepts.

[@bertjilk3456]

Utter BS. The 60s, 70s and 80s are littered with examples of the Soviets shamelessly copying western designs.

[@sealove79able]

A wonderful and very interesting video and aircraft I knew nothing about Mr.Ed.Have a good one.

[@dalbhuie_youtubeaddedanumber]

I do hope one day you will get round to doing a video on the Scottish Aviation Twin Pioneer. Nobody seems to ever have done one as comprehensive as your videos are about it.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

It is a great little plane, I'll put it on the list.

[@dalbhuie_youtubeaddedanumber]

@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters Thank you, my father was one of the more junior designers working on it at Prestwick, and I would love to know more about it. There is nothing in depth out there really.

[@terencewong-lane4309]

The YC-14 was brilliant!

[@RT-mm8rq]

My friends father worked on this. I remember him having a miniature model of this plane on his desk.

[@Freesavh1776]

Ed thanks for another great video. I've binged watched all your stuff. So now I sit with baited breath waiting on new videos. I can't wait for the next one to come out for this duo.

[@williamscoggin1509]

I was in the Navy in the latter half of the 1970s and got to witness one of these YC14's takeoffs & landings at the air base in Yuma, AZ. I remember thinking "those engines are Huge"!

[@Ron-uq2hg]

If my memory is correct. The original YC-14 is in the Aviation Museum just out of Tucson AZ. There is a large plane graveyard and one corner has been Turned into a museum and it contains quite a few planes that never went into production. There is also the original Air Force One of President Eisenhower. A Super Connie.

[@BrianWMay]

I remember seeing the YC-14 and YC-15 at Edwards AFB, both in the same hangar next to Base Ops. They were BIG aircraft!!

[@BoomVang]

I saw the 14 and 15 at the Paris air show. An engine fire could burn off the wings in flight when not in a lower pod.

[@MikeAnderson-oh9po]

My dad worked on the YC14 at Edwards AFB in 78-79. During that time I got to see some of the glide tests of the space shuttle.

[@checkyoursix5623]

Saw the YC-14 parked in front of the air terminal building and adjacent operations dept. hangar at NAS Point Mugu around 1977.

[@johnnyallred3753]

I always liked the look and ability of the YC-14!! I Would of liked to fly it.

[@KO-pk7df]

In 1977 I knew of these aircraft by the pictures and articles I read in the libraries of AF Bases and Naval bases. I was in Navy aviation and had just arrived at Norfolk Naval Base and was walking around exploring and I saw the Boeing YC-14 in camo paint on the ramp outside a hanger. I was pretty excited making the discovery, I had tried to get inside the fence to get a close look but it was a Saturday afternoon with only the guards present so I was not able to get in. Still back at my ship not many knew what I was talking about, but the maintenance Chief did and he was not able to get us a pass to go see it up close. I always wondered why they never caught on.

[@jefftheriault3914]

Working up a drafting certificate, lo these many years ago, doing a full 3/4 view illustration of this aircraft was my final class project. Still have it in some portfolio somewhere downstairs.

[@austingwatson]

Cool plane. I recall watching it take off and land at Boeing field, Seattle, WA when I first started working at Boeing in early 1977. It literally jumped off the runway and climbed like an elevator.

[@MM22966]

Everybody's faces when they realize the C-130 will still be flying in the 2100's...

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day, Bullshit. By 2100, Global Warming's Increasingly intense and Increasingly frequent Recordbreaking Extreme Weather Events, Coupled with the 12 metres of Sea-level Rise Expected when West Antarctica and Greenland both dump their Ice Caps, after their Ice Sheets melt, break up, and are no longer "pluggjng" the Uphill Glaciers and preventing them from sliding down and going PLOP ! And That's ALL Already Locked-In. Today's stupidly Vile weather is the Result of Fossil Carbon which we Burnt, in 1997 and before. Because it takes 25 years for a Cube of CO-2 To Achieve 95% of the Atmospheric Warming it is going to cause.... Therefore, Thus, and Because... Every EcoGnomie On Earth is busily, furiously, trying to continue to wrest a Profit from every Transaction And is thus tracking to collapse - Well past the point where ANYBODY will be in a Position to Operate ANY Flying Machine beyond a Paper Aeroplane, But clean fresh Paper will be as Rare as having enough Kerosene on hand and available to operate a Hercules with, by burning the Stuff. Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. Ciao !

[@ARCCommanderOrar]

What will retire first, B-52 or C-130?

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

​@@ARCCommanderOrar>>> I would guess the B-52, since the C-130 has so many different operators, both military & civilian. That said, my ability to predict the future is SKETCHY at best, sooooo...😊

[@fishingthelist4017]

It still may be in production.

[@pjotrtje0NL]

More and more NATO operators are moving away from the C-130J and to either the A400M or the Embraer (K)C390, just because the C-130 is beginning to show its age: even the newest J models.

[@JoshuaC923]

Another excellent presentation

[@bigblue6917]

Thanks, Ed. One thing I love about this site is that it fills in the blanks on aircraft I have heard about but would love to know more. Part of the problem with the French was that much of the aircraft earmarked for supporting Dien bien Phu were suddenly taken away for another operation, which meant they were not available for support at Dien bien Phu which was so desperately needed. A case of French muddled thinking. America did not make that mistake with Khe Sanh. The Soviet Su-25 looks very similar to the failed rival to the American A-10. It's thought that a Soviet spy satellite photographed that aircraft but missed the A-10.

[@henrys.6864]

I've seen the YC-14 at Pima Air Museum. It a very impressively big aircraft eventhough it doesn't show much scale in the film footage. It's my favorite of the two competing aircraft designs. 👍

[@emaheiwa8174]

I’ve always loved this plane. It has a Russian vibe to it ❤. It deserved to get into the production lines

[@petesheppard1709]

Well, the Russians DID make it work! I'd like to think something like the YC-14 will be resurrected as an eventual C-130 replacement.

[@jimviv6030]

I saw this incredible aircraft going through its paces at one of the big English air days and have always been disappointed at its demise.

[@soonerlon]

Interesting airplane. I was fortunate in being able to see the prototype aircraft at Davis-Monthan AFB while TDY there. Great video mate!

[@RR-pw5nb]

Saw it on display at the Pima Air Museum in Tucson.

[@gort8203]

The video does not mention the risk involved with reliance on upper surface blowing for lift during STOL operations. If an engine fails during STOL flight near the ground the loss of lift on that side will probably be uncontrollable. I would not want to fly this aircraft at STOL speeds unless every occupant was sitting on an ejection seat. Combat aircraft that use engine bleed air for low-speed lift, such the F-104 and A-5, had ejection seats. Two engines can increase the risk in STOL operations in lighter aircraft due to control issues. As an example, if an OV-10 engine failed suddenly during an STOL takeoff the aircraft was below Vmc and would likely crash, hopefully straight ahead IF the pilot reduced power on the operating power engine immediately. Therefore USAF restricted normal operations to takeoff and approach speeds higher than Vmc unless STOL was absolutely necessary

[@russvoight1167]

I saw the prototype when I spent a day at Edwards AFB, CA with my Uncle

[@RichardGoth]

another fascinating video!

[@fredtedstedman]

reminds me of the jet DH Buffalo test aircraft ! pioneered that strange shaped tail , as Globemaster and Atlas .

[@gregorycasey3347]

Saw one of these at the airport in Arizona in 1994 but passed back through and it was moved.

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

As a grunt, the only military airplane I ever had the pleasure of being a passenger in was the RCAF CC-115 Buffalo. That was a trip and how.

[@jeffstone7912]

YC-14 can be seen at Pima Air museum located near the boneyard in Tucson.

[@GARDENER42]

That's a new one for me - never knew it existed.

[@mrzoinky5999]

I remember a story about this aircraft from either a Popular Science or Popular Mechanics magazine from the mid 1970's - always wondered what happened to it.

[@russvoight1167]

Saw the YC-15 as well.side by side in the same hangar

[@wormyboot]

I miss those Strategic Air Command colors. Such a good looking livery.

[@MrDino1953]

Nice story. I like how it ended.

[@Kiowa1776]

Great right up brother

[@ArielCalonne]

Great work -- thank you!

[@ghostindamachine]

Great documentary video! A few models of Beriev and the Antontov AN-72 have similar design philosophies.

[@yes_head]

Nice one, Ed.

[@fortawesome1974]

STOL stands for "Short Take Off and Landing" Not Slow!!

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

Yep, my bad, misspoke.

[@dustyak79]

Another cookie winner please step forward to receive your prize.

[@toomanyhobbies2011]

Thanks for mentioning the Soviet design "rip-off" of the yc14. The Soviets were excellent at STOL aircraft because of their huge amount of land with "primitive" landing strips, and their many aircraft with above wing engine configurations are very successful in that role.

[@zeppelinkiddy]

You mention Boeing's YC-14 unique engine-blown wing which is called the Coanda Effect,. What was truly interesting about this AF program is that the YC-14 and YC-15 had two completely different and advanced wing technologies that had never been flown on aircraft of this size and weight. Boeing's competitor the McD-D YC-15 used a supercritcial wing which some argued, would lose it's effectiveness and would be hard to maintain when faced with the dirt, dents of military field use. However others argued that the mechanical complexity of Boeing's YC-14 blown wing would also present maintenance problems. In the end and after the program ended, it was the McD-D XC-15 that evolved into today very successful C-17 Globemaster II which features a supercritical wing.

[@alunjones2550]

Being able to keep the reversers on until dead-stop makes a massive difference, and even then, the engines are not dragging in debris.

[@Seminal_Ideas]

Wonderful viideo as always Ed. I've always loved this aircraft and its cancellation was a great missed opportunity. As the C-14, it would've bridged the gap between the C-130 & C-17. Possibly even selling to European air forces and sparing them the agonising development of the Airbus A400M.

[@bendalgleish1894]

I learned about this plane recently because I found a special silver pin issued by Boeing of it

[@alex3261]

YC-14 and An-72 use the Coanda effect wing blowing to create a very high lift at low speeds.

[@flybobbie1449]

This design i saw in a book about Bristol aircraft concepts from the mid 50's.

[@bull614]

I have seen pictures of this airplane but could never figure out what it was. Thank you for this video

[@johngalt2506]

A video about the A-10B Night Obseversation Gun Ship program would be cool.

[@deck614]

Jet engines mounted forward and above a wing blow the speed of air over the wing - so it gives a true huge vertical vector, especialy with great flaps bended to the ground. This is the Coanda effect, named after this Romanian Engineer (Charles Coanda) who dared testing a jet engine in 1910, invented the flaps-in-tail of the space shuttle etc. French Breguet 941 used this principle just before the very cool and efficient YC14

[@JTA1961]

Put on a couple of floats... & you'd have a fricken FLYING BOAT

[@daigriffiths399]

Digital engine readouts... they look very familiar. Taking 'transport aircraft' to include civilian stuff, Lockheed's L-1011-250 (1976) had them for Delta Airlines. I think some L-1011-200s (1975) (Air Canada and Saudia) also had them. I have pics of two of these aircraft with a SECAL of 9L-LDN (I think - it's difficult to read) and 3D-NEG. I'd guess that Boeing and Lockheed were buying from the same instrument manufacturer but on the timing, Lockheed's TriStar got there first.

[@sjTHEfirst]

The Soviet didn’t need to spy on the American aviation industry. All they needed was a subscription to Aviation Leak and Space Technology.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

🤭

[@shawnmiller4781]

😂ROTHFLMO!!!! And right you are

[@TheJustinJ]

They did have subscriptions to both. As well as all major US news papers. I'm sure. Kennedys famous speech to media execs is proof of this. The KGB stood outside North American Aviation for weeks, and took photos of the Vigilante prototype, the inspiration for the Mig-25.

[@Beemer917]

I'm pretty sure they had a subscription, actually several.

[@shawnmiller4781]

@@Beemer917 Why? It’s cheaper just to get a library card and visit their magazine rack

[@Sophocles13]

You earned a Sub Sir!

[@markmills586]

I remember seeing the YC-14 (and -15) as a ten year old at Farnborough ‘76. They seemed such futuristic designs at the time. I still have the photos somewhere.

[@douglasfur3808]

The boots that house the landing gear remind me of the sponsons on the Boeing flying boat design. I wonder if they produce any ground effect lift during takeoff and landing.

[@markreardon6663]

For those correcting the STOL thing, y'all have never been in a Caribou and it shows.

[@shawnmiller4781]

I have and every one brought to Alaska ended up crashing

[@skylongskylong1982]

In 1964 the U.K we’re working on a STOL transport aircraft powered by four Rolls Royce Pegasus engines. Never flew due to the new British Labour Government . Article on the above appeared in the 1976 RAF year book.

[@bennymutant]

Shame there's not a restored example. I'd never seen that super-short landing before. Cool!

[@capndave9152]

If the project had coincided with the creation of US SOCOM, we might have gotten an MC-14. The STOL capabilities couple with is load capacity would solve a lot of problems providing special operations needs for rapid insertion and logistic support.

[@silverwings1843]

I have always said this about many aircraft: Can you imagine getting accepted to OCS, then BFT, then FT and being assigned to fly some aircraft like this !!! Depressing !!!

[@davidpalmer9508]

Hi Ed, Drop me a line before you complete your YC-15 video. I was chief engineer on the YC-15 Technology Demonstrator and have a wealth of info for you.