Barbeque bacon burger

Please create a video about The Thunderwell! Nuclear steam piston concept weapon for destroying asteroids or aliens lol or launching cargo into orbit!👍

Hey go check out the KZfaq channel Pandora US, they're ripping off your hitter train video word for word and all your footage. Thumbnail is the same just flipped. Ridiculous since you out so so much work into your videos

I remember reading somewhere that drag at Mach 0.98, or basically right below the speed of sound, is much higher than at supersonic speeds of 1.2 onwards. And yeah, lack of supporting infrastructure is also another issue. Honestly, for any vehicles, especially planes that cost a huge amount of money to buy and rely heavily on supporting infrastructure compared to cars, new/radical concepts or designs shouldn't be implemented. Rather, a slow introduction of a slight change in the aircraft would be better, since it would give assurance that even if the plane had didn't meet the criteria that it was supposed to, it could still very much function like a normal plane, and also that it could still run normally at any airport. Another way however, is to actually have all the boarding systems and infrastructure be built into the aircraft, which would still allow it to function at less developed airports.

Congrats on your growing subscriber base! That Boeing aircraft would have been awesome but Boeing needs to get their stuff together first before even thinking of designing another aircraft… ;)))

That one faulty AOA sensor: I'm about to end this man's whole career

When Southwest and others want to buy thousands of it, you kinda have to give them what they want.

@@Greatdome99 That's one of the cardinal rules in business. Never become dependent upon a single customer or they become your god.

Boeing is run by Bean Counters now (Lockheed Martin as well). They pump the Stock by Growing Profits. Executives then cash out their Stock Options - it's how they pay themselves. The future? Who cares? They care about money, *now.*

Is innovation impossible in commercial aviation? Well, almost. In the field of aerospace, the risk and cost of drastic new developments are so high that it is discouraged.

A clever play by Boeing.

Damn that's cold lmao

@@232K7 It’s just math. But, they let Airbus “win” the race for this huge plane. As you see, they are ceasing production and they’ll never get their money back. It won’t break even.

You should tell your colleagues to work with the Boeing 2707 instead.

@@jamesdellaneve9005 I mean yeah, Airbus ended up building the “biggest’ double decker passenger plane, “beating” Boeings 747, even their updated 747-8i and 8F however, the A380 couldn’t really compete. It never really broke even, Freighter versions never materialized as plans for the construction of a freighter meant that the plane would have to be entirely redesigned as adapting the structure was impossible unlike the 747 which was originally designed to be converted into a freight as it came out in the early 1970s during the fuel crisis so Boeing hedged their bets and it paid off. The two 747-8Iis will likely be the last 747s to fly as two are currently being built and modified for use as the two 747 Air Force One jets.

These videos are just such a fun watch, i'm watching this before i fall asleep lol.

Have You Gave Me My Small Shoutout?

You have an awesome channel and deserve every subscriber, and probably a lot more. Love the video, keep up the excellent work!

what was the music in the intro?

The pleasure's all ours, our good old bro. 😉And here's to hundreds of thousands more subscribers in the future. 😎

I’d recommend a period . after refined and after that just say ‘I am amazed by what could have been and what has been made.’ Also I’d recommend using less contractions like I’m or it’s or don’t and write the entire two words out if you’re not 100% with english. Write out do not or I am because you need to learn the basics of sentence construction (use more, or at least some punctuation mainly) to be able to use english contractions/shortcuts properly. Anyway I agree! I love this channel because it frequently digs up unique content that none of my other KZfaq aviation based channels put out and is always high quality + the guy’s narration is fluid, natural, and upbeat. Awesome channel

Honestly, that sonic plane would break apart after 4 flights. Cough, cough, 737 Max, poor build quality and factory management... But it looks pretty bada**, NGL. I wish we had Mach 2 aircraft in 2022.

@@leebee1100 lol english go brr

Yeah, i mean the engines look so Ace combat ADF10 with there placment

And now we have the 737 Max. I like the high transonic design of the sonic plane, but doesn't aerodynamic drag increase a lot above Mach 0.9? It is more efficient to fly Mach 1.5 than 0.95. By the way, I love the wing design of this sonic plane, the crescent wing form, an older variation used on the Handley Page Victor. This wing has both subsonic and supersonic qualities, that work well in the transonic region.

@@thepolishtech1552 >

It was merly a promo sketch art, gone CGI 3D, certain attributes could've made it acceptable to the FAA. The craft wasn't designed to supersonic, by design, it was to be *impossible to exceed* mach1, THAT was the issue, drag would always be a problem, it just needed to be regulated, NOT limited, the FAA could've allowed somthing like between 1/4 & the other 2/4 of a full point A to B range, for granted sonic speed, at very high altitude.

I felt the same when their SST never flew.

The same huge billboard was at Sydney Kingsford Smith in 2001. Just before 9/11. There’s an article about the billboards - and the plane - in the NYT from that year: “Boeing Plays an Aerial Wild Card”

I live in Earl’s Court by the big Tesco 😂😂😂💯true story..where the big billboards are

They should not have canceled it in the first place.

did you watch the video? it made no sense and was poorly researched. should never have been announced much less survived 18months before being canceled.

@@beaudavis3808 should have been cancelled before starting you mean

@@bonob0123 No, I mean what I said. Do not reinterpret my words.

@@beaudavis3808 not reinterpreting. saying you're completely wrong.

At least a true SST makes sense. Why burn more fuel to travel only marginally faster?

@@PremierSullivan Boeing said that because of the reduced travel time it would burn around the same amount as conventional aircraft like the 777. There is absolutely a market for an aircraft that reduces flight times by several hours as long as it's for roughly the same price, we see this clearly in the rise of nonstop ultra long haul flights like Qantas's project Sunrise which shows if given the choice people will take the nonstop flight to save a few hours just like for example people would take a Sonic Cruiser that would allow them to get back by sunset instead of midnight. An aircraft like the Sonic Cruiser would allow airlines to have much more flexibility scheduling flights with convenient departure and arrival times, although one scenario where the speed becomes less ideal is overnight transatlantic flights where the aircraft would arrive too early. An ideal scenario would be taking a slower 777 or 787 overnight, arrive in the morning, do business all day and then take the faster Sonic Cruiser home so you could get back in time for dinner.. In the end what killed the Sonic Cruiser was 911 which resulted in higher fuel prices and reduced air travel demand leading to airlines wanting significantly less fuel consumption so the whole thing about the Sonic Cruiser burning around the same as a conventional aircraft wasn't good enough..

@@PremierSullivan 20% is not just marginally faster when you're talking about flying over the Pacific. And Sonic Cruiser was comparably efficient to the 767.

100m?? That would have been an RA TCAS event for sure.

@@Optimus-Prime-Rib it was on take off

Haha ok will do. I figure you didn’t need to see the intro twice In this one

@@FoundAndExplained I don’t ever remember seeing it once! The tune with the clouds is just iconic IMO. Gave your videos a perfect professional and trademark feel to it. It’s your thing

@Anish Khokhar🔧 in mine it is 10 15

9 pm for me lucky..

Ikr

You would still save the same amount of time over a conventional aircraft, you would be on the ground in the Sonic Cruiser before the conventional aircraft even enters the traffic pattern..

@@cancelanime1507 tell me you dont fly commercially without telling me you dont fly commercially lol

@@beardedbarnstormer9577 If you want to have a logical conversation don't resort to stupid slander like that please..

@@cancelanime1507 its only slander if im wrong. Are you a commercial pilot? how would a SS airliner fare on a star into LAX? how would their increased speed account for that? it makes sense if you think that all airplanes start the day at the same time on the ground and the SS ones can depart first... but thats not how any of this works.

​@@beardedbarnstormer9577 Well I'm making a comparison between two aircraft (one the SS and the other a conventional one) doing the same route, taking off at the same time.. How would you do that differently?

It wasn't a Supersonic Aircraft and that was the whole point

🤣😂🤣🤣i love when experts chime in 🖖

@domcom fermi dont forget their triplane crop duster the top speed is 80 knots.

Boeing might redesign he sonic cruiser using Boom Overture Technology by using composite materials, 4 bypass turbofans instead of afterburners, and run on substainable aviation fuel.

@@Perich29 If boeing gets involved then it's an assured pipe dream.

It's what happens when bean counters run companies

Halfway through and I'm thinking the same. Like I'd pay just to experience it once in my life kind at least once.. unless it became affordable which it probably would not in my lifetime.

communism

Yes sponge bod spsure pants .... ora ora...

@@kaminelson1277 yes

@@maddoxmoreno5690 IS THAT A JOJOS REFERENCE JOJO IS THE BEST FU*KING ANIM-

@@F-35A_Lighting_II bro ges who got the last comment

I did it already? Or the x-22?

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/idB-e5yX05fHoo0.html This is the link to the video.😊

@@FoundAndExplained i think he meant a bigger version of the V-22 Osprey except it has Quad Rotors, this aircraft did appeared in one of the Transformers movies.

@@FoundAndExplained Your video on the X-22 was excellent. I'm talking about the largest post V-22 Bell-Boeing concept from the late 2000s. One design endowed it with 55 foot rotors and the ability to carry a Stryker combat vehicle. That implies about a 40,000 lb cargo capacity - almost double that of the Boeing CH-47 Chinook. This "Big Boy" variant would have still been behind the 44,000 pound ability of the Mil Mi-26 "Halo."

@@FoundAndExplained Here's the wiki entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_Quad_TiltRotor

Most players in this industry nowadays will always try their best to avoid spending a big sum of money to do a big research. That's why it's quiet stagnant. The money is the problem.

Blame excessive faa regulations too

The high bypass turbofan engines of today are actually "ducted fans" (~80% of thrust via the front fan). They sound like propellers from the front (if you fly first class. . .) and rockets from the rear (if you're in steerage). Nothing new here.

That would be terrible for video performance.

Too much work

@@JokullFrosti I see. In the end, it's all about the monetization.

@@BrenoLuna Nick has 5 employees. He can't just post willy nilly. The income needs to be steady and sustainable because multiple families depend on the income to survive. There is no reason to tank the channel because 1 guy doesn't like seeing his face for a few seconds through the video.

@@JokullFrosti fair enough :-)

I will say, though, the giant engines on the 787 are pretty impressive.

We'll get you there 20 percent faster... please arrive an extra two hours before your flight...

I remember even shorter flights across the atlantic. Technically you can travel faster than the speed of sound without breaking the soundbarrier.

@@juliusfucik4011 right, I believe via headwind. Our ground speed maxed out at around 620mph~992kph

@@herrgodfrey9563 *Tailwind. A headwind slows down your ground speed. But yes, airliners cruise below Mach 0.85 because any faster than that, the accelerated air over the wings starts pushing up against Mach 1, which is what causes the excessive drag and fuel drain that killed the Sonic Cruiser and Convair 990. But if your air mass happens to be chugging along at 100 mph because it's a jetstream, that's free speed! Also keep in mind that the speed of sound changes with pressure and temperature, so you have to look at the aircraft's current Mach number, not the speed of sound at sea level under "normal" temperature conditions.

@@AubriGryphon right, I understand the speed of sound changes depending on different factors which is why it's higher at sea level vs 10k meters, close to 160 kph difference, in some circumstances. It's pretty wild, nonetheless. I really hope we'll have SSTs before I die lol.

@@AubriGryphon Just temperature. Pressure doesn't factor in

"If you build it, they will come."

If that's bad imagine how bad a Supersonic airliner would be for the gate slots.. It wouldn't be ideal but it's possible the system could have been tweaked a bit to allow for the Sonic Cruiser..

They already had allotted gate slots for the Concorde which at that time cut the Transatlantic journey in half whereas the Sonic Cruiser only shaved off a couple of hours flying time. But you’re right, the proposed SST’s they’re currently working on will run into that same issue as the air routes are more congested as are gate slots since Concorde was retired. Computers could easily do the job regarding slots so long as airlines are willing to swap out slots with one another.

You mean the Convair 990

Overall, swing wing airframes are substantially heavier and would reduce the total flight distance because the wings wouldn’t hold as much fuel compared to a fixed wing. The recent iteration of the 765 with the engines over the wings is actually a viable STOL concept that would satisfy the requirement for low velocity landings at conventional airport runways.

I try

I hate to break it to you but the BWB will never work.. It is physically impossible to safely evacuate an aircraft of that nature in 90 seconds therefore it will never be allowed.. It does probably have future in cargo, business jets and military tankers though..