Spiral notebooks sold out, but the moleskin styles ones are still in stock!

Honey lets go visit the Bahamas in our stealth bomber

As a retired 737 pilot,(EVERY version except MAX) , aircraft engineer, and simulator instructor I think this is one of your best videos yet! Not only did you cover most of the good and bad issues of blended wing aircraft but you gave one of the best descriptions of the 737 MAX debacle I've yet heard.

9:45 Fun fact: The Wright Flier, the worlds very first airplane was designed to be unstable. Both the wing and the canard provided lift, meaning if the plane left level flight it would be pushed father out of level flight by the passive forces. This was a deliberate design choice by the Wright Brothers, but subsequent airplane designers disagreed with this design philosophy and future aircraft designs were made to be stable, as you described. For the Centennial celibration of the Wright Brothers first flight a replica Wright Flier was built. Several highly trained and experienced test pilots tried to fly it, landed and refused to try again because the plane was so difficult to control. I'm not sure if the first flight was actually reenacted, but it makes that first flight even more impressive when you think about the fact that test pilots with thousands of hours of flight time were afraid to fly this plane, and the Wright Brothers did it with no flight experience at all. Can you imagine walking out to an airport, renting a Cessna 172 (one of the easiest planes in the world to fly) and teaching yourself to fly it by climbing in and taking off? You could, in theory do this. Flying an airplane isn't much harder than driving a car. But it would be highly illegal. But this was how the first generation of pilots learned to fly. Except they were not renting airplanes carefully designed by aeronautical engineers to be easy to fly. They were flying planes they built themselves with no understanding of aeronautical engineering whatsoever. Or at best very little knowledge. Early aviation is a wild and crazy story with plenty of death.

4:19 that guy knows exactly what shape he's left on his screen for filming. 😂

"I pay for whole wing, I'll use whole wing"

13:20 although I love blaming software as an engineer, I must say that this is not bad software, but bad system design. Writing better code doesn't add redundant sensors.

I find it incredible how I can sit and absorb your videos for 25-30+ minutes without ever losing focus. Especially impressive is how I leave feeling like I have at least some grasp of the content matter, despite my lack of engineering experience. Truly well done, you might someday consider making a video about the design process and challenges of making your own videos.

This is the best teaching audio-video that I have ever watched & heard. It is dense with information and not a single word is superfluous or wasted. Taking notes in notebooks slows the student down so he/she can come at a concept from different angles until it is thoroughly understood.

"Faster boarding times" SOLD. Let's do it

I'd be willing to bet that those failures being due to having a single sensor rather than redundant systems can be traced back to one or more executives earning themselves a bonus because by eliminating redundancy from the original designs they managed to save the company a miniscule amount in production and maintenance costs. This sort of shit usually comes down to the suits having no clue.

What a great video! I've checked out the channel and subscribed. Well done, you've taken something quite technical and explained it in plain language without losing detail in the narrative AND managed to keep at interesting at the same time. Really good job done.

this is an amazingly well put together, well worded, well thought out video. I appreciate your devotion to excellence in these fields.

I remember years back when this design was just a joke online, and there were plenty of edits with different airline liveries. Didnt expect the world to steer towards this in our timeline

I found the explanation of passive stability control in standard airframes to be especially clear.

As an aerospace engineer with specialization in structures, all of these are true. Also I learned new things from this specially the light and weight distribution. Kudos subscribed to your channel

I’ve been hearing plans for making air travel better for decades. One of the earliest was this this flying wing idea nearly 25 years ago. Yet nothing changes. I’ll believe it when I see it.

This was a very well-researched piece, because you caught a lot of the "why we haven't done this yet" problems, which I suspect was your goal. If I may offer a few criticisms... --"Tube and Wing" was in play from the late 1910's or earlier, and the fact you were specifically talking about jets isn't really relevant for the class of plane being discussed? The reference to fixed diameter tubes later helped specify what you were referring to, but it's still going to be confusing. --You've conflated 'horizontal stabilizer', 'tail', and 'vertical stabilizer' a lot here. The reason the flying wing design without a vertical stabilizer (and instead relying on fly-by-wire) was chosen for the B-2 was always because RCS (Radar Cross Section) was the selected trait to minimize by engineering. You can have vertical stabilization _and_ be a flying wing. Even the original Horton prototypes and some later intermediate prototypes still had passive vertical stabilization, as did the more recent civilian prototypes you've discussed. --The chart with "fuel consumption per passenger over time" I think is labelled as "per decade" when you meant "per year", given that it went from 100 to 50, in 50 years, and the numbers cited were between 1-5%. --Flying wings are weird, but you made no mention of the stability gained by allowing for dihedral wings (as observed in literally every civilian and non-military or fly-by-wire prototype shown), as opposed to the semi-anhedral (because the B-2 is both weird and classified) of the B-2 (which, as it's the only full-scale production flying wing is really the only production reference). No mention either while talking drag of the unusual trans-sonic effects in addition to lifting stress of tube and wing designs fighting the Sears-Haack or Whitcomb-area. Of especial note is how the flying wing/lifting wing must not have a tail to follow these, but can still have vertical stabilizers. --I'm not sure how much research has gone into this(cargo), but a lot of the 'pressure hull' problems actually disappear for cargo applications as they don't require life support, and given the lifting body characteristics I think it would be worth mentioning that designing a flying wing that could contain 2-3 shipping containers that, while remaining sealed or venting the container without surface breach could carry those containers (potentially full of vaccine or medical supplies) halfway around the world, given the known characteristics of the B-2 alone? --Mention the engine mounting problems of a flying wing vs. the weight distribution? Thrust alignment on these things is hard (Read: takeoff vs. cruise problem), and needs to be strongly considered as the 3rd element to center of mass/center of lift, but you only passingly touched on it in wing+tube alone? Just some thoughts based on aviation engineering subtleties I've run into, trying to align this more with some of your previous videos (since I know you've discussed anhedral/dihedral before), and reference for some deeper insights for others to discover. I love that you're taking a serious look at the topic, and bringing what was once a fringe aviation thing out into the limelight for other engineering enthusiasts to feast on!

13:23 another problem with MCAS was that there was improper training done for it. Pilots could have saved the plane and passengers on both occasions but were unaware they could turn the MCAS off with just one button.

I have been wondering a design like this hasn’t been in production. I remembered it this morning and my mind has been racing all day. Thanks for sharing the sentiment and talking about it.

I am loving this channel. Well done Brian, excellent work!

I’m almost speechless after realizing how much of preparation and production it took to make this great video. What fascinates me the most is that I can watch this for free. This is insane. Huge thanks to the author. You’re making the world a better place.

The center of mass & lift bit reminds me of something I read during my kerbal days; an aircraft with its center of lift behind its center of mass will fly poorly, an aircraft with its center of lift in front of its center of mass will fly once.

I'm pretty new to this channel, and I just found out here about your efforts to offer purpose-made items to engineering students. That is most commendable, as a marketing effort. 👌

As always, magnificent illustrative and technical description. You totally describe all of the science necessary...very well done, AGAIN.

To be fair: some of this groundbreaking new tech to reduce fuel consumption per passenger is simply "less leg space"...

1:23 use zero-based axes unless you have a really good reason not to. Starting at 50 makes it look like consumption dropped by 90%. It didn't.

What a cool airplane. I wish I could fly one through the Grand Canyon at high speed and low altitude. To those who are interested in such things, my 3 favorite aviation/science fiction art books are: - Icon by Frank Frazetta - Beyond the Horizon by John Harris - Great Fighter Jets of the Galaxy by Tim Gibson

excellent explanation + perspective on passive vs active systems, redundancy, criminality of boeing 737 max cost-cutting, etc

I took flight mechanics last semester and you just condensed the major topics into a well done 30 minute video. Keep up the amazing work

I won't hold my breath. We've been seeing concepts just like this as "the future of aviation" for literally my entire life. I remember seeing articles with designs similar to this and headlines like "Is this the Boeing 777?" Then it was "Is this the Boeing 787?" Etc. So yeah - I'll believe it when I see it.

Fascinating, thank you. I've been intrigued by blended wing body aircraft ever since reading in the 1970's about the Horton brother's design work of the 1930's, but had never been able to fully understand the complexities of controlling this type of aircraft compared to the tube and wing design. Your programme illustrated this very well. Thanks. I am disappointed that you didn't give at least a 'heads+up' to the Horton's work in this field. They were the forefathers of everything that you discussed re the B2 and, I suspect, the McDonell design too. I understand that Boeing engineers visited the Smithsonian to inspect the Ho229 prototype as a result of their studies into BWB designs. I could get worked up and rant about the shameful neglect of the Ho229 by the Smithsonian, but I'll control my emotions! Thanks once again for a really enjoyable programme. Have subscribed following this discovery.

Such a wonderful channel! Thanks for all this valuable content!

No doubt that the industry will move this direction. However, having zero (or minimal) window seats, would really bug me.

At 4:20. someone drew a knob in the flight tracker data. Nice.

Two things not mentioned: The effect of the tilt of in-air turns on passengers sitting closer to the outside of the fuselage. The tilt would have them hanging from their seatbelts, or thrown into the walls of the airplane if they’re not wearing them. Also, having to escape from an aircraft without windows when you have no idea what is outside the door will give some people pause, delaying evacuation.

I think the more fuel efficiency per person can be pointed at seat-size, and the number of people being crammed into planes per flight. Although there is no shortage of engineering improvements - fuel efficiency per-passenger get's floated as overall efficiency far too often, and it has been at the expense of the passenger. Flying is no longer something to look forward to. It is an arduous, pain in the butt. As little as 30 years ago this wasn't the case so much and tickets were not that much more expensive if any either.

I'm glad you covered the cabin pressure factor. This was a concern of mine when we were working on our supersonic commercial flight capstone project as we started deviating from the cylindrical fuselage configuration. One important limitation not covered here is the height vs width of the airframe. If the internal cabin is to be high enough for passengers to walk around, the wingspan must be much larger than that of conventional regional airliners that carry 100 or so passengers. At that point, you might as well add more rows of seats. Its likely we will never see a regional airliner or charter plane of this design for this reason, mainly just international flights where you can sell the extra several hundred seats. If the industry is forced in that direction, they will have to compensate by scheduling less frequent flights to fill the seats.

Imagine the amount of future engineers this channel inspires…

4:20 i like that new plane design on the computer

This video was extremely comprehensive and well done. Love the work put into it. A+ quality product, learned a ton.

I will be having the main guy who conceived this idea as my professor in university! So excited!

Flying wings have been experimental for a very long time. The Tube and Wing configuration is used because it serves the form=function needs.

I would really love to see a video of yours with Mentour Pilot. Both of you guys have excellent explanations, for the newbies outthere.. im loving this video. Thank you

Everytime I see video's about these kind of aircraft, I think to myself "GET ON WITH IT"

4:19 ' Vast amounts of resources ' some really good work he has on that monitor

Stunningly well thought through and narrated.

Keep up the great work. Love your videos!

25:21 Johny Sins is aeronautical engineer too

1:24 this is kinda a misleading graph since it doesnt start at 0. 50% is still a good improvement, but with a quick glance i first thought it was something like a 95% improvement.

Really you provided a brilliant explanation - thank you. You got me all excited about this concept

You are really, really good at explaining complicated things in a simple way. You didn't lose me once! Thank you! I enjoy the experience of understanding complicated things quickly and easily.

That notebook is gorgeous. If you'd released it two years ago I would have bought the hell out of it and it might have made my dissertation's research phase a lot more productive. Even now that I'm not really doing anything close to engineering it might still be the very first piece of UKpostsr merch I buy.

This was the topic that I used for my seminar during my university days. I found the BWB (blended wing body) concept extremely fascinating at the time. I was so into it that I referred to so many journals and articles. It's so wonderful to see that Real Engineering also used some of the articles that I used. Of course, he did a better job in explaining the stuff in a more technical way than whatever I did when I was younger. Have watched a lot of videos of Real Engineering, but this one was a wee bit personal and I loved it. 😍 Thank you Real Engineering! :)

Great video, so clearly explained. Top notch, thank you.

25:21 I recognize that guy, he fixed my pluming for free! my wife loves him. I heard he was an astronaut, pilot, soldier and doctor, what a man!

As a software dev, you're gonna have a hard time getting me to set foot on a plane where a computer can overrule pilot input.

It is very interesting to get an inside look at the engineering involved for the flying world it’s reminders of the building of bridges dams and other extraordinary feats of engineering

Enjoyed your video. Brings me back to my days of mechanical engineering classes.

Speaking as a longtime engineer, I want to say this is a very well done, accurate and informative video. Kudos!

Something ignored is that as putting people further out you need to add structure strength because as you go away from the center the more turbulence people will experience.

To: Real Engineering This piece on the future of the blended wing was so impressive. Your little commercial at the end, talking about your process of understanding new material, is what caused me to subscribe. I almost NEVER subscribe to anything. You rock, keep up the good work!

I remember reading about something like this in a science magazine like a decade ago. Neat to see that they are still being developed.

He has one of the best voices on the Internet. I love that Irish accent.

As an active aircraft mechanic, I have always had some questions and concerns on the blended wing designs incorporation to passenger and cargo applications. Definitely want to thank you for your insights and video as the logic, reasoning, and engineering behind the benefits and changes helped settle a lot of those questions. Very good video!

When I was a child at the beach I was lucky enough to see a b2 performing test runs and I fell in love with them ever since when I first got insta I posted that I wanted one someday or that I'd fly one atleast and now I'm going for my private pilot's license and I am absolutely stoked to hear the future of aviation may be headed in this direction this makes me so excited

@RealEngineering slight correction: The 737 Max's MCAS wasn't implemented because the 737 Max was less unstable than its predecessor. The new 737 engines are heavier and mounted more forward, meaning the center of gravity is pushed even more forward of the center of lift, which increases the passive stability of the 737, not decrease it. The report cited in this video explains that, true to its name MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) was installed to make the steering column "feel" more similar to its predecessor, not to counteract any loss in passive stability: "MCAS enhances the feel of the column forces in manual flight... resulting in the required column feel to the pilot".

8:19 True KSP players know that it makes planes very instable

Just a minor historical point: the "tube and wing" configuration surely predates even World War I; The B-47 was one of the first such designs with pylon-mounted jet engines and swept wings typical of modern turbine-powered tube and wing aircraft.

You explained so many concepts in this video, at a level I could understand. You should be a college professor because you are a great teacher. I learned so much.

The flying wing design has a problem with YAW. This originally caused the Northrop XB-49 to crash, reaction time is S-L-O-W. The B2 Spirit gets around this by fly by wire design by not getting itself into an uncontrolled yaw condition. Also the control surfaces are quite different notably the split flaps. These problems will be rectified because a flying wing and lifting body is a heck of alot more efficient in fuel and in passenger space too! I see the clean airliner running on hydrogen which has the highest specific impulse, not battery electric, it's just to damn heavy! So the lifting body design has a lot of advantages in this area with the only design problem be in controlling the aircraft. I know they will solve this however.

You know a person is a true engineer when he's selling graph books instead to mech 😂😂👍

I am 3rd-year student in mechanical engineering and your videos really motivated me to keep on learning whenever I get bored with subjects in college. Thank you so much.

I was sold the moment you started talking about boarding and de-boarding. I want this right now.

Another great video where you explain some quite complex issues in a way that is simple to understand.

The level of detail this dude puts into his videos is incredible. Always a beautifully edited video with loads of info and resources. UKposts God imo.

1:28 I love graphs that don't start at zero. This looks dramatic, but it's barely a 50% reduction over 50 years.

Very informative. Nice background music. Keep going! Thank you

This presentation is of very high calibre. Thank you.

You kind of glossed over airport infrastructure changes. I would be interested to know how much change is required. Will we have to completely redesign airports, or just new jetways?

The engines at the top will also improve safety. The top mounted engines are better protected from debris and bird strikes. The volume ratio should also be better, if it could glide, it should be able to float pretty well

Awesome presentation. So many factors I would never have thought of.

I REALLY appreciate your attention to detail. Thank you so much. I like learning

This is all looking very familuar! haha, another great video as always!

As an engineer that works on avionics, I would bet everything I have that the engineers complained about the 737. They all knew it was stupid

I read somewhere that a disadvantage of blended wing airline is that passengers at the extremities would face severe motion sickness as they are near the wingtips and thus tilt a lot when the flight rolls or turns

Thank you for this excellent and concise description of the 737 Max MCAS disaster.

Could you make a video on the engineering of deep sea submarines pls

What about the question of increased g-loads for those passengers sitting further from the center-line of the aircraft in the wider bodied blended wing?

fun yet serious, deep yet easy, your videos make learning simply great

It would be so cool to see a future where these are all the airplanes being used. I mean that simply from an aesthetic standpoint, i absolutely love the idea that these can save that much fuel. Game charger that we desperately need. Cheers!

This channel makes me love engineering more everytime.

To make active stability safe enough, I find myself thinking that you want not only plenty of redundant cross-checked sensors (both different types and multiple of each), and flight control systems, but also might want to make your control surfaces and their actuators redundant. Design things so you can lose of some some percentage of your control surfaces on independently of others while maintaining sufficient control authority.

Very informative video. I think you are missing an analysis of the issues in landing a rudderless delta shaped plane in cross winds though. I suspect it can be partially solved with all wheel steering but for highly variable cross winds I suspect the tube and wing with rudder style is better at landing. If you could restrict the blended wing aircraft to airports where this is not an issue then great. I think they will need all wheel steer and wingtip spoilers at a minimum to compete in this area though.

About the lack of windows for passengers. Wrap around OLED displays keep getting ever larger, cheaper and more flexible. So much so that Airbus even proposed a future airliner to feature a cabin completely wrapped in OLEDs for that 360 panoramic experience feed from dozens of exterior camera

I am retired mechanical engineer and I just wanted to say I loved your description of how you study at the end of the video. Some how I picked this up at university when some courses allowed us to bring one or two pages of notes into an exam. I soon realized that the act of generating the condensed notes meant that during the exam I had such grasp that I did not really need the notes anymore. I started to create these "cheat" notes for every course and whether or not they were allowed into the exams became irrelevant. Eventually I had a binder of these notes that I still have to this day. I could have used your notebook then!!

I'd like to see how this gets out of a stall, corkscrew dive or random tumble before I set foot in one.

Simply Amazing content. The 737 max part really helped me understand the issue

I am surprised you haven't covered the problem with passengers sitting further away from the main axis around which the plane turns. As far as I've heard somewhere, this is a big problem with blended wing body design, because people can get much more easily sick, having to withstand increased forces and movement. Or has this issue been resolved somehow and is not that big of a concern anymore? :)

Follow-up video idea: What impacts will these planes bring to passenger airports and their gate layout? Could the costs for adapting existing infrastructure effectively stall the sale of these aircraft?