the second plane shows very impressively that scaling up a plane is not just scaling up the parts. there is a limit to model making and a hard transition to proper plane building.
It has nothing to do with scale but correct build methods; in this case the tail sheared off. There isn't a limit to model making before you get to a real plane, they just get bigger till you get . . . . a mosquito, for example.
Proper planes will disintegrate if you fly them like this. The thrust-to-weight ratio is massively higher on models than real planes, basically the square-cube law.
@@elmodiddly that is most definitely not true, just like a crow can't exist let alone fly if you reduce it to the size of a mosquito, and a mosquito can't exist if you enlarge it to the size of a crow. These models are built to _look_ like real airplanes, but the physics of flight and of material strength are very different
@@straightpipediesel All of those are parts of the same thing. These models _need_ that kind of thrust to compensate for bad aerodynamics, moving an actually well designed plane towards something closer to a remote controlled rocket or drone with some plane-looking scaffolding on top that barely helps it to fly. Look up small aircraft with wings and propellers that were actually designed to fly like Lancet drones - they don't look like boeing 747s at all
@@NJ-wb1czYou also have to consider bad piloting. You don't fly an airplane without basic instruments by external eyeball 300 feet away. A model's got to be able to climb when a pilot pulls up enough when it looks fast enough. UAVs, missiles and such have inertial reference units, air data probes and autopilots which consider these factors.
That Gripen crash is especially sad as it not only destroyed a beautiful aircraft but also shows that the builder massively underestimated the forces acting on such a large aircraft and built it like many smaller scale planes - out of wood... which is not an issue by itself (see the DH Mosquito), but this thing seemed to be far to fragile to be even airworthy. The fact that the fuselage disintegrated like that shows that this perfectly. And it seems to be made of sections for easier transport, creating even more weak spots.
I couldn’t agree more and condolences to the owner/pilot, however in cockpit videos of the blue angels I’ve seen the highly engineered vertical stabs vibrating like crazy during certain manoeuvres and that design is very strong indeed! Just goes to show the forces involved during certain speeds and manoeuvres.
For real it sucks, but I wouldn’t say the whole aircraft looks flimsy. From what I saw, it seems like the vertical stabiliser breaks first. That clearly means the vertical stabiliser was too flimsy. Once the vertical stabiliser breaks, the whole plane is destabilised, causing the plane to go through the air at a strange angle, putting far more pressure on the rest of the plane than you would ever expect it to withstand. Of course it’s going to break up. The tail was clearly too weak. The rest of the aircraft? Hard to say. But I would certainly hesitate before claiming that it’s all too weak. It clearly got off the ground and flew for a while before breaking.
Well sadly I have seen a few real crashes of plains and every time when they crash they made a huge fire ball and massive ploom of black smoke, so there really is not comparison to RC.
These do illustrate how and why airliners aren't meant to bank in turns more than about 35 degrees max. There's no lift surface when they do, so they drop like rocks.
You can do way more than 35° it would just be considered outside the normal flight envelope but yes they are flying these liner way to aggressively, if they are faithful then the aerodynamics are similar and then you're not supposed to fly it like a fighter.
@@user-lv7ph7hs7l Or, if you are going to fly it that aggressively, you need to fly it higher so you have more altitude to try and recover it in. You can see at 0:26 he's almost recovered to level flight, but he needed at least fifty feet more altitude for it to successfully arrest its descent.
@@phytonso9877 Yeah but that's not as spectacular... I have a lot of respect for RC pilots I can't do line of sight well, so I get the desire to keep then close but then again I don't build these things that cost more than a used Toyota. I think some of them are better engineers than they are pilots because if you fly that low you can't mess up. Although I guess the Gripen was the opposite, he seemed like a good pilot but his aircraft completely disintegrated, him I felt bad for. The Concorde was more than high enough to recover from the stall, not sure what he was trying with a delta wing flying as slow as my foam RC plane. You can almost run faster than the stall speed of that thing but I still crashed it... used to having a (virtual) instrument panel and artificial horizon otherwise I would perform about the same. Especially with these using multiple actual jet engines that cost about 3 grand minimum you'd think they focus a bit more on the basics of flying like not stalling or not flying close to the ground at that speed and banking at 60°+. In German we say Mehr Geld als Verstand which roughly translates to more money than common sense/intelligence.
Bank angle doesn't have anything to do with lift. It's energy and angle of attack. The first pilot stalled the right wing. Edit: 3rd and 4th were also stalls.
@@icecl0ud Of course it does, you say yourself he stalled a wing. That's why wings level is one of the steps in a terrain escape maneuver because it gives you the best possible climb rate. Now I supposr you could call it effective lift, as yes technically both wings generate equal lift but that no longer point up against gravity, like a component force, the large the angle at which the force acts the lower the force, remember the vector crap from school? If you are relatively slow or banking extremely hard, the component of the lift facing upward can become less than gravity pulling the aircraft down and it stalls. This causes the nose to drop when you bank, so that's why you give some backpressure and the more you bank the more you pull the nose up to maintain your angle of attack and climb rate. If you don't do that the nose will drop fast at a high bank angle. Try rolling a 737. At some point the nose just drops around 60-70 degrees even if you fully pull up and you drop and by the time you've inverted you're 30° nose down and overspeeding.
1:14 how that can really make you appreciate just how well built real fighter jets are. The fact that they can handle so many g's without tearing apart like that is pretty amazing.
Number 1: Stall during turn Number 2: Structural Failure of vertical stabiliser followed by complete mid air breakup Number 3: Stall of port wing during turn Number 4: Stall potentially due to low airspeed and high AoA but possibly made worse by wash from aircraft in front Number 5: Pilot distracted by no.4 also stall (note the left rolled just before the final right roll)
8 месяцев назад
no the number 1 was Bank Angle. It overbanks, and the plane rolls over resulting in steep dive.
The first one was due to a loss of lift from high bank angle, not technically a stall. The lift forces went from mostly pointing up, to pointing sideways. From there the only force keeping the nose up was from the rudder. As the nose fell the pilot didn’t react quickly enough to stop the roll input and pull out of the dive, which due to the low altitude resulted in the crash. Had the pilot quickly reacted to the loss of attitude control and banked left before the loss of lift, it would have been fine. Otherwise they immediately needed to stop with the roll and pull up to maintain altitude
Given that at 1:48 you can see some glider trailers I suspect this is an airfield for glider planes. They should provide the perfect condition for these kind of events.
Actually, if you look very closely, it was NOT the engine that fell apart first, but the vertical stabilizer. In fact, the engine and main bidy stayed intact till the very end. So what are you talking about?😅
The irony about the Saab disintegrating in midair was that the announcer was going on about how rc models of this size have to get very thoroughly inspected and certified for safelty, proper materials and building quality. And as he was saying that, the thing fell apart...!
1:46 Glad to see that guys hi-vis was telling us what the pilot was thinking. Pretty much all of these crashes could be avoided by learning what bank angle is, and what happens when you go to far.
“Tower we are declaring an emergency” “Copy flight 735, can you make it to the runway” “Negative tower, we’re going down!” “Copy that 735, the giant humans with fire extinguishers are rolling on the tarmac as we speak”
I enjoy watching these compilation crashes, especially when they have put a lot of time, money, and effort into building these toys. However, I only have one complaint: when are we going to see some more?
what pissed me off the most was how those guys were just stomping around in some guys field over his plants.. crash sure, go get it and walk out, don't stomp all over the farmers livelihood
@@MrPoopYTP No they do make RC sized real jet engines, compressor stages, combustion chamber, nozzle, fan, bypass or none. 2-3 grand a pop. Before EDF it used to be more common, now of course you can get high performance EDF like many do for airliners, but with fighter jets it's still common to use actual turbines. It's not that expensive compared to the rest of the thing, some spend 20 grand one toys like that. I will try to add a link for the popular manufacturer but YT sometimes doesn't allow links but easy to find "rc jet engine" anything below 2 grand is EDF. Above there is fire. And noise. They make a lovely roar like a proper aircraft.
Nein Nein !!! Actually I feel really sorry for the guys who own and made this, it is their passion. They love this stuff here in Germany, I enjoy watching them in the fields here, although I still argue why they are allowed to do this which disturbs the birds, stresses the wild life, but I cannot go fishing. However it is not because I want this stopped, I just want to go fishing!!!
@@marcoporro Dont start lol Nor is fishing for a hobby. That is why in the Netherlands catch and release is not only allowed but law lol Germany is one of the only countries out of two I think in Europe that do not allow it, catch and release does not kill anything, that is why recaptures of the exact same fish are so regular in some lakes. Anyway, you did not start but I did, sorry lol. But it is an argument because they say, causing them stress for a hobby is the reason, this causes birds stress to fly loud planes around them lol Anyway it is what it is, I still love watching these guys fly them here and I still drive all of the way to the Netherlands to go fishing, so its all good lol
@@Pobsta-de7hb oh no, let me be clear, I have nothing against fishing. I am just saying that more people fish than fly, and there is a more direct impact (you are voluntarily disturbing/injuring fishes vs just possibly and unintentionally disturbing birds), so it's easier to see why people are more concerned with fishing. And even then, in my country I think you almost always have to have a permit on public areas to fly drones or planes (but it might be mostly related to accidentally crashing on people, idk)
@@marcoporro Gawd knows, I am just a whinging old guy and I hate the ban on catch and release fishing here but I am not alone, many do. It is all this peta group or something they are called, but apparently letting your dogs crap where ever they want, leaving rubbish everywhere walking them, cats breeding in the streets by the thousand so theres a massive over population of street cat issues, the largest pet shop having puppies, kittens, monkey and all sorts down the road from me, all look sad and depressed, is ok with them though but not me fishing with my son lol As for flying, I am not sure whether the guys that fly their planes etc here need permits by law etc, perhaps so. I just enjoy watching them and watching them freely enjoy their hobby that they love, whilst I cant lol Who knows, maybe I will learn to fly these things and take up a new hobby lol
That and its producing decent enough speed, the outer shell of these RCs are limited in what kinda material they can use, at least in show regulations but they come made that way.
