Відео

Seems like AI and automation could save millions in this process.

Excellent no nonsense explanation. I also now understand why the attendants are all slim: cost savings.

Yes. Because human technology hasn't yet figured out how you can flatten a land 😂

spinning wheel while in the air? ever heard of gyroscopes?

LET TESLA MAKE IT…

That opening landing was atrocious.

What's the deal with the crashed aircraft in the background at 3:06? Looks like a Hercules?

No. Rather leave it. To many negatives. Easier to clean rubber from runway. Lot cheaper too

Vanes on wheels to get them spinning to landing speed (airspeed) would have to be large, and would induce an incredible amount of drag.

Antonov is Ukrainian aircraft!!! Muscovites are useless here.

from an engineering standpoint, doing that would be adding another point of failure, another liability to the project it would result in more planes benched for maintenance due to the increased complexity, making it more costly thus nullifying those "savings" so it is kind of dumb to even consider that with our actual technology unless there is a breakthrough in the materials to make it reliable, we don't need to "reinvent the wheel"

1:45 that flight simulator needs to patch all those glitch. 😆

It also adds some break force.

It’s crazy there’s this video. A while back I wondered and just figured the motors would add too much weight.

1:07 Rubber makes the runway smoother? While f1 drivers get more grip once some laps have been put through

what if they installed rockets like the panjundrum.

Wow - I feel like I should have known this, but I didn't.

Why can't aircraft have motors in wheels to spin wheel to match the speed of landing. This way they won't wear out tyres.

The only thing i got from this is that airlines are paying $2.30 per gallon of fuel. I know where I'm going to start filling up at.

Pre-spin the wheels in a retracted position before getting out, like using air speed or compressed air. It would be nice to see what speed difference gives half of the tire wear, which could also save cost. On my last short airplane trip, the captain slammed the plane so hard that we bounced back into the air. I guess that is one way to pre-spin the wheels hehe :D

Ryan air may charge loss of rubber charge from passenger after this video.😂

Is the answer that reducing static friction on landing would defeat the purpose and extend stopping distance? Because that's why. Now I'll watch the video.

Well, I THOUGHT about trying, but it was gonna be too taxiing. Just glad that someone was thinking about tire wind vanes before I was even born. 🤔🤗

If the wheels spin up, yes they will save rubber, but surely that initial touch down must start then slowing down process of the plane, if the wheels spin synchronises , then the plane will require more braking effort to stop, and thus more wear on the brakes! Its just which is the least expensive option in the long run!

You could always land on a conveyor belt

concorde accident was cause by runway debris that was pick up in the engine and blow some parts

But in high winds/ storm conditions is it more dangerous when landing ..could it be more likely that wing could clip one of the bumps..not sure that makes sense🙈🤣

😊😊😊😊😊😊 from Malaysia 🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾

Runways are tired of planes landing

Atlanta is the busiest airpot in the world sr

Whichever method used its an expensive process - I am involved at the other end of this process with Rubber plantations in Liberia where almost all of the production of natural rubber is exported for the manufacture of aircraft tyres.

If you really wanted to save weight on a plane, you'd fly it empty. But then you'd be missing the entire point of venturing into the air in the first place! (Putting passengers on a diet might make sense though. Of course this would just give them more reason to pack another bag!)

I will admit I've asked myself this question many times in the past during my 59 years on planet earth. Had no idea the rubber build up on the runway required it be scraped off! Knowing that, I am only more curious... resumes video.

Bugger. I thought this was my secret idea that was going to make me gloriously rich!

While watching this. I noticed that at the 2:28 mark. I recognized that test equipment. I ran that dyno for years! Just wondering how they released that footage? But if you are wondering. This was taken at Honeywell aerospace test lab in South Bend, IN. That is the EI dyno, specifically, the B end. This did bring back some great memories of the testing done there.

UKRAINIAN ANTONOV

The reason they clear the runway of rubber is so the plane doesn't crash... Think of that...

Dad worked for Lockheed back before and into the early WW2 years. They looked into the same problem, with the scarcity of rubber. They found that no amount of spin stopped the smoke and wear on bomber tires. They found it was caused by the transfer of the aircraft weight to the ground. Spinning the tire made it worse. I worked fighters during and just after the Vietnam War. Fighters like the F-105 got something like six or eight landings per tire. Doing touch and go practice landings amounted to doing an approach and not landing, but flyby and go around to save tires.

No. TYRES.

5:30 here is actually easy to notice with a naked eye that the runway IS wavy. Is does not appear flat at all.

Wow, a microcar that allows you to lane split between cars in heavy traffic, or park between cars while blocking them in?

Great video, nice explanation. Great job. Although, kilometer is km, not kms or klms.

25k from half a kg. garbage!! If thats the case they would make everyone take a dump before boarding and save a half a million.

Everyone loves ramps, duh!

boing is not a reputable source anymore.

1:38 Antonov is Ukrainian, not russian... 💩💩💩

@5:17 "Furthermore, the bulk of the wear on aircraft tires is during taxiing -- not landing." I was simpatico with our host's explanations, until the above assertion. A single landing will strip far, Far, FAR more rubber off of the tires than miles and miles of taxiing. Heat destroys tires. That skidding effect during landings makes those tires extremely hot. That makes the rubber softer, and more will peel away (or melt off). That one second of skidding, during a landing, is what kills the tires. Also, the now very hot tires are running at nearly 200 MPH, which continues to heat up the rubber. Then, the braking also heats up the rubber. So a single landing will eat away more of the rubber than hundreds of taxiing operations. @0:14 "...leaving behind melted rubber, which then has to be cleaned off the runway, regularly." The frequency of cleaning that rubber off of the runway far, Far, FAR exceeds the infrequent cleaning of rubber off of taxiing areas. That is because the taxiing areas do not get loaded up with rubber from the tires. It does not happen during taxiing (perhaps only slightly, over long periods of time). Taxiing is not a tire eater. Yes, it contributes to the wear and tear of the tires. But the tires are rated for X number of landings -- not for X miles of taxiing. As technology improves, a safe, reliable, cost effective way to spin up the wheels will eventually be invented and adopted.

Rubber doesn't melt.

Airplane tickets should be priced by weight of the passenger.

'Big Airplane Tire' is fighting it tooth and nail!