Why You Never Got to Fly The American Concorde: The 2707 SST Story
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 вер 2024
- Watch More Mustard Videos & Support The Channel: nebula.tv/mustard
Support Mustard on Patreon: / mustardchannel
Mustard Merchandise: www.teespring....
Instagram: / mustardchannel
TikTok: / mustardchannel
Facebook: / mustard-109952378202335
Twitter: / mustardvideos
Website: www.mustardcha...
Special thanks to Periscope Film ( / periscopefilm ) for letting us use exclusive and rare footage for this video! Checkout their UA-cam channel for a huge collection of exciting historical footage.
It was to fly even faster than the Concorde, at speeds approaching Mach 3. And even carry more passengers. It would have flown the distance from Los Angeles to New York in under two hours. America’s effort to build a supersonic airliner was an ambitious project spanning a decade and costing a billion in government funding. But even an army of aerospace engineers and the latest in aviation technology was not enough to get America’s Supersonic Transport (SST) off the ground.
In 1962, the British and French announced a partnership to build the world’s first supersonic airliner, the Concorde. A few months later, the Soviets also jumped into the race with SST plans of their own supersonic airliner, the Tupolev 144. As America had watched these programs transform from concepts into serious enterprises, officials began to worry about maintaining America’s lead in civil aviation.
So in 1962, President Kennedy announced that the U.S. government would help fund the development of an American supersonic transport. Manufacturers were invited to participate in a design competition. Design entries from Lockheed (L-2000) and North American Aviation (NAC-60) were reviewed. After years of evaluation, Boeing’s 2707 was selected as the winning design.
But it turns out that building an SST significantly faster and larger than the Concorde would be enormously challenging, requiring completely new aviation designs and technologies. As the 1960s wore on, the Boeing 2707 program was plagued by technical setbacks, and the program’s ambitious goals were not being met. An anti-SST movement had grown around opposition to sonic booms and other environmental concerns.
When funding for the Boeing 2707 project was canceled in 1971, foreign competition and concerns about national prestige were not enough to offset political, economic and environmental pressures. The public’s view of government programs and optimism over technology had waned. Over the course of the 1960’s, the world had changed. #SST #Boeing2707 #Airplanes
Go to audible.com/mus... or text 'mustard' to 500-500 to get one free audiobook and a 30 day free trial of Audible
Thanks for watching! Please Like, Comment and Subscribe!
Thanks for watching! Just quick note... I made a typo @ 1:47 .. it should read "Convair" not "Corvair". Good luck getting a Corvair to hit Mach 1 ;)
Yes. CONsolidated Vultee AIRcraft.
A Corvair doe lol
Bartonovich52 he means the Chevrolet corvair
Mustard challenge accepted. Child slaves! Bring me the midday opium and 700 pounds of jet fuel!
Blazdur the Ridiculously Named you mean the solid rocket boosters?
The idea of flying across the country in two hours probably sounded much more interesting in a time when you didn't have to show up to the airport 2 hours early for security and lines, didn't spend an hour getting to the airport, and didn't have a 1 hour drive or worse through traffic to get to your destination from the arrival airport. In the grand scheme of things, the extra couple of hours of flight is just the nice part of the trip.
I don't know about you but sitting in economy from here to Europe for 9 hours I could barely wait to land. Now imagine having to endure that to Australia. I don't know how people do it haha
@@pmxgamingftw8286 ITS LITERAL PAIN. I’ve been from Brisbane to London, and Brisbane to Europe. Literal pain. + it was economy.
@@pmxgamingftw8286 I flew from Sydney to Montreal back in the 90's and the whole trip took 27 hours. One of my flatmates flies to Austria once per month (well, he did, back in the Before Times). Just driving between our major cities is a huge deal; it's 10 hours from Sydney to either Brisbane or Melbourne. So I think we just grow up with a different idea of what constitutes a long trip. I remember watching the British show Hussle once, and people in London were complaining about an upcoming train trip to Birmingham. I thought ... it's bloody England, how far can it possibly be? Sure enough it's only a couple of hundred clicks, and less than an hour and a half by train. I know people who do that every morning and evening to commute to work in Sydney! So, yeah, it's just life for Australians...
You know you're old when....
@@joyalpatel6000 the Brisbane to London flight was hell cuz you knew you were gonna end up in London...
"Why you never got to fly the American Concorde." I never got to fly on the ordinary Concorde to begin with...
Me neither :(
I do hope they will construct a new Concorde.
How come people are so sensible to some booms?
I wouldn't mind hearing them.
On the other hand, they should manage to invent something that removes the boom.
I mean for a flight from NYC to LA or to London, they could fly out to the sea before crossing the Mach 1 and then turn and accelerate to max cruising speed.
Thomas Dahl the booms broke windows because they flew over large cities. You wouldn’t tolerate that.
France only stop using the concorde only because it was too expensive on fuel, nothing to do with the sound, the pilot would only cross the sound barrier over the ocean
@@thomasdahl3083 Getting rid of the boom is impossible.
@@thomasdahl3083 Sensible? That doesn't seem to be the right word to use there. And also, there is no way to prevent a sonic boom other than keeping an aircraft subsonic. Flying out over sea, reaching Mach 1+ and then turning inland doesn't mean there would be no sonic boom. Quite the imagination, but I don't think you understand how this all works
I never got to fly ANY supersonic. Born into this world too late. 😔
Snazzy Labs dont wory new space race is coming
No you didn't. Supersonic jets are still a thing among recreation and tourists!
So far supersonic flights seems available only for business and very rich tourists. Transportation tech must radically change to be available for masses. Until then it is only a dream.
Snazzy Labs even worse for me would’ve loved flying Concorde but again all too late and use to have to see the last one that ever flew once a week as it’s kept at my nearby airfield
Try a jet fighter
I remember the sonic boom on a semi-regular basis as a boy in Kentucky. I also remember seeing aircraft flying well ahead of the sound of their engines. My father explained that the jet was flying faster than sound. This was in the early 1960s. A few years later, sonic booms were absent from the skies.
I grew up near a U.S. military base and often heard sonic booms. My grandfather once said "I wish they'd take those things and drop them on the communists, instead of dropping them on us over here!"
@@MikeV8652 your grandpa sounds pretty awesome lol
No they weren't, you were just in the wrong place :¬)
My dog hated sonic booms
As Concord was a dud it was good for the US that it failed
Fun fact, Boeing did not know how to overcome the problems of B2707 because they did not sign up for Audible's "How to build supersonic planes 101"
Ju dont seyyy
C IA gosh, is that true?
@Loli4lyf yeah SkillShare is more good!
C IA no, they didnt use SquareSpace. :)
They didn’t sign up for “From Zero to Mach 3 in 10 days: SST design Bootcamp for iPad”.
4:54: "The 2707 would be powered by by 4 turbojets fitted with afterburners. To counter the heat they generated they were uniquely positioned under the aircraft at the rear. But this made the plane rear heavy and that meant the 2707 was able to pull fucking dank wheelies"
Welcome on board of the boeing 2707, flight from .... to .... my name is ... ... the weather forecast looks good, very low chance of turbulence, we are expecting to land at .... in the next 3 hours. Please remain seated and get ready for sum dank nooners 😂
God l would have loved to get drunk and do that.
Would make flared landings a lot smoother too cuz you can't accidentally slam the nose as much.
But could it pull donuts
@@M1NETAUR I haven't heard "nooners" in a long time😂😂thank you for the laugh and memories😂
I'm suprised lockheed didn't get the green light to make it considering their SR 71 Blackbird success.... And yes i do know about the blackbirds fuel issues and expensive build process.
Doesn't mean that with future improvements it couldn't of been improved 👍
*thanks for the likes and comments*
The SR-71 was incredibly complicated and expensive to build. It was also not economical. It’s one thing to develop and build a handful of these aircraft at the expense of the US government, who would also have the budget to operate them. It’s another thing when it comes to civilian aircraft and most of the costs to develop something equally capable as the SR-71 fall on their own books, and the operating costs fall on the airline.
But the SR 71 was flown despite a number of technical flaws that would never have been allowed to transfer to a commercial airliner. The first was that welding titanium is a dark art that still hasn't been mastered to high standards. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) Every SR 71 leaked aviation fuel from every seam when it was on the ground. The seams tightened up during flight, but this would be a major concern for any passenger getting within fifty feet of a 2707. Equally, the frictional heating of the outside of the SR 71 meant that crew could lose skin and flesh just brushing against the cockpit or exposed fuselage. To prevent this happening to paying customers, the 2707 would have had to have extra layers of insulation above and beyond normal aircraft. I would love to have seen it, would love to have had it work, but time and tide were against it from the start. The miracle is that Concorde lasted so long.
@@gusclark1697 Let's also not forget that a vast majority of the titanium used in the SR-71 was covertly shipped from US shell companies operating in the Soviet Union. It wouldn't have been financially feasible to build it, even if they could, and the Russians would have likely caught on if they seeked out more.
People at the time didn't even knew SR71 existed.
@@PradhumanRehal That too.
I remember when the space shuttles would fly in from the Pacific, over Southern CA, and land into Edwards AFB. Not only would the supersonic boom not only create that booming sound, but shake buildings with a quick jolt, similarly to a 3.0-4.0 earthquake. It always freaked people out!
That thing was flying 25x the speed of sound. It's sonic booms made sonic booms, literally.
At the time of the 2003 Columbia disaster, I lived in western Louisiana, directly under one of three shuttle glidepaths to Florida landings. I was eating breakfast and had Fox News on. They were about to cover the landing. I knew that it was on my glidepath and expected the huge sonic boom that we always got. Instead, I heard a rapid series of about 12-15 smaller booms. That meant multiple objects, so I knew what had happened. I rushed outside to see if I could see anything in the clear sky. Nothing. I rushed inside as the news was reporting that the shuttle was "overdue" at Cape Canaveral.
Saw it land in Edwards. It had a double boom.
Humans are so weird. Basically regress in technology because idiots get freaked out. Not like they were doing it at 3AM. There's been construction going on next to my building for 2 years now and the building shakes, oh no!
Not enough is made of the design criteria having to be "bigger and faster" than the Concorde. Had they just wanted to compete rather than seek to overshadow Concorde, the build would have been a much easier proposition.
If only building a plane like this where that simple.
It is much easyier to spred lies abouth Concorde
And yet they still claim they landed on the moon looool
@@zerocool-zerocool oh no
We could easily build planes like this today since technology is very greatly more advanced than it was in the 60s.
"Operation Bongo", that's some big brain naming.
Gotta have something to put on the class action suit when you finally let those government arsewipes have it.
Just like operation "Chrome-Dome," lovely naming the US military does.
Soldier-No sir your don’t mean…..?
General- Initiate operation banana monkey
As a little kid, I was the proud owner of a battery operated metal American SST toy in Pan American livery - complete with operating swing wings and lighted engines.
In good condition, these things are worth a fortune today.
Do you still have it?
Alas, no.
:/
@@chrisnorman9980 Sad
I do, however, have a large collection of vintage post war Lionel trains and accessories- so there is that.
:)
@@chrisnorman9980 cool
Your animation of the folding wing 2707 is totally stunning.
Hello, 1960s
@@Vasichenko b1 says hello... still at ya baby.
Agreed. That scene is particularly beautiful.
its just like the F 14 Tomcat fighterjet.
USA: Ohh thats a nice foreign plane you have there, it would be a shame if someone *_BANNED_* It
Exactly it was jealous America that killed off the British Concord
@@mickc7388 The Concorde was not British, but British and French. It is spelled with an E at the end.
@@litamtondy Anglo-French (English and French)
@@scarecrow108productions7 Yeah, that's what I said...?
@@litamtondy yeah. Just for more detailed definition. Nothing big.
I've experienced the sonic boom from an SR-71 overflight. It's impressive.
BaBoom!
Lucky
The irony is that Boeing gave up and build a giant cargo ship instead... which came to be no other than the 747. Yes, a humble cargo (hence the raised cockpit).
It became the most successful airliner ever.
The Douglas DC 3 holds that honor...
Actually the Boeing 737 is the most successful airliner in history.
The 747 was in development before the 2707 was cancelled.
@@winternow2242 Indeed, the Boeing 747 was hugely successful and the Concorde would end up being the biggest commercial failure in commercial jet aviation history. They never sold any Concordes, the 14 production aircraft were given away for 1 pound each.
But the 747 looks weird
I live in Leeds in the UK and can remember when a jet went overhead at super sonic speeds a couple of years ago, my whole house shook, at the time I thought a bomb had gone off, I can definitely see why people would complain lol
I live near my country's capital city airport. I hear supersonic bangs maybe twice a year. They always take me by suprise.
I remember that, there was two huge bangs, i was straight on to twitter expecting to hear that a large bomb had gone off in Leeds! it was two fighter jet scrambled to intercept a passenger aircraft that had lost radio contact with the ground!!
I lived in Germany for many years during the cold war when aircraft regularly broke the sound barrier above land. It was no big deal.
SuperHaz007 if it was a regular thing then that explains why you thought it was no big deal, however they are definitely super loud and wouldn’t want to experience it on a regular basis
V1 rocket intensifies
Video: “But this made the plane rear heavy and this meant the 2707 needed...”
Me: MCAS
"May Crash Any Second"
Except the difference is, in those days they were so smart to cancel the project.
737 max mode
Honestly, I hope they get that sorted out. It's an extremely efficient plane as well, it would allow airlines to retire older and less efficient aircraft. I've also heard from some people that it's a joy to fly.
algorithm
Are you talking about the sardine can MAX? I used to think the 757 was a skinny uncomfortable airplane, now they want to fly “guppies” (that’s what airline employees call 737s) all the way to Hawaii and other overseas airports! Do you enjoy being crammed in a skinny underpowered tube for 5 or more hours? And even if they give the sardine can more power, is that still what you prefer? A tiny, uncomfortable airplane with MAX power?
Damn, 3 times the speed of sound would be 2301.807MPH, which would have made the route NY-London go from 7 hours to an hour and a half. Just imagine... :(
And imaging the enormous ticket price
not accounting for the acceleration and deceleration, but still
Commercial flight that could fly about nearly the same speed as a SR-71 Blackbird? Damn...
With a regular line,theoretically speaking, you could live in NY a work in London or vice-versa
@@Unknown-un2ky way to expensive though, but if you're going to another continent for a job, it must be a good one
I often did that joke saying that the 2707 was some kind of "passengers version of a F-14". Damn, the strain on the variable geometry pivots would have been quite something I guess =/
Ehh, kinda more of a passenger version of a B-1B.
Now I just imagine an F14 with a cockpit stretched out to carry like 100 people
I could see Tom Cruise piloting the 2707 just like Maverick on Top Gun on F14.
@@VisibilityFoggy More like a B-1A as the B-1B is rather slow for a supersonic aircraft at only mach 1.25 instead of the more than mach 2 of both the B-1A and Boeing 2707.
I flew the British Concorde in 1981 or '82. Seeing the curvature of the horizon was the most exciting thing about it. Very tiny fuselage. Two by two seats. No laying down on a three across - as luxury flights often afforded back then.
LOL no the cabin was extremely cramped. I'd rather fly in a 777 three across..
But it was so fast, you didn't need to lay down.
@@leechjim8023 : The Sony walkman was newly invented and I had mine playing in my ears. As we taxied out I was unconsciously tapping my foot. The pretty young girl (older than me at the time, but young in retrospect) groaned and grimaced and said, "Could you please not do that, this is going to be a long flight." I moved seats soon after (the plane wasn't even half full), but I still think it was funny that she said that. A long flight from New York to London indeed! I wonder where that woman is now, in her late 60s.
Never flew on one, but got to go on one at Dulles and check it out. Surprised me that the interior was so “commuter” sized like it was.
Precisely, and that was it's selling point (and the glorious food and Drink) @@leechjim8023
Even in 2018, the 2707 looks very futuristic. But lots of technical challenges held it back. Nice video.
Looks exactly like a 'Thunderbirds' model!
Oh yeah, the Thunderbirds. Means were old or massive nerds, probably both!
The first version, shown as preview pic, is imho even more beautiful than the Concorde. What a loss that we didn't get so see it irl.
Fun Fact- The Boeing 2707 almost crippled Boeing economically but was ultimately saved by an aircraft that was meant to be a stopgap. And that aircraft was the 747
Another fun aviation fact is Howard Hughes used to piss in jars.
This is why 747 best waifu
Yes, it was meant to fly passengers until the SST was ready, then become a cargo plane. The 747s have been phased out of passenger service but new ones are still being built for cargo.
Ironically, that stopgap showed the real future in commercial aviation - range, not speed.
Benjamin Barrera and that is a damn shame too. Everyone wants the
damn 2 engine models.
Sad!
Really a nice looking plane. Supersonic brings other problems. Only fighter jets were allowed to break the sound barrier out at sea. When I was a kid I experienced fighters over our house full afterburner breaking sound barrier, shook the whole house. This was back in the 70's. I was scared but very impressed seeing those flames from those jets at night. Somethings like that you always remember
Mom worked in Boeing's wind tunnel section as an engineering aid, among other thing plotting the test results by hand. When Boeing opened up viewing of the SST mockup mom took me along. I remember it had a complete interior, It was probably pretty narrow but I was still small enough I didn't really notice, and had a lot of interior TVs. The details are gone from my memory, I don't think they were in seat backs, TV picture tubes were too big, might have been in the end of sections of the luggage bins.
I also remember there was some material in the house prior to that about a multi stage intercontinental rocket powered bomber, I'd assume it was a one way trip for the crew, Dyna-Soar.
That's awesome!
james varte yeah you gotta be inside their dad that’s much better
A partial mockup was in place at the Pacific Science Center in Seattle for a long time. You could take a virtual flight from coast to coast, and watch the country fly by on the TVs. Alongside the cabin mockup, there was a model of the huge bearings that were supposed to support the swing wings. They were the size of hot tubs, and were heavier than the entire payload. They were pretty much the last straw in this design fiasco.
Tony Barban is your mom still alive?
I went in a British/French concord in a museum
There aren't many UA-cam channel's editing and animation I would describe as "sexy," but this is definitely one of them. Are you using a CAD program to create 3D models?
He probably used Software like Autodesk Maya. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah that shinny animation at the start blew my mind. Sexy indeed.
Wait, they were made for the occasion ?! Some movies don't even have animations that good.
Autodesk is kind of like bootleg opencad but any of their software comes out nice
Windows 3.14
My grandfather worked at the SST project at Boeing (documenting the communications system). Today is his birthday incidentally. He would be 115 years old if he were alive... Happy birthday grandpa! :)
"Why you never got to fly the American concorde"
Me who is 17 and not even with a car license: Yea why DID I not get to fly it?
fax
America: Stop that program
Engineer: Why?
America: It causes many problems
Engineer: Ok
America: But I have an idea
Engineer: Yes?
America: Lets make a super sonic spy plane!
Engineer: ...
America: Would you agree?
Engineer: Do you have enough funds for that?
America: Yes
Engineer: Aight Lets do this!
*SR-71 Blackbird was born!*
Kek
This. America for the regular people = Limited budget. America for killing people who are not Americans = Beyond unlimited budget and resources.
Well, the SR-71 was flying since 1964, but is quite easier build and flight a mach 3 airplane 100ft long with just a crew of two with special flying suits than a commercial plane almost three times larger and over 200 souls on board wearing regular clothes
@@dingo7055 Lmao
dingo7055 well citizens didn’t like the idea of the supersonic plane.
Wow.. The government listened to citizens once upon a time.
What do you mean they are still listening we just don't know about it lol
TK 797
I just ask my phone where the nearest agent is, and remembered what my dad does
What fantasy is this?? History?? Get outta here!!
Exaggeration of once upon a time
@@zaaz73 no they don't they listen to "friends"
What really put the nail in the coffin to the Concorde and other SST aircraft was the energy crisis of 1973. When petroleum price is quadrupled it made operating the Concorde into a highly uneconomical enterprise.
And yet Concorde went on to be a highly profitable aircraft until it's retirement in 2003
only because the operators didn't pay the full production costs. BOAC/BA purchased it's final 3 aircraft for £1 each. Making profits easier.
@@tsu8003 It was still a commercial and business failure. They were hardly making ends meet as only the rich could afford the tickets
Wow, I have never seen anyone claim that the Concorde flights were ever profitable. We truly live in a world of fake news.
Benjamin Barrera It was ! There is a video about it on youtube, they actually made good money with it ! It retired because of the incident, and old age (30 years for an aircraft is A LOT, and the supersonic speed put huge strains on parts and fuselage ) !
Look it up !
I often wondered why America tried everything to ban concord flights to US it all make sense now
One of the reasons the Concorde's success was limited was due to complaints from people in France. The sonic booms across France during initial tests drew heavy complaints. As a result, the flight plan from New York to Paris, which was about 3.5 hours, involved one full hour of subsonic flight before and after reaching the Protected Points (PP) off the coast of France and off the coast of the US. There is simply no way flights from NY to LA or anywhere else over land at supersonic speeds would have been tolerated. The Oklahoma tests made that abundantly clear, as well.
The only way supersonic flight over continents (except almost entirely barren parts of the USSR) would be tolerated by those on the ground would be to do it the way rockets do. Fly vertically until you are so far out of the atmosphere that no one can hear you boom. The Concorde and its potential rivals were nowhere close to that. The Concorde actually had to climb to a high altitude then dive to break the sound barrier, then could continue to climb.
@@brianhaygood183 With overly loud landing and sonic boom being a problem, why didn't cities just build airports WAY OUTSIDE the housing areas, with a simple direct rail spur to bring people between city and airport far away? Super simple. Why not, exactly?
@@noneone8726 Because the planes were all designed to land on airport infrastructure that was already in place
@@noneone8726 Well if you know anything about urban planning the always do they build them way far out but urban sprawl always finds a way
It was because people hated sonic booms. It's not that complicated... They didn't ban the Concorde, it regularly flew from the US and Europe. If they were actually "trying everything to ban Concorde flights" then they wouldn't be flying to the US lol. It amazes me 100 people agree with your comment, people are so dumb
Beautiful graphics and an engaging story. As always :) Thank you for working on this!
Imagine how many more complaints there would have been if supersonic aircraft created hadoukens instead of sonic booms.
🤣
*Wakes up in the morning*
HADOUKEN!!
Hahaha
😂😂
if there is an award for best comment. I would nominate this
Your production quality man!! 👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼
🏻
I totally agree with your praise!
Yup. His editing, 3D modeling, infographics, use of audio & music cues - and even his VO talents are high-quality by themselves. Combined? Astounding for a single-man effort. I mean spooky good. That's doesn't even include his research and script-editing - I mean holy cats.
Man, Mustard...this video is 6 year old ! So many style imitators now (2024). Your stuff is timeless.
They can make multiple SR-71 Blackbirds but not an american concorde
(Talking bout the material thing. I mean they have that much titanium. Why the shortage of material tho)
Because supersonic transport is extremely expensive that's why.
@@elr2141979 not to mention the SR-71s aren't used for commercial travel and constantly flying in and out of large metro areas on a daily basis.
Cabin has to be pressurised also passenger plane was gonna be bigger
The 6:35 mark in the video mentioned the Boeing 2707 super sonic booms at 60,000 feet could be heard at nearly 30 miles away. The SR-71 Blackbirds usually cruised at 80,000 feet (about 15 miles altitude). To minimize the noise would mean the 2707 would have needed to fly at around 160,000 feet, which would make pressurization much more difficult since even the SR-71 pilots needed pressurized suits similar to astronauts.
“It’s a matter of national security” throws several economic considerations over board.
One thing you failed to mention was that when Nixon canceled the contract it cost the taxpayers more in penalties than if they had completed the 2 prototypes. When informed by Bill Allen, CEO of Boeing he (Nixon) tried to reverse the announcement. Unfortunately the numerous subcontractors that had been contractually assured by the US government that they would be able to recover their development costs if the program was canceled. In the end the taxpayers were on the hook for far more than the cost to finish the program through the prototypes per the contract.
And?
So why was the SST really cancelled?
Jorgen dahl Well clearly priorities have changed and for good reason. Technology is no longer seen as the solutions to all of the world’s problems but actually the cause of most of them. Cancer, Climate Change, pollution, lack of empathy, we need to get back to basics again, not focus on machines just for the sake of having machines.
@@dmannevada5981 You must be dumb
@@droneguts5122 Because Boeing bit off WAY more than they could chew with regards its design. Firstly, the swing wing (A massively complicated concept) carried a huge technical and weight penalty, and secondly, because the announced cruise speed was right on the edge of what was possible/affordable at the time with regards to alloys that were suitable for the purpose required for airlines to actually make a profit from fleet operations.
Gorgeous graphics and compelling subject matter! Hats off to you my friend :) Genuinely one of my favorite channels on UA-cam
A few months ago, a military jet on a test of some sort created an unauthorized sonic boom over my area. People were talking about explosions and an earthquake until we found out what it was. And it was not even close to us. I shudder to think what hell OKC went through in that test.
*_@Merennulli_* Yeah, sonic boom is pretty unpleasant, especially from a big aircraft. Just imagine living near an airport or under a major flight path and having that racket going on all the time. Even SST fans, must think it's a good job that overland sonic flight is banned.
@@phonicwheel933 Look at all the UK posters in this thread who think there was some conspiracy to ban Concorde because America couldn't build a superior alternative or whatever
Thanks Mustard! Greetings from México, I'm an aeronautics engineering student who really admire your animations, you allow me to watch planes I love and that other way Icould only imagine how they looked like. I've learned so much Thanks to you!
When you look back on it now, that was one particular project Boeing never should have gotten. Lockheed had far more experience in building supersonic aircraft having built among other things the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft for the Air Force. The government made a big mistake.
And North American was already flying the enormous XB-70 nuclear bomber which could cruise at Mach 3 and had a range of 3,700 miles. Boeing got the contract because...?
b-58 passenger
b-70 valkirie passenger
lockheed was a bigger concord clone
boeing sst had a design much similar to the TFX entry ... similar to GD F-111 and the future B1 lancer
note than the B1 is the sucessor to B70 since NAA changed its name to Rockwell in 1967
@@benjaminbarrera214 the difference is the govt is willing to pay more. you need to be economical with an passanger jet. a jet meant to drop a nuclear bomb is something the govt doesn't spare an expense on. hence the xb-70 costing $750,000,000. the f-22 costing $150,000,000. And the B-2 costing $737,000,000 (in 1997 dollars) and costing a fuckton to develop at $44,750,000,000 to develop. (the xb-52 only costing $1,500,000,000 to develop).
Another thing they could of don was use the blackbird and make it a commercial aircraft
@@duecomicsans9145
How would such an overpriced aircraft work since it even leaked fuel and had to be refueled in the air after take off, the crew had to wear special suits and out of 32 made, 12 were lost in accidents.
I’m gonna create a channel called “Ketchup” just to rival you
I'll create a channel called "Mayonnaise" to complete the rivalry
Scooty789 ill make a channel called "Relish"
Ill create a channel called sandwich, just to post reaction vidoes of all your channels
Rum&Coke I'll make a channel called Hot Dog to do reactions for your videos. And my friend will do one called Burger to rip off these guys
Watch me create a channel named factory
I wish I’ve had the opportunity to fly supersonic. Concorde was (literally) on its last legs when I was born with the entire program being shutdown by 2003. My parents told me about how it wasn’t actually that uncomfortable and about flying to London in 3-4hrs.
Concorde had 20 yrs of service still to do. According to their chief Pilot. John Hutchinson. In Mileage terms, they were still only just run in.
Congradulations on 100k Subs guys, well done.
And that was 3 years ago
@@nenekarya7370 yes he is now at 900K !!!
I love looking back into the past
Bruh verified comment barely over 50 likes
Quick guess: too expensive.
Too loud.
Edit: ha ha you can't beat physics.
Shorter explanation: Boeing didn't like that it didn't start with a '7'.
good point LMAO
TeddtheTiger They could have changed that 🤣
The other designation was 733.
@@andymadden8183 But it didn't end with 7
Great video but please make more of ones to enlighten people. I stumbled upon someone complaining in your comment section about loosing job and seeking for help. Having multiple income sources is very crucial to financial growth.
Ideal words. Investments have always been the best alternative; having multiple investments increases your benefits and provides you with other revenue streams.
I realized the benefits of investing. My source of income had previously been my job. But I lost my job when the pandemic started and I had to live with the little I had in my savings which really affected my plans.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. For the past four years, my income has never been dependent on any firm or work place, because I chose to invest and the more money I get the more I seek for new investment opportunities.
Unfortunately having a job doesn't mean security. So I really appreciate John Joseph's transparency and help on my trades.
I came across this name John Joseph when I was really looking to start up some investments. But I wasn't given much information about him.
Quasi-interesting bit of trivia: The mock-up of the Lockheed SST ended up being used to represent the doomed Maiden One SST in the TV movie "SST: Death Flight." It was used for the external flight scenes; scenes on the ground were a completely different model that had 747-style engines that miraculously disappeared.
I love how the animation makes the planes look so smooth and shiny.
My Dad took a transportation degree in Seattle in the late 50s-early 60s. He watched B-52s being taxi-tested, and walked around a painted outline of the Boeing SST. Told me about this sort of thing as I was building models of the planes. I'm sad that they never got off the ground, but I got to sit inside a Concorde, in Paris, at the air show in 1983.
I have no idea why but that opening shot works *so absolutely perfectly* with that music.
1950s : We Will Have Flying cars in the Future
The Future : *Just some Memes On Flying Cars*
Meta
I mean there already were flying cars in the late 1900s. Just proved to be stupid and impractical and unsafe. James May flew a pretty neat one on the BBC. Car was from the 60s I berieve.
@Mark S still too dangerous for simpletons to use.
@@kishascape Hmmm... The flying car from the 60's that you are mentioning is named the ConvAirCar if I'm correct
Really
It would’ve been so awesome had the 2707 came out, it looks so amazing. But I’m still content with how fast conventional jumbo jets fly which is 700+ mph, after all that’s still quite fast!
This plane is as tall as a six-story building with a top speed of Mach 0.86. That's equivalent to 659.85 mph.
I used to work as a hillwalking guide in South West Ireland in the 1990s, we would regularly here Concords sonic booms as she went supersonic over the Atlantic, they were loud. I couldn't imagine a supersonic jet ever working in a domestic US situation, the booms were just too loud
I remember loud sonic booms when I was a kid. Also, I lived in Santa Barbara when the space shuttle landed in California, the sonic booms would wake me up and I'd turn on the TV to watch the landing. Now imagine people across the country being woken up every time a commercial plane flew overhead, day and night without end.
Benjamin Barrera We could have built them, however, we pussied out of it.
@@benjaminbarrera214 they would only for over the ocean, not even the military can go supersonic over land without a good reason
Cork eh? Im here rn :D nice place I got to say.
@DESTROYER67732 They flew high so we couldn't hear the jet, just the bang! when it went overhead.
I can’t get over how insane your animations are
The production quality of this channel is superb! Glad I found it! Real gem!
Great video as always
quality content 101
The English is easy to understand even for a french guy like me, thank you man, I like how unbiased your content is.
I absolutely love your channel
To be honest I’d love to see the Concorde,Tu-144 and the Boeing 2707 flying together
Until you have to hear those sonic boom on a daily or even hourly basis.
"cause america is land and people live under the air routes" - when you know the answer and still find the video interesting, you know it is a good video.
teddy boragina bore vagina
looks like something straight the fuck out of Kerbal Space Program
Birb 😂😂
More like something that sparked the idea to create KSP in the first place.
when you can't compete with other peoples, so you ban their creations
Edit: boy everyone sure is at each other's throats when it comes to this argument.
Edit 2: at first i meant this as a joke because the story of the American supersonic transportwas very similiar to the "if you can't beat it ban it" tactic, i mean yeah, no one wants to have their OS screens divide into a million piece, even the video says so.
Still happening now with Huawei and imminently Xiaomi.
@@nikkisamuasa yeah they aren't banned here (not American), and they sell better stuff at a cheaper price here
@@curved8657 You do realize they still built a slew of supersonic jets and spy planes anyway? This is the typical if u can't beat it, ban it approach. Concorde ran for 27 years and serviced the whole world at one point. Don't see any European countries and the rest of the world complaining.
@@ThemePro24 LOL i don't blame the US over concorde. it wasn't an efficient program to begin with. Why so triggered? i'm just saying the US has been doing what it's been doing for decades. if you can't beat em, ban em.
@@ThemePro24 Look at 5G, China got their headstart and the US couldn't take losing. So all the "steal your information, communist china, 5 eyes alliance, brain cancer" news started flying around. But they did it just to buy time to catch up with their own version that they started to sell theirs in direct competition, regardless of their previous actions.
Europe: build something
America: write that down! Write that down!
When America sees they can't compete:
*_KILL IT! KILL IT!_*
Well, give Boeing some credit here. This is clearly a unique design in a number of ways (unlike the Soviets with their cheap Concorde knockoff). I can't imagine how expensive this plane would have been to operate though.
@@thunderbird1921 If it weren't for the fuel crisis, this would've been the most amazing plane in the sky...
@@thunderbird1921 yes 👍
Boeing had worked on a number of small-scale supersonic transport (SST) studies since 1952. So, they were really the first with this concept.
This is fascinating. The last video I made is about the future of supersonic commercial flight, and many of the companies working on "the new Concorde" are based in the United States. So we may still get the chance!
FutureNow my understanding was that supersonic booms only happened when entering mach speeds then after that it would be smooth flying. Why does it happen multiple times?
The boom is not just when entering supersonic speed. I explain it in my video, but it essentially leaves a carpet of booms in its path. On the ground we just experience it as a singular (or more accuarely two) sonic booms, because that's when it has reached us. A sonic boom is actually caused by a change in air pressure, which happens continuously as long as the plane is flying supersonically. Also this boom is not perceptible to those on the actual plane, since the plane is flying faster than the sound.
imagine the SST is a ship or water vessel, the boom is the wake, and you are a lighthouse at "X" spot.
say the vessel is at A spot travelling towards B spot, each about 10 m away from X. the wake only hits "X" only one time but the wake kept going and keep hitting another X downstream. a sonic boom is basically that, where air acts like water where the sound travels like wakes in calm water
FutureNow watched ur um supersonic video
Dank Mouse
Pretty much all of the above have the right idea; the sonic 'boom' is what a stationary observer experiences. The cause of the experience is a cone-shaped pressure wave (or pair of waves) that propagate(s) from the nose and/or wings of the aircraft as it travels at bullet speeds. This cone strikes the ground continuously behind the passing aircraft.
Mustard seems to be specializing in making videos about mid 20th century aircraft which is a pretty interesting niche
I can personally relate to the anti sonic boom movement that fought super-sonic aircraft operations over the continental U.S. during the 60's/ early 70's. There is a you tube video - "Tall man 55" - It details USAF practice runs to attack enemy targets. These practice runs used B-58 aircraft to simulate attacks on greenfield MA. My grandparents lived in CT. and the sonic booms from these practice runs shattered windows of their home from these activities. It is a shock to hear a sonic boom on a clear day- you do not expect it and it does do damage.
Truth Army How about you fuck outta here with your boot licking bullshit. Perhaps you would've fit in with the Soviets who put national prestige over human rights and the enviornment.
I've lived a couple of miles from a prominent U.S. air force base for about two decades. I've also had friends who lived literally RIGHT NEXT to operational railroad tracks. I mean 50 yards away maximum. Needless to say it's uncommon to see less than a few jets fly overhead per day. And every year air traffic really picks up when they're practicing for the annual air show.
I mention all of this because, believe it or not, human beings eventually adapt to daily stimuli. I don't even notice jets. Haven't for years. And my buddies who live right on the train tracks say the same thing about the daily train commutes. They eventually grow to block the trains out.
So the temporary minor annoyances are just that -- temporary. Beyond that, we've the resources and technology to replace windows with proper shatter resistant materials.
The price we'd pay is minimal when considering what supersonic transportation would allow. It'd be entirely possible to wake up in NYC, fly to London for a business meeting and lunch, and be back home that evening. We've built societies on our ability to travel great distances in short amounts of time. And the psychological impact of being able to travel the world in a few hours would really impact the way in which the average citizen views the world around them. Way too many benefits for such transient nonsense to be the reason it never sees the light of day.
If it's not economically viable I'd understand. But not complaints of window damage.
@@datboi_gee Considering the experiments ended with people successfuly suing the U.S government, I'd say from a business stand point it looks like a dead end which it was since the EU would later make its own restrictions on commercial supersonic flights over the mainland.
@@cripto1366 oh I wasn't implying that the citizens should just "suck it up" and allow the flights to freely destroy their property. All I was suggesting was that the benefits of supersonic public transport are far reaching while the negative impacts from the testing runs are rather negligible.
And that certainly doesn't mean they're entirely the citizen's burden to bear either. It'd be an absolute cakewalk for the U.S. government, airliners, and the public to work in unison to find a middle-ground where flights still occur and the damage is minimized and covered.
I remember the sonic booms in Los Angeles when I was a kid. At home, school, driving in a car. I don't remember windows breaking but it was frightening since we didn't know if it was an earthquake or just another sonic boom. SST would have meant sonic booms day and night so these people who think they were a minor nuisance really don't know what they are talking about even though this video accurately describes the problem.
The design was so so so futuristic... 😍😍😍
Who cares about studying when mustard uploads ?!
Watching mustard is studying for engineering...
at least that's what I say
It,s the mustard gas downloads that i fear !
interesting video, my parents have a 1970s era Danish encyclopedia where the entry on aircraft proudly shows the Boeing 2707 alongside the TU-144 and Concorde - I wonder why it never flew and here I have the answer.
(originally wrote 7202 instead)
Man you're lucky. I'm from the past we don't have youtube to learn from, only these goddamn encyclopedias
Inject me with that sweet mustard.
THE GRUMPY DRAGON lol
Don't inject mustard. It goes in the mouth, not the veins.
Like Jeremy Clarkson said: SPEED AND POWER
ER - '///HO345'^
glad i can say i’ve been subbed since you were at 8k. that’s going to mean something when you’re at 2mil
G-Co Theeprior 2k here 😂
120 Here :)
10K here
Or it will mean fuck all, like it currently does.
Here at 500
0:10 can we just appreciate how gorgeous this aircraft is?
bummer
when technology supersedes reality, and everyone gives up
2:19 What a nice pun. Get it? "Off the ground" and an airplane "Off the ground"?
Slaps knee
@@Helperbot-2000 😂
stop.
@@antifunnyfart Why? Is it because you are jealous that people think I'm funny?
@@suspense_comix3237 I don’t think we needed you to tell us the joke, buddy.
Got to see the nose/cockpit of this beast recently, and damn is it cool looking (Boeing museum of flight restoration center)
Hetznaz nicee man 👍🏽
It's huge isn't it.
Oh my god these videos are the best I've ever seen!
Last time I was this early, the SST was still in active development...
Last time I was this early sentences beginning with "Last time..." were original.
Last time I was this early, people could see something they didn't like or disagreed with, and simply move on with their lives without getting offended...
last time i was this early, people would stop liking their own comments
Last time i was this early sopwith camels were still fighting in france
We DID build one SST in the form of a bomber: The XB-70 Valkyrie. Unfortunately, that aircraft also ran into some instability problems. Then there is the B-1B Lancer which could also be converted into a passenger liner.
But then again, I once lived near an Air Force training and testing range and the problems that can arise from sonic booms are real.
The only problem the XB-70 ran into was a F-104... the program was cancelled due to advances in ICBM technology.
What stability problems did B-70 have? Both planes had technical issues that were probably typical for experimental aircraft that weren't in serial production. 1 of the plane was lost in a mid-air that was completely not the fault of the airplane; the survivor flew uneventfully for a few more years before being retired at WPAFB, where it flew under its own power.
"Then there is the B-1B Lancer which could also be converted into a passenger liner."
No it can't. It's internal volume is nowhere near enough to accommodate passengers, and its shape was dictated by the need for high-speed flight at low altitudes, where an airliner wouldn't fly, and for a reduced RCS. Also, the B-1B has a top speed well short of Mach 2, and a cruise speed even lower.
THERES A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MILITARY AND CIVIL AIRWORTHY CERTIFICATES. ED WHITE, (APOLLO ASTRONAUT SAID, ) CONCORDE WAS THE GREATEST TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE 20TH CENTURY, INCLUDING THE APOLLO PROJECT.@@sandervanderkammen9230
I always wondered why America never had its own “Concord” type Supersonic Jet Liner Series.
-Hearing Multiple Sonic Booms Per Hour All Across The United States,
-Hundreds of Millions Paid Annually For SB Related Property Damage.
-Atmospheric pollution on a biblical scale.
-The inefficient costs of operating supersonic airliners commercially.
-Potential material shortages required to build supersonic aircraft.
-Insane maintenance costs and potential air disasters pretty much explains why the program never got off the ground so to speak.
Actually the british Concorde airways made alot of money it generated alot of profits due to the fact that people were willing to pay high prices to fly the concorde.
Concorde generated about 20 million British Pounds per year in profit for British Airways, or about 400 million total over a 20 year lifespan. But the UK government invested over 2 billion into the development (in addition to the 2 billion that was invested by france). So technically that's a loss of about 1.6 billion (for the English side of the equation - not including France) plus losses from inflation. Although I do suppose that it counts as a domestic investment in terms of employment and advancement of high tech industry.
@@carlkinder8201 ya but they made the money back through commercials. See the plane became the face of british airways and it made everyone want to use the airline. In terms of sales figures alone it was a massive success for the company and a massive sales commercial for british airways, it was a success in itself and would have eventually payed itself back for it costs.
@@generalkenobi5173 2 billion is a lot for a government to spend on free advertising for a public company (even spread over 20-30 years). I still don't think that your math adds up, but if you can provide hard numbers from reputable sources, then I'll admit that I'm wrong. Again though, I believe that the real return on investment was through advancement of British industry. Much like how the US Apollo program didn't create an immediate profit or short term return on investment, but the technological advancements created by that program had massive economic benefits in the following decades as this tech trickled down into the public markets.
Here's a solution, build stronger windows! Lol and who cares about the sonic boom?? I think it sounds cool.
I remember seeing an editorial cartoon showing the SST from behind, with the four engines replaced with garbage cans trashing the atmosphere. With Concorde charging $10,000 for a round-trip Atlantic crossing, even the American version would have probably been out of the financial reach of most people.
Concorde is like a symbol of what can be achieved if we cooperate.
WW2: Our battle is the deadliest.
Supersonic war: Our battle is the most expensive.
5th gen fighter: Hold my beer.
I've heard a sonic bom! Sounded like my roof was being sucked off. Then the bloody thing went back! The whole street ran out to see what it was, but of course, it was gone before we had heard it! So, I'm glad they are not flying in Australia, commercially!
I had a C-130 fly low over my house. The whole damn area shook like it was the apocalypse. I also heard a sonic boom from a space shuttle reentry. I'd take that over the C-130 any day.
I've lived in a city where you could hear sonic booms daily..
It was no big deal at all. I don't think it would bother anyone..
Not sure how the tests were run by the FAA to antagonize people.
Correction: the sonic booms did annoy us when they were produced by Patriot missiles .. but that's a whole other league.
Ive heard them many times, usually from fighter jets
Booms were banned over the USA in 1973.
I know people living in the UK who hated the sonic booms caused by concorde when it flew over them but now say that they miss it
we're approaching 2020 and we still dont fly anything remotely close to this.
and Elon wants to fly people with rockets....lmfao
It's totally do-able but then it's the pressure of making super sonic commercial aircraft economically competitive compare to it sub sonic rival is the reason why most of the aviation industry couldn't be bother about making them.
And again SpaceX is still creating something great... Reusable and self landing rocket could at least cut down the cost of space travel and who know what the future could build base on that tech.
Big difference flying a rocket straight up out of the atmosphere and flying supersonic parallel to the ground in atmosphere, for hours, over populated areas.
That's why the Concorde worked as well as it did; it flew a route over the Atlantic where nobody cares if you're creating sonic booms for hours on end.
A rocket goes straight up so unless you live near Cape Canaveral or other such rocket launch sites, you don't care about the noise.
Supersonic transports will NEVER take the place of subsonic continental flights for that reason. Orbital flights, however, could take the place of extended intercontinental flights we use today. Unlikely though unless you can overcome economic considerations....using a wing for lift is just more efficient and cost effective than burning fuel directly for lift and thrust.
It's why you don't see many VTOL fighters out there, either.
Inventions for Hyperloop rail
VACCINATE YOUR KIDS ALREADY! These are not failure for not flight; Hyperloop is tubes with rain air longer to distance for tubes PVC is rail to train above 760mph (1,220Km/h) for super faster than Maglev 2 times.
If developers building and tested for Los Angeles to San Francisco travel at 35 minutes, airplane at 55 minutes, cars at 1:20 hours.
@@josuefairy Could you write your sentences properly and actually check they're readable??
Your animation of the folding wing 2707 is totally stunning.. Congradulations on 100k Subs guys, well done..
*THE DROOP WOULD SNOOT*
10:13
You should do a video on the Canadian Avro arrow
Hi Matthieu, great topic and it's been suggested many times. It's definitely on our list :)
SWEET! :D While we're talking about Canadian aircraft, I think the Avro Jetliner would also make an interesting topic!
Mustard there's a working avro arrow mod in BeamNG.drive
Mustard This was a great video (I seriously didn't know about our super sonic jets; go figure), and I agree with OP. You should also do a video of Family Airlines, since it has quite a story to it.
Yes!
Let me guess: The German engineers from Operation Paperclip had other things to do
They don’t know that, yet
Basically lol
🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭
I live in the Sacramento area with 4 Air Force bases nearby back in the 60s...I remember hearing sonic booms from F-104s & F-106s all the time...and I loved it!
In the 90s we were way out in the middle of nowhere in N. Arizona and I heard some sonic booms...probably F-16s out of Luke AFB...the sound took me back to my days as a Kid mesmerized by Airplanes!😎
Very cool video mate. My old man used to work for British Aerospace in the 70s.
the music score behind the story of the vid has me captivated even during the ads lol! great subject matter and presentation man!
1:25 just realized the supersonic jet is an outline of a Myasishchev M-50
Jesus christ, the SSV Normandy is so similar to this I feel that there's no way it is a coincidence
123.o
Only youtuber I smash the like button before Ive even watched it...
Exact.
Your animation of the 2707 is amazing! We finally get to see it fly. Thanks!!
Commerical failure: The Baade 152 from GDR
It's on my list :)
Powered by 2 pig snouts!
But boy, did it look good
+Philip Schneider
Oh yes, very good idea. Almost nobody knows that plane!
Props to the cameraman for going MACH 3