Aerospace Engineer Answers Airplane Questions From Twitter | Tech Support | WIRED

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 7 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 2,2 тыс.

  • @lijiang1342
    @lijiang1342 Месяц назад +2376

    I found this dude online, hes a professor at purdue university which is top 3 for aerospace engineering in the US. Impressive stuff.

    • @jmax8692
      @jmax8692 Месяц назад +11

      Yeah I’m sure he cares about his students 😂😂
      Dude shows no passion or enthusiasm.
      A pilot could have done a better job tbh.
      -ADAS engineer
      -Research Diver
      -Commercial pilot

    • @islandcactus1508
      @islandcactus1508 Месяц назад +9

      Yet he still forgot the 757!

    • @rainzerdesu
      @rainzerdesu Месяц назад +332

      @@jmax8692 That must be why he's highly rated as a professor by students that actually took his class contrary to what some random scrub in youtube comments says

    • @governoret
      @governoret Месяц назад +140

      @@jmax8692 1. Professors are not babysitters - they're researchers, teachers, and educators. Possibly he's more research oriented than teaching oriented, and that's why there are dedicated teaching staff in addition to research staff. It's much harder to find a good researcher than it is to find a good teacher. 2. He explains everything clearly, with poise and intelligence. Just because you lack the intelligence to understand the topics he discusses, or because he moves too fast for your brain to comprehend, doesn't mean he's a bad teacher.

    • @AdiabaticFlameTemperature
      @AdiabaticFlameTemperature Месяц назад

      @@jmax8692He’s actually one of the better profs at purdue! Teaches a lot of seminar classes, really cool aero systems/MDO classes, and was (is?) head of the aero department. He’s involved in a lot of student affairs and it shows - super cool guy!

  • @KonstantinGanchev-oq5rp
    @KonstantinGanchev-oq5rp Месяц назад +3408

    Dr. Crossley was my professor at Purdue - great instructor and engineer.

    • @abarthcorsa3493
      @abarthcorsa3493 Месяц назад +62

      Boiler up

    • @jaktheduk9042
      @jaktheduk9042 Месяц назад +32

      @@abarthcorsa3493 hammer down baby

    • @bazman32
      @bazman32 Месяц назад +32

      He seems like a really good instructor - calm and easy to listen to and knows his stuff! Lucky you!

    • @MyFrofileForPiano
      @MyFrofileForPiano Месяц назад +2

      What subject was he teaching?

    • @Skywarr405
      @Skywarr405 Месяц назад

      ​@@MyFrofileForPiano He is best known for his class in Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO)

  • @jopo7996
    @jopo7996 Месяц назад +6773

    This guy knows his information so well, he answers every question like he's on autopilot.

    • @TheJello
      @TheJello Месяц назад +159

      Dadum tsss

    • @jmax8692
      @jmax8692 Месяц назад +27

      Bad joke, and he didn’t appropriately respond to at least 4 of the questions 😂😂 shows what you know

    • @Suppiluliuma-wd1hw
      @Suppiluliuma-wd1hw Месяц назад +235

      @@jmax8692 he gave fast simple answers to simple questions. People won't stay there to listen for advanced theory, they just wanna know a simple answer

    • @joeystoney3678
      @joeystoney3678 Месяц назад +27

      Plus editing

    • @jgyuri
      @jgyuri Месяц назад +7

      Except he called captain Sully "Sullivan"

  • @tomh0304
    @tomh0304 Месяц назад +1265

    Dr. Crossley isn’t just a great engineer, he’s also a super down to earth and friendly guy too. He’s been the dean of AAE at Purdue all 4 years I’ve been in the major here. Crazy seeing him on Wired!

    • @jonslg240
      @jonslg240 23 дня назад +1

      If he's so great why is he only choosing the extremely soft questions? He should be choosing all the hard questions instead.

    • @roadtoplatbutimbad4738
      @roadtoplatbutimbad4738 22 дня назад +53

      @@jonslg240 It would take way longer to explain harder questions and a large portion of RUclips watchers have poor attention spans.

    • @TheGreatDanish
      @TheGreatDanish 21 день назад +1

      He's still a bird brain who thinks telling me "oh flying is safer because there are fewer accidents" is gonna make me feel safe. It doesn't address the fact that if there Is an accident it's more likely to be fatal than a car crash.

    • @jg54sayaka11
      @jg54sayaka11 21 день назад +1

      Which uni?

    • @ericpi194
      @ericpi194 21 день назад +17

      @@TheGreatDanish ironically, that's the reason flying is safer. The consequences of failure in flight are a lot higher than that of cars due to altitude and speed, so alllll the redundant systems and training and licences and security that go into aviation make it the safest mode of transport by miles. Something going wrong in a car that causes an accident comparably in aircraft would be a mild inconvenience :D it's excellent

  • @timogeerties3487
    @timogeerties3487 Месяц назад +223

    13:48 Air Traffic Control is one of the most stressful jobs in the world. You need to perform amazing under pressure, need an impeccable memory and are put in charge of thousands of lives any given minute. The responsibility is something else. The vast majority of those trying to join quit due to burnout or other stress related complications

    • @EJD339
      @EJD339 Месяц назад +6

      I have ADD and I can’t even phantom how people do that

    • @QuintonDeLauda
      @QuintonDeLauda Месяц назад +10

      Quitted it for exactly that and have never been happier before. 😊

    • @timogeerties3487
      @timogeerties3487 29 дней назад

      @@QuintonDeLauda I'm a plumber but even I know that this job is just as stressful as a job that regularly puts your life at risk

    • @ThomasJoseph-sq9jl
      @ThomasJoseph-sq9jl 26 дней назад

      Not to mention that, nowadays, any slight screw up you make as ATC is published here and everyone will judge your lifetime competence based on that few seconds/minutes of your life. Much worse if you're a woman or minority - without even knowing the details, someone will be quick to bring up how this is a "DEI problem".

    • @baconeta
      @baconeta 25 дней назад +4

      Michelle Khare did an amazing video on this

  • @ArnoSchmidt70
    @ArnoSchmidt70 Месяц назад +4040

    Fun fact: Aircraft engines were so unreliable in the past, that pilots in the 1950s and 1960s called the 4 engine Lockheed Super Constellation the best 3 engine aircraft ever built.

    • @TheGroundBeef
      @TheGroundBeef Месяц назад +102

      I love that, that’s hilarious 😂😂😂

    • @borismatesin
      @borismatesin Месяц назад +332

      The B-36 Peacemaker bomber had six propeller and four jet engines, "six turning and four burning". Reliability turned that into "Two turning, two burning, two smoking, two choking and two more unaccounted for."

    • @noob.168
      @noob.168 Месяц назад +15

      the newest generation of engines have issues too... e.g. Pratt & Whitney engines caused hundreds of Airbus to be grounded.

    • @TheStopwatchGod
      @TheStopwatchGod Месяц назад +2

      @@borismatesin 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @ToastStealer1332
      @ToastStealer1332 Месяц назад

      EXACTLY what I was thinking 🤣

  • @marendenison3550
    @marendenison3550 Месяц назад +887

    This man is really well spoken, straight to the point and professional. I like how he describes things with both scientist’s and passenger’s interest in mind.
    Sometimes flying makes me nervous. Hearing him describe the strength of design on commercial airplanes and general airplane safety really helped ease my anxiety about flying!

    • @MrNicoJac
      @MrNicoJac Месяц назад +6

      Mentour Pilot will do more :)
      Honestly though, if a plane crashes, it's usually bad maintenance policy, or miscommunication/misunderstanding by the crew (getting confused by a faulty warning, bad ATC accents, etc).
      Occasionally weather or true design flaws (Boeing MCAS) are the culprit.
      Most modern big airlines are exceptionally safe though, and have had few if any crashes.
      Cheers!

    • @John_Smith_86
      @John_Smith_86 Месяц назад +3

      Remember, anybody can build. It takes a real engineer to build something with as low a safety factor that it doesn't fail while still being cost-efficient.

    • @flyingsquirrel2620
      @flyingsquirrel2620 Месяц назад +2

      @@MrNicoJac Yes, MCAS was badly designed, but you can even argue that MCAS incidents could've been stopped if the pilots were educated how this new system works.

    • @chunLi29
      @chunLi29 Месяц назад +1

      Too fast for my brain to keep up 😅

  • @nathanlowe5463
    @nathanlowe5463 Месяц назад +593

    Professor Crossley taught my senior design class back when I was a student at Purdue! He’s an absolutely fantastic professor! Boiler Up!

    • @InertZero
      @InertZero 22 дня назад +2

      Same! Boiler Up!

  • @gottogo3326
    @gottogo3326 Месяц назад +306

    15:11 bro knew exactly what he was saying.

    • @gabe2237
      @gabe2237 22 дня назад +19

      Aerospace engineers are very smart 😭😭😭😭😭

    • @Tantakugames
      @Tantakugames 21 день назад +49

      your mom is a jet engine

    • @apdj94
      @apdj94 21 день назад +23

      Engineers love to use low level words to describe complex processes lol

    • @makeandbreakgames1791
      @makeandbreakgames1791 20 дней назад +3

      Gave me flashbacks to the early days of Martincitopants' My Summer Car streams

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 19 дней назад

      No, he made many mistakes.

  • @homburg_media
    @homburg_media Месяц назад +390

    There used to be a joke that if you lost an engine (on twin engine aircraft) it would leave you just enough power to fly to the crash site.

    • @rbgerald2469
      @rbgerald2469 Месяц назад +44

      The running gag for ETOPS (Extended range Twin engine Operation Performance Standards) is "Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim".

    • @ericbrown1101
      @ericbrown1101 13 дней назад

      Reminds me of that Ron White joke. His plane story was hysterical 😂

    • @N.I.R.A.T.I.A.S.
      @N.I.R.A.T.I.A.S. 8 дней назад +2

      Hey, former ATC here. I had one pilot - American guy, won't say which airline - who would often say "I love Australian air traffic control. You guys get us to the crash site faster'n anybody else."

  • @MrHuffmeister
    @MrHuffmeister Месяц назад +533

    I've been flying for over 10 years now. This guy completely nailed every question. Super simple, easy to understand answers. Awesome video.

    • @DavidKen878
      @DavidKen878 Месяц назад +3

      To be fair, a lot of the questions were simple.

    • @sajana_397
      @sajana_397 Месяц назад +7

      nah he forgot the 757

    • @Op25No2
      @Op25No2 Месяц назад

      @@DavidKen878Glad to know you’ll be the next expert on WIRED if they dont need this dumb guy anymore😂

    • @justin8894
      @justin8894 Месяц назад +13

      Your arms must be tired.

    • @MrNicoJac
      @MrNicoJac Месяц назад +4

      He totally did not.
      Left out crucial parts to multiple questions.
      And the idea of only having one pilot....
      I'd question whether you think CRM saves lives, or is just window dressing BS 🤨

  • @paulmartin2348
    @paulmartin2348 Месяц назад +132

    You can instantly see that he is very comfortable with this material which means he knows it very well. A pleasure to watch.

  • @dweeder1453
    @dweeder1453 Месяц назад +165

    Prof. Crossley is an amazing researcher and a teacher. His optimization course is one of the best at Purdue University

  • @TrueHelpTV
    @TrueHelpTV 19 дней назад +21

    at 2:00 I could feel Boeing hovering off camera NOT holding a gun to his head.

  • @SR-71Fan
    @SR-71Fan 26 дней назад +92

    0:51 what about the 757?

    • @michaelhoffmann2891
      @michaelhoffmann2891 25 дней назад +17

      Or the 717!

    • @aaronbredon2948
      @aaronbredon2948 24 дня назад +19

      The 717 was the internal designation for the military KC-135 refueling airplane.
      Boeing initially skipped that number to avoid confusion.
      Eventually, 717 was reused for the MD-95 after acquiring McDonnell Douglas
      The 757 was a twin engine replacement for the 3 engine 727.

    • @danielbjohnson
      @danielbjohnson 23 дня назад

      Flying pencil

    • @michaelhoffmann2891
      @michaelhoffmann2891 23 дня назад +1

      @@danielbjohnson That was the Do-17! 😆

    • @BigPen12435
      @BigPen12435 22 дня назад +2

      @@aaronbredon2948 717 is a plane, i flew on it about 2 years ago with qantas

  • @angelkilier
    @angelkilier Месяц назад +254

    Assuming an airplane is made of the material that black box is made of, even if it could survive a crash, passengers still won't. During a crash, something somehow needs to absorb up all the kinetic energy for humans to survive and there is just too much of it for anything to absorb it all. Plus rigid material is not that good at absorbing kinetic energy, they transfer the energy instead.

    • @ChrisThomas-xt4jh
      @ChrisThomas-xt4jh Месяц назад +94

      Easy, just make the passengers out of that material too

    • @appa609
      @appa609 Месяц назад +1

      It's not a special material it's just a dense structure

    • @Yonkage-ik5qb
      @Yonkage-ik5qb Месяц назад +20

      If the airplane was made out of the black box material, it would be too heavy to fly. Might as well propose making an airplane out of solid concrete.

    • @fotografalexandernikolis
      @fotografalexandernikolis Месяц назад +9

      Exactly, it's not just the material but also the shape. A round ball made of glass is extremely strong, while an intricate glass artwork is extremely fragile. This is such a simple concept it's hard to fathom how some people don't understand it.

    • @MrNicoJac
      @MrNicoJac Месяц назад +13

      If planes were made of black boxes (and somehow magically not prohibitively heavy), then if they crashed, they'd hit almost like a meteorite and bury themselves deep into the ground 😂😂😂
      And if we dug down a couple of hundred feet to get them out, all those squishy meat sack humans would be one massive smoothie on the cockpit wall.... 🤢

  • @camp128
    @camp128 Месяц назад +40

    Best one yet. Guy knows his stuff and gets to the answer quick.

  • @asabsvsm5058
    @asabsvsm5058 Месяц назад +51

    Yay, Prof. Crossley!!! I'm lucky to have had the opportunity to take a class taught by him

  • @Imaboss07
    @Imaboss07 Месяц назад +18

    he seems like a very smart person all his sentences felt super intentional and directed

  • @JustWasted3HoursHere
    @JustWasted3HoursHere Месяц назад +170

    To add to the fact that airplanes are statistically safer than cars, think about the fact that about 2.9 million people fly EVERY DAY, yet airplane crashes are rare.

    • @aaronbarrett5061
      @aaronbarrett5061 Месяц назад +11

      Yeah but when they do crash, it's very unlikely that you're going to survive 😅 most car crashes are not severe, I think it's a control issue with most people, in a plane you have no control over what happens, you can quite literally just drop out of the sky, it may not be common, but that is the fear

    • @JustWasted3HoursHere
      @JustWasted3HoursHere Месяц назад +30

      @@aaronbarrett5061 No, no. More people are _killed_ in car crashes than in airplane crashes since they are so rare. Yes, if you compare the average crash of a car and the average crash of an airplane you are less likely to survive the airplane crash, but that is a different statistic.

    • @purdysanchez
      @purdysanchez Месяц назад +19

      @JustWasted3HoursHere, the guy basically said it was a different statistic. He wasn't arguing that car travel is safer. He was pointing out that people are more afraid of airliner crashes because of their survivability. I'm more afraid if I'm attacked by a shark than a cow. Even though more people are killed by cows.

    • @MikeDCWeld
      @MikeDCWeld 25 дней назад +4

      ​@@aaronbarrett5061not necessarily. Most car crashes occur at very low speed compared to plane crashes. You're much more likely to survive a plane crash than a comparable car crash. Also, _every_ plane accident or incident is _*thoroughly* investigated _ to find the causes of it and determine how best to avoid similar accidents or incidents in the future. Sometimes it does take more than one accident or incident to determine the exact cause or convince involved parties to take action, but the goal is for every accident and incident to make aviation safer as a result.

    • @jamesseager8126
      @jamesseager8126 25 дней назад

      Put as many planes in service as cars in service then let's see if that stat holds up. All I'm saying is let's do the math not just look at a statistic.

  • @HenrikRoback
    @HenrikRoback Месяц назад +175

    15:10 I had no idea I had anything in common with a jet engine!

  • @kenbrown2808
    @kenbrown2808 Месяц назад +69

    it is POSSIBLE to fly a modern passenger jet with only one pilot, but the presence of copilot allows the pilot to share his workload with the copilot. in essence, during the complicated parts of the trip; specifically takeoff and landing, the pilot flying does all the things directly related to controlling the airplane, and the pilot monitoring does everything else, like talking on the radio. (and for those who don't watch aviation youtube, the common terms for what used to be pilot and copilot are pilot flying and pilot monitoring - and the two or three pilots on a plane, depending on the length of the trip, will trade roles during stops on a series of short trips, or at specific points during a long trip)

    • @photovincent
      @photovincent 25 дней назад +2

      Exactly, and under normal circumstances. I was looking for a comment on that gross overstatement in the video. When something unexpected happens it’s definitely a more than one persons’ workload

    • @KoiranenAerospace
      @KoiranenAerospace 25 дней назад

      It's not about ability to share workload. The aircraft are flown by crews, not by the pilots. Also, pilot and copilot does not turn to be PF and PM, regardless of who is being PF, the copilot is still copilot and commander is still commander.
      PF does not do everything directly related to controlling the airplane.
      It is technically possible to fly also 50 year old passenger jet with only one pilot. The plane does not know, how many pilots there are touching controls.

    • @kenbrown2808
      @kenbrown2808 25 дней назад +1

      @@KoiranenAerospace thank you for making what I originally said less clear. and by the way, in most airlines, it is captain and first officer. not commander and copilot.

    • @KoiranenAerospace
      @KoiranenAerospace 25 дней назад

      @@kenbrown2808, I don't know what source you use for statistics, as I have never seen such statistical data. In EU area, it's pilot in command or commander as described in ORO.FC.105 and CAT.GEN.MPA.105, while "a captain" is just duty rank but it doesn't have anything to do with current role in flight deck, as two captains can fly together but only one can be PIC or commander at a time, and the other captain has some other duty (of course there is qualification requirement to operate either pilot's seat, compared to normally being trained only to left or right seat).

    • @kenbrown2808
      @kenbrown2808 25 дней назад

      @@KoiranenAerospace Mentour pilot would be the relevant reference in this case.

  • @connorhennessy1769
    @connorhennessy1769 Месяц назад +37

    I had professor Crossley in class at Purdue, great speaker. Boiler Up!

    • @mecha_engineer
      @mecha_engineer Месяц назад

      I just applied to Purdue's mechanical master program.. Hope I can meet him

  • @DzinkyDzink
    @DzinkyDzink 27 дней назад +12

    4:35 that part is so painfully true... So many little issues that compound to a quite a miserable experience for someone who travels 11h trips twice a year.

  • @overthecounterbeanie
    @overthecounterbeanie 24 дня назад +15

    3:50 Regarding commercial aviation improvements, one underrated improvement is cabin pressure. Newer airplanes are pressurised to better match the air pressure on the ground - which is why our ears don't "pop" on flights nearly as much as they used to.

    • @mkvv5687
      @mkvv5687 18 дней назад

      The standard used to be 8000 ft. What is it now?

    • @bbgun061
      @bbgun061 17 дней назад +1

      @@mkvv5687 The 787 for example has a cabin altitude around 5000 while in cruise.

    • @mkvv5687
      @mkvv5687 16 дней назад

      @@bbgun061 Thanks. Thinking about it more, I realized that most of my experience was with military 4-engines. We typically cruised at 42k. I don't know if that had anything to do with pressurization.

    • @ericbrown1101
      @ericbrown1101 13 дней назад +1

      Now that you mention it, it does seem like my ears don't pop nearly as much as they did when I was a kid (unfortunately a while back lol).

  • @WaltWeaver
    @WaltWeaver Месяц назад +277

    People mentioned the missing 757 in the comments, but WIRED put a photo of a 787 and called it the 777 0:48

  • @jsmith1746
    @jsmith1746 Месяц назад +79

    Regarding aircraft with more than two engines, e.g. the 747, we (I am a 747 captain) actually train to fly and land with two of the four engines inoperative. There is a defined procedure in the manuals for a two engine inoperative approach, landing, and go-around. Of course in training, this is always done with both engines on one side failed, which makes it even more challenging. But yes, a four engine 747 can fly, and even climb (very slowly), with two of the four engines failed.

    • @Aphova
      @Aphova Месяц назад +1

      What happens if engines 1 - 3 fail? 😅 Can you maintain speed and/or altitude?

    • @DrDeuteron
      @DrDeuteron Месяц назад +1

      @@Aphova you can trade altitude for speed--but that may put you on a suboptimal course.

    • @PasleyAviationPhotography
      @PasleyAviationPhotography Месяц назад +1

      I'm glad someone mentioned this

    • @paveladamek3502
      @paveladamek3502 Месяц назад +2

      QF32 landed basically with only *one*. 2 was gone and 1 and 4 were practically at idle.

    • @John_Smith_86
      @John_Smith_86 Месяц назад +7

      @@Aphova Well... you can still land without any engines at all

  • @Gendya3312
    @Gendya3312 Месяц назад +21

    Dr. Crossley FTW! Great professor with the best big picture view of aerospace systems. Down to earth demeanor and super approachable. His knowledge level in classes is inspiring. BoilerUp!

  • @TheClockwork28
    @TheClockwork28 Месяц назад +14

    I'm not really that into aerospace engineering, but I would attend his classes just because he's so good at explaining stuff and it's such a treat to listen to him. Thank you!

  • @calebpatrick1334
    @calebpatrick1334 Месяц назад +57

    lol this is incredible, I have Dr. Crossley for AAE 550 right now

  • @shay5820
    @shay5820 21 день назад +4

    Professors like this are amazing I remember in my engineering design class learning about fatigue stress with cracks and learning how the blades of a jet engine are made of a single crystal to prevent impurities and cracks. Its amazing the knowledge these people have

  • @kinfongyeung5400
    @kinfongyeung5400 Месяц назад +18

    12:00 That is a really nice way of saying a missle lol

  • @JouvaMoufette
    @JouvaMoufette 22 дня назад +35

    4:13 Did this guy just go "arf"?

    • @ReactAsyIum
      @ReactAsyIum 20 дней назад +9

      I think his mic cut and he was saying "our fuel impact"

    • @YS-eu4ne
      @YS-eu4ne 17 дней назад +2

      LMFOAOO

  • @wacomtexas
    @wacomtexas 23 дня назад +9

    14:20 Reminds me of the industry joke: Pretty soon, autopilot will be so good we'll only need a trained dog and one guy to operate an aircraft. You mean one pilot and a dog trained to fly? No just any guy to feed the dog, which is trained to bite the guy if he tries to touch any of the controls..

  • @pssolutede
    @pssolutede Месяц назад +16

    10:26 Ramps like some carriers: you wanna start your plane into the wind, so ramp into the wind. The aircraft carrier can turn itself into the wind, so the ramp can always be pointed into the right direction. An airport runway cannot. So it's useful that the runway can be used in both directions, depending on the wind direction. The ramp would ruin that.

    • @ghostrunner2138
      @ghostrunner2138 Месяц назад +8

      Also space is super important on a carrier but not really a scarce resource at a major airport. If you can’t take off in 7000 feet you probably have a bigger issue that a ramp isn’t gonna help with

    • @arthurdent2900
      @arthurdent2900 25 дней назад +1

      @@ghostrunner2138 I was bought up (UK) near an ex WWII RAF airfield. After WWII the air field was used by Rolls Royce for engine testing. They developed the Flying bedstead there and also the engine that powered Concorde. They tested the Concorde engine using a modified Vulcan bomber. The runway had a ramp at one end and the Vulcan always took off using the ramp whatever the wind.

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 24 дня назад

      You should be reaching V1 well before the end of the runway.

    • @arthurdent2900
      @arthurdent2900 23 дня назад +1

      @@johnp139 "V1 represents the point of no return, beyond which it becomes unsafe to stop the aircraft on the remaining runway." Thus, by defintion, V1 ia always reached before the end of the run way

    • @bbgun061
      @bbgun061 17 дней назад

      A ramp on a runway would never be used, because airplanes are always airborne before they reach the end. (Unless someone screwed up their calculations.)

  • @luislaracuente
    @luislaracuente Месяц назад +14

    @7:00 On Boeing airplanes is called FQIS - Fuel Quantity Indication System. There are sensors on each individual tank that monitors fuel, which also is used to move fuel around from one compartment to the other if necessary. Efficiency of mileage per fuel is dependent on several variables: weather conditions, cargo (weight), fly altitude ,etc.

  • @michelepaccione8806
    @michelepaccione8806 Месяц назад +28

    There’s a big difference in safety between large commercial airliners and other flying machines. Helicopters, general aviation planes, experimental planes, all have different safety records. There are small plane crashes several times a week in the U.S.

    • @JoshuaTootell
      @JoshuaTootell Месяц назад +17

      Yes. But generally the pilot crashes the plane without the plane having anything wrong with it.
      Don't fly with doctors!

    • @BunjiKugashira42
      @BunjiKugashira42 Месяц назад +7

      @@JoshuaTootell Still, I believe we should compare private cars to private airplanes and big airliners to buses and trains.
      When you compare commercial mass transport to individual transport, the individual transport will always have more accidents.

    • @slade8212
      @slade8212 Месяц назад +10

      True, but someone who is not convinced that aircraft are statistically safer is definitely talking about commercial aviation. They definitely don’t know enough to distinguish between GA and commercial.

    • @jessicastjames6202
      @jessicastjames6202 Месяц назад +6

      There are over 100 fatal car crashes every day in the US. So I'm not sure what point you're making, because flying in a rickety bush plane with a geriatric alcoholic pilot is still safer than driving a car lmao

    • @blablablablablablablablablbla
      @blablablablablablablablablbla Месяц назад +1

      @@jessicastjames6202There are way, way more people driving cars than flying planes every day.

  • @srinath6247
    @srinath6247 Месяц назад +6

    12:30 That area the professor was talking about is called "Equipment Restraint Area" or shortly termed the "ERA line". You're not permitted to cross the line until the engines are turned off and the ACB (Anti Collision Beacon) on the belly of the fuselage stops blinking.

  • @CASA-dy4vs
    @CASA-dy4vs 10 дней назад +1

    I love how this dude is straight to the point and isn’t too bothered if someone has an opposed opinion or not very knowledgeable.

  • @diegofernandez4789
    @diegofernandez4789 Месяц назад +13

    Loved the comparison between jet, turbofan and propeller. Great stuff.

  • @samarpanfarmer501
    @samarpanfarmer501 Месяц назад +34

    Boiler up! Prof. Crossley on one of my favourite shows! This is so cool.

  • @semihtor
    @semihtor Месяц назад +85

    2:18 “if one system fails another one backs that up” I guess boeing wasn’t aware of this concept when incorporating one sensor for the 737 MAX’s MCAS system…

    • @Aviator27J
      @Aviator27J Месяц назад +5

      It's a bit ironic because the MCAS was the only system, but it wasn't there to be backed up or to back up anything. However, hydraulics, electrical, pressurization, and most other systems have triple redundancies. In most jet airliners, you have three overlapping hydraulic systems and even if all three go (somehow), there's probably one more system plus manual backups that allow operation of the aircraft.

    • @richskater
      @richskater Месяц назад +5

      Two autopilot systems, 2 flight computers, big planes have 3 radios, even a Cessna has 2. Instruments all have backups and in IFR training you're taught how to substitute an instrument by cross referencing others.
      The requirement is for a plane to be able to hold altitude with half it's engines. Almost all commercial planes exceed this and can actually climb with half it's engines.

    • @mkvv5687
      @mkvv5687 18 дней назад +3

      Actually, Boeing did put in two sensors. To get the 2nd sensor *enabled* the airline had to purchase the premium package.
      I seriously wish I could say that was a joke.

    • @HalNordmann
      @HalNordmann 16 дней назад +2

      Thing is, there was a backup procedure - but the pilots would need to be aware of it, which they weren't

  • @Blacksharq
    @Blacksharq Месяц назад +34

    10:55 you're welcome

  • @jt663
    @jt663 24 дня назад +9

    10:24 Ramp question.

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 24 дня назад

      Right, how stupid. The V1 should occur WELL BEFORE the end of the runway, and if it doesn’t, no ramp will matter.

    • @זהסודי-ה7מ
      @זהסודי-ה7מ 23 дня назад

      The reason for the ramp is mostly because carriers don't have anywhere near enough space for regular takeoffs. The US and France opted for a catapult that has an extremely powerful engine, which slings the plane very hard to its intended takeoff speed. The main problem with this design is that it's expensive to buy and maintain, hence the ramp. There's only one problem: countries that use the ramp often tend to use short takeoff jets like the harrier and the F-35B, that vector the engine's thrust to lower takeoff speeds even further. And those that don't have to suffer the absolute horror story that is the admiral kuznetsov, the MiG-29K and the Su-33 (hint: they crashed a lot). The ramp is useless for commercial aviation, where you do have enough space to reach proper takeoff speeds

  • @notmenotme614
    @notmenotme614 Месяц назад +16

    Is flying safer than driving your car…
    1. There’s a lot of redundancy in aircraft. If one component fails there’s at least one other backup. Critical components like the flying control computers and wiring will be quadruplex (4 backups that cross check each other). The aircraft I worked on had at least 5 ways of generating electricity (an AC generator per engine, a DC gen per engine, transformer rectifiers to make DC into AC, electrical buses that can be connected to power another, Ram Air Turbine)
    2. The standards of aircraft maintenance is on a whole different level. Everything is checked, tested, inspected and certified by Supervisors and Inspectors. Tool control and documentation is very strict. It’s easy to lose your job if you make errors. There’s no cowboys unlike car mechanics.

    • @ComissarYarrick
      @ComissarYarrick Месяц назад +5

      It's more of a perception and media spotlight issue. Car crush ( unless someone famous/important died, or crush is particulary spectacular/tragic ) usually will be just a footnote in news reel. If plane crushes, it will be on the news for whole day if not several.

    • @ericjessee
      @ericjessee Месяц назад +7

      Not to mention there's no air traffic control for cars. You may trust yourself to drive safely, but there's always a pretty decent chance of some idiot slamming into you, which you have no control over.

    • @notmenotme614
      @notmenotme614 Месяц назад +6

      @@ComissarYarrick This. 5 or 7 people die every day in the UK, in road collisions. Every single day. The reason why it doesn’t make headline news is because it’s such a regular occurrence.

    • @Martinit0
      @Martinit0 Месяц назад +2

      3. Commercial aircraft (which are the safe ones) are flown by professional pilots. They have health checks, resting requirements etc. Cars on the other hand...

    • @lildurty23
      @lildurty23 Месяц назад

      ​@notmenotme614 well it doesn't make headlines because 150 people didn't die, unlike plane crashes

  • @rpnye23
    @rpnye23 Месяц назад +298

    I'd like to know exactly what the "How come commercial aviation hasn't gotten better in 50 years" person is getting at, because that's probably the most insane thing I've ever read

    • @JohnSmith-me4ik
      @JohnSmith-me4ik Месяц назад +86

      He probably means the customer experience

    • @rpnye23
      @rpnye23 Месяц назад +75

      @@JohnSmith-me4ik the customer experience has gotten significantly better if you’re willing to spend the inflation adjusted amount of money you would have been spending 50 years ago

    • @JoshuaTootell
      @JoshuaTootell Месяц назад

      People forget that flying was a luxury 50 years ago ​@@rpnye23
      But also, the Cessna 172 hasn't really changed in 50 years either 😂

    • @morat242
      @morat242 Месяц назад +28

      Yeah, governments used to set ticket prices and routes, and the prices were set very high. Mandatory business class (or at least premium economy) level fares meant lots of room.
      The airlines couldn't squeeze in more seats, because you could fly on a competitor for the same price.
      The rest of us just didn't fly. And the rise of uncomfortable but very cheap flights indicates that's what most people want.
      But yeah, now flying is quieter, safer, doesn't smell like smoke, has screens and wi-fi. And if you're paying the equivalent price as 1974 long distance, you also get a bed.

    • @Justlaxin13
      @Justlaxin13 Месяц назад +14

      I assume he means speed. NY to LA or London (or wherever, those are just classic examples) take the same amount of time they did 40+ years ago.

  • @3dflyer87
    @3dflyer87 27 дней назад +4

    Prof Crossley was my graduate advisor at Purdue. Amazing person.

  • @infrequentflyer4271
    @infrequentflyer4271 Месяц назад +40

    2:30

    • @j-ghull
      @j-ghull 21 день назад +2

      Saw this thought what the heck and then he said it 😂

  • @Taesian
    @Taesian 25 дней назад +3

    3:52, this buddy has never been in flights when they had smoking sections. That was 1995 when they banned smoking and up until 2000's still saw Ashtrays on the armrests.

  • @JonathanFisherS
    @JonathanFisherS Месяц назад +8

    There is is a very very very very subtle piece of humor in this at 10:21; it's either the editor the professor. The Navy pilots comment made myself and my friend (former Air Force) do a literal lol

  • @AnonymousFreakYT
    @AnonymousFreakYT 20 дней назад +3

    On "why co-pilots exist" - redundancy is one. Emergencies is the other. During an emergency, one pilot will spend basically 100% of their effort just flying the plane. The other pilot will do troubleshooting, communication, research options, etc.
    Both engines go out? One pilot will be telling air traffic control, scouting for alternate runways, trying engine restart procedures, etc; while the "pilot in control" will have hands-on-controls to maximize the performance of the airplane to get it to glide as far as possible to hopefully make it to a runway.

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 19 дней назад

      Right, this guy has NO human factors or aviation background!!!

  • @alejandroalanis2325
    @alejandroalanis2325 Месяц назад +4

    Awesome to see someone with this level of knowledge and such an easy way with his answers.

  • @samb8076
    @samb8076 Месяц назад +2

    I had this professor at purdue back in undergrad. Great guy. Amazing professor and yes back then also he talked this fast

  • @Yash-sr1zm
    @Yash-sr1zm 17 дней назад +1

    You just know a knowledgable person when you see one. Really impressive how this man can answer each and every question with ease.

  • @draheim90
    @draheim90 25 дней назад +2

    I’m a (contracted) Navy researcher and we do a decent amount of research involving air traffic controllers. It’s one of the most stressful and cognitively demanding and exhausting jobs. It has a high dropout and fail rate during training. And, despite paying well for an enlisted position, it also has a high burnout/attrition rate once people are actually on the job. Consider too that there are relatively few jobs like it in which a simple and otherwise minor mental mistake can cause so much damage both monetarily and in terms of loss of human life.

  • @PabLow-zx6mr
    @PabLow-zx6mr Месяц назад +4

    11:34-not true, I once seen Tom Cruise fly Mach 10

  • @spamlessaccount
    @spamlessaccount 21 день назад +7

    0:54 do you just not like the 757?

    • @floraevoli3330
      @floraevoli3330 18 дней назад +1

      it does exist according to Wikipedia

    • @KingKnight1280
      @KingKnight1280 17 дней назад

      ⁠​⁠@@floraevoli3330could be because it was meant as a kind of twin to the 767

    • @KingKnight1280
      @KingKnight1280 17 дней назад +1

      Also he forgot the 717

  • @skapur
    @skapur 20 дней назад +1

    Some rural airports, especially in mountain areas do have ramps. Mountain Empire Airport - MKJ in Rural Retreat, Virginia is right next to I-81 and you can see the ramp on the runway as you drive by on I-81

  • @renatolp8798
    @renatolp8798 Месяц назад +7

    This Wired series is a true gem, to know things is to be free and happy

  • @zosiabowlus5987
    @zosiabowlus5987 Месяц назад +13

    this is a really great video! great guy seems very nice and educated!

    • @lucy-pj2wn
      @lucy-pj2wn Месяц назад +1

      yes i agree!! i also hear his daughter kate is really cool, not sure if it’s true though 🤔

    • @zosiabowlus5987
      @zosiabowlus5987 Месяц назад +2

      @@lucy-pj2wn wait yes ive heard that kate is super awesome and is a german pro but not completely sure 😊

    • @lucy-pj2wn
      @lucy-pj2wn Месяц назад

      @@zosiabowlus5987 yes i heard that too!! apparently she got this super prestigious scholarship and is studying in germany this year 😱😱

  • @abbym2689
    @abbym2689 Месяц назад +5

    Professor crossley an absolute Purdue icon!!!

  • @johnellis5989
    @johnellis5989 Месяц назад +8

    Wonderful, knowledgeable post, and nice presentation! Thank you. How come the B-757 is skipped over? Many folks are fans of the 757, especially pilots. Nice presentation, though! Also, thinking about Pilot Flying vs. Pilot Monitoring roles, contact me if you'd like. Thank you again.

  • @AnonymousFreakYT
    @AnonymousFreakYT 20 дней назад +1

    Minor caveat about the Boeing plane numbering - they _DID_ have a 717. It was essentially a modified 707 for military use, which was called the Boeing C-135 Stratolifter by the military. They never sold a civilian version, so the 717 same wasn't used for airliners.
    Until…
    Boeing bought McDonnell-Douglas, and renamed the MD-95 into the 717. (The only McDonnell-Douglas airliner design they continued to develop and sell after the purchase. They did keep manufacturing the MD-11 and MD-90 to fulfill already-committed contracts after the purchase, but discontinued any new development or sales after the purchase.)

  • @r12e5p
    @r12e5p Месяц назад +1

    Another thing to know regarding the need for two pilots is that on take-off and landing, the two pilots will usually split duties, with one responsible for flying the plane and the other responsible for monitoring the flight data and communicating with ATC. It also makes it easier and more efficient to deal with emergency situations.

  • @UncleKennysPlace
    @UncleKennysPlace Месяц назад +4

    Note that several small planes now have "autoland" in case of pilot incapacitation.
    Single engine planes don't need to operate with one engine out. I've found that looking for a landing spot is a good thing when your one-and-only falters.

    • @SmallSpoonBrigade
      @SmallSpoonBrigade 23 дня назад +1

      The main reason that we're unlikely to see planes without pilots carrying passengers is that few people in their right mind would be willing to ride in a plane where there isn't a pilot.

  • @JoeVanGogh
    @JoeVanGogh 14 дней назад +3

    10:38 "into the drink"😂

  • @Andrew-iv5dq
    @Andrew-iv5dq 20 дней назад +3

    0:59 you forgot the sky pencil 757

  • @haszoka
    @haszoka 16 дней назад

    Captivating delivery. Very well done.

  • @Pouncer9000
    @Pouncer9000 Месяц назад +69

    0:54 757 sobbing silently

    • @whiteguy4753
      @whiteguy4753 Месяц назад +6

      That was really sad, 757 one of the coolest planes ever

    • @BPJJohn
      @BPJJohn Месяц назад

      Big Sad. 😥

    • @klonkimo
      @klonkimo Месяц назад

      o7 for the 757

    • @-caesarian-6078
      @-caesarian-6078 Месяц назад +4

      Curled up in a ball on top of 717

    • @gearoftones8585
      @gearoftones8585 Месяц назад

      And it's my favourite!

  • @Sr.Tartessos
    @Sr.Tartessos 28 дней назад +1

    Cool dude. I liked how he explained everything, he made it very easy to understand.

  • @GoatScrab69
    @GoatScrab69 Месяц назад +6

    This man turned a joke into a series with hope, despair, loss and hype. He deserves every bit of recognition he has and even beyond that

  • @huma474
    @huma474 19 дней назад +3

    @13:55 - Ronald Regan is why there's an ATC shortage. He broke the ATC union and as a result their jobs became worse and worse to the point where most people don't want the stress.

  • @TheSuperhomosapien
    @TheSuperhomosapien 25 дней назад +54

    2:21 The airplane knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn.t.

  • @Cut3Sku11
    @Cut3Sku11 29 дней назад +1

    Airplane pushes air down? 2:56-3:11
    Isn't it the Bernoulli principle and the difference in pressure?

  • @danmiller3348
    @danmiller3348 19 дней назад

    I had Dr. Crossley for AAE sophomore design back around 1996 or 1997. Good to see him here!

  • @neurve8509
    @neurve8509 Месяц назад +10

    777 picture at 0:47 is wrong. That's 100% a 787.

  • @georgeedwardes5318
    @georgeedwardes5318 28 дней назад +2

    The aim of takeoff is to generate enough speed so that the wings produce lift. A ramp doesn't help here and it's potentially throwing you into the air before the plane is producing enough lift. In normal takeoff you don't even lift up, you just accelerate and when the plane is ready it naturally takes off.

    • @juhapehkonen7347
      @juhapehkonen7347 20 дней назад +1

      Yeah, it's a shame he didn't really answer the question thoroughly or maybe it was edited to fit the format. Going uphill on a ramp would also decrease your acceleration/speed, so your airspeed would be lower at the end of the ramp compared to a flat surface.

  • @user-ei7ed6zy9k
    @user-ei7ed6zy9k 21 день назад +3

    0:47 thats not a 777, thats a 787

  • @N0M4OFFICIAL
    @N0M4OFFICIAL 17 дней назад

    12:25
    Usually the ground crews place cones surrounding the engines after they've been shut off. Nobody is allowed in that area unless they're doing maintenance or have a valid reason to be in that area.

  • @drewcollier4498
    @drewcollier4498 9 дней назад

    would love to see more of this guy or other aviation professionals

  • @DynV
    @DynV Месяц назад +34

    2:11 What about Boeing, with its whistleblowers "deaths" ?

    • @josh021588
      @josh021588 Месяц назад +7

      Boeing is still successfully taking off and landing there planes at a 99.999999999999999% (or whatever it is) success rate.
      You’re just filling your mind with the isolated incidences through a wonderful online algorithm 😊

    • @xino951
      @xino951 Месяц назад +2

      ​@@josh021588 dude's right, the older models are doing fine, it's the newer ones. MCAS was a disaster and especially how they implemented it.

    • @mastershooter64
      @mastershooter64 Месяц назад +1

      @@xino951 and the lack of training right?

    • @fractalmuse
      @fractalmuse Месяц назад +3

      @@xino951 The MCAS disaster resulted in...two accidents, *total*.
      Feel free to look up how many flights are performed with the 737 MAX family per *hour*, to talk of per day or week or month.

    • @xino951
      @xino951 Месяц назад +2

      @@fractalmuse yeah two crashes and a total of *346* deaths, not casualties!! Plus if I remember correctly Boeing didn't even provide proper information to FAA. As far as I know they are not using MCAS on commercial airplanes anymore?
      And about the 737 MAX yeah I know it's still operating but I don't think it has the MCAS system implemented, I don't know.

  • @aland7236
    @aland7236 Месяц назад +7

    I grew up out in the country during the 90s and can affirm that the high-bypass turbofans being used today are so much more quiet than the oldies. I still see aircraft passing overhead and can only hear them on a very quiet day. I also see contrails that are smaller and go away faster too. When I hear that old roaring sound in the sky 9/10 chance it's military.

    • @mxviii
      @mxviii Месяц назад

      Military Aircraft including jet fighters are even quieter than civilian aircraft. What you are hearing is the afterburners. But Fighter Jets can literally sneak up on you when they want to. Problem is, when they are operating locally, its for training so theyre always going to be loud lol

    • @aland7236
      @aland7236 Месяц назад

      ​@@mxviiiWhich fighter aircraft are quieter than civilian aircraft? Before or after the sonic boom? Sorry Cuz, I haven't been anywhere near a military plane casually passing overhead where I could hear the person in front of me.

    • @mxviii
      @mxviii Месяц назад +1

      @@aland7236 that’s because it’s casually flying overhead. Got to any airshow and one of the things they like to show off is how they can sneak up on you. But to answer your question: F-15s F-16s F-18s and F-22s.

  • @Rithvik-m6g
    @Rithvik-m6g Месяц назад +5

    Great video, very informative.

  • @the_essential_gringo6695
    @the_essential_gringo6695 Месяц назад +2

    You can tell this guy is a great teacher every answer was concise and simple enough for us laymen to understand.

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 24 дня назад

      I’d be answering most of these in a real condescending manner.

    • @mechadeka
      @mechadeka 15 дней назад

      @@johnp139 And that's why you aren't a professor.

  • @jayschafer1760
    @jayschafer1760 24 дня назад

    @ 14:50 Amen. The Connie and Super Connie are the most beautiful airplanes ever made in my opinion, glad to see them get some love.

  • @Asis-b7g
    @Asis-b7g Месяц назад +7

    Dr crossly let’s go!!! Great prof, still gave me a B tho

  • @kk4649k
    @kk4649k Месяц назад +5

    Why did you leave out the 717’s and 757’s ? 0:40
    717’s are still being flown by Hawaiian airline surprisingly.

  • @SujalChavda-r3x
    @SujalChavda-r3x Месяц назад +20

    I like space topics

  • @sombrerosrule
    @sombrerosrule 19 дней назад

    I love listening to to experts or enthusiasts talk about their field of interest

  • @ShanJiang-le3sn
    @ShanJiang-le3sn 25 дней назад +1

    Regarding the request to change seats mid flight, I think it’s less to do with the weight distribution but more with cabin management. Imagine how much time and effort flight attendants would have to devote to accommodating every passengers requests once an exception is made, let alone the potential tension among passengers who are eyeing on the same seats to switch to.

  • @6181143919
    @6181143919 Месяц назад +4

    I could listen to this gentleman all day and not get bored! Fantastic stuff!

  • @michaellee4276
    @michaellee4276 24 дня назад +8

    8:17 As you use up batteries, just drop them out of the airplane with a parachute. I see no problems with this.

    • @hectorlopez-ry3mg
      @hectorlopez-ry3mg 22 дня назад +3

      Yeah sure… 😂

    • @ExtravagantSteak
      @ExtravagantSteak 21 день назад +1

      **Elon Musk enters the chat**

    • @collenjr2004
      @collenjr2004 21 день назад +1

      Michael, that’s a terrible idea and I shouldn’t have to tell you why 😭

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 19 дней назад +1

      Recovering them??? And all of the batteries are drained at the same rate.

    • @ElderonAnalas
      @ElderonAnalas 19 дней назад

      Nah, we just need to do like they did with the electric powered glider, whole top of the wings are solar panels and it just recharges as it flies.

  • @Ironwill_Games
    @Ironwill_Games Месяц назад +8

    Whenever people say what is an engineer is and how smart they are, I’m gonna suggest them this video!

    • @johnp139
      @johnp139 24 дня назад

      @@Ironwill_Games Only he is stovepiped in his thinking. No consideration of aviation or human factors.

    • @lukaszspychaj9210
      @lukaszspychaj9210 20 дней назад +1

      Dude, i could've answered most of these questions myself

  • @adamkovac1991
    @adamkovac1991 Месяц назад

    what an incredible human being! I listen to this video during working, and it was pretty enjoyable. Right to he point, very profesional with a passion and understanding of what kind of listener is on the other side of this video. NICE! Thanks professor!

  • @someguy6152
    @someguy6152 18 дней назад

    8:32
    That's something alot of people don't know, is that in engineering it's usually calculated to maximum possible variable than put a multiplier on top of it.

  • @sasquatch2
    @sasquatch2 23 дня назад +4

    3:45 two engine aircraft: if one engine goes out, the other one will always have enough power to get the aircraft safely to the crash site.

  • @boy638
    @boy638 Месяц назад +47

    Why would Wired include irrelevant questions like "Can I ask a flight attendant to change to an empty seat" 5:16 to an aerospace engineer. Save those for a flight attendant for example, not an engineer.

    • @Ogaitnas900
      @Ogaitnas900 Месяц назад +11

      There's always a couple of out of pocket questions for the experts, for fun. They usually find ways to interpret them and give interesting answers.

    • @fufenbuggle
      @fufenbuggle Месяц назад +27

      @@Ogaitnas900 and in this case, he included an engineering-specific answer that the weight distribution of the passengers does matter

    • @jmax8692
      @jmax8692 Месяц назад +1

      None of these were for an engineer
      They were for pilots mostly

    • @Ogaitnas900
      @Ogaitnas900 Месяц назад

      @@fufenbuggle indeed! didn't mean to imply he didn't

    • @v_naymishra
      @v_naymishra Месяц назад

      Small weight distribution here and there don't matter unless the passenger is really heavy

  • @mattd1142
    @mattd1142 Месяц назад +3

    0:47 757- what am I chopped liver? lol

  • @negydimenziosember
    @negydimenziosember Месяц назад +2

    4:20 i believe the question was not how the old ones got better in paint and wires but why were there no category leaps like with...trains cars bikes even scooters...

  • @trainliker100
    @trainliker100 Месяц назад +1

    I find it amazing that a great number of people were around at the time of the first flight at Kitty Hawk and also saw the Boing 707 and beyond. All of that advancement in one lifetime.