The first 100 people to download Endel by clicking the link below will get a free week of audio experiences! app.adjust.com/b8wxub6?campaign=rexshangar_may&adgroup=youtube F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible. Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
Popular Mechanics Magazine in the 1950's or '60's had plans for a flying model airplane named "Hoop Skirt", which used the same principles & looked like a flying barrel.
@@Robocopnik No, that’s completely compromising the design and effectiveness of the first plane. I knew you were joking. I just thought i’d be the bigger idiot 😆😳😬😆
More a ducted fan, which is used in jet engines but more large bypass ones as used on airliners. There has recently been some interest in ducted propeller design for modern electric propulsion. Definitely vectored thrust though.
The early days of aviation must have been an incredible time to be an engineer when all manner of crazy, radical downright wacky and outlandish designs were built and tested. Today anything too radical or crazy would never get funding
G'day, Hmmmn. Clearly you have yet to meet the Hadley Optica, intended to compete with Heligoflopters. And perhaps ye ha'e yet to hear o' Elon Musk's Roquet Park, with all his dud Skyrockets lined up in a row, to reming him of what does not wurrrk...(?) ! To say nothin' about his "HyperLoopy" reinvention of the Tunnel. Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@emjackson2289 Not that radical more like an evolution of existing designs. It's airframe is conservative. Even its vertical take off has been done before. Truly radical would become something like the F117 nighthawk. Now that was worthy of bieng called radical. Things that are so outside the box that they shock the world are very rare these days
the design isn’t far off from how jet engines work as IIRRC fanjets work the same way. his idea was an unintentional step towards the jet age, a decade before the rise of jet engines
He was an experienced engineer, he was experimentating plausible solutions, it wasn't unintentional, it's not like he casually tried something out of a dream.
@@carta8399 his idea was sound and is basically used today in RC planes. Ducted fans work best with electric motors. The technology at the time wasn't really up to it.
@@carta8399 in the history of aviation this is actually common. The ones we regard as the 1st to create a new ground breaking design or idea usually weren't the 1st to think it up. Instead they were usually the 1st who could actually build it with the technology they had access to.
After all, it's a ducted fan. Great for the time and today we know, almost anything flies with this propulsion. Superman, a witch, a magic carpet... Why not, a cartoon plane? Thanks for the video!
Again, this time frame was the golden age of aviation. Everything one could think of was tried, some worked and others failed...miserably. It follows the principle of the high bypass turbine engines we employ, today. "The more things change, the more they remain the same."
Dear Rex, I appreciate all your work and expecially that about Italian "air oddities". Your pronunciation of Italian is pretty good and I'd like to give just an advice. As you may probably know, Italian has pretty stringent rules of pronunciation and here are some of them: C and G are "hard" before vowels A, U and O (like in "car" or "gun") while they're "soft" before I and E (like in "jet" or "cheese"). If you want to make them the other way round you must interpose another specific letter. Therefore, C and G become "soft" before A, U and O by interposing an I. So, when you say "Giovanni", you must NOT make the I heard, for it just serves as a "softener", thus you should pronunciate it like "Jovanni". Same (kind of) story if you want to have "hard" C and G before E and I: you must add an H in between. Therefore, Italian "chi" is like English "ki". I understand this is harder to remember for it looks the other way round in English. Keep on the good work and ciao (pronounce as "chao", not "chiao") ;-)
Another Well Done Episode …Imagine trying to calculate the aerodynamics with a pencil and a slide rule …Ducted Fans are still under development.. so this was way ahead of it’s time
Making it out at a young age is quite difficult. I started a side hustle at 17, saved up and made some good investments. l'm 28,live on my own and having a good life for myself. Big ups to you and everyone out there trying
@@kathyfrugalsen3047 Yes it sure is. I put in money in investments and get profits. That 's how I make more money without working. This does not sound new to you right ?
What a unique project - and pretty ahead of its time design-wise. It looks like it was delivered to Wile.E.Coyote in kit form in a wooden crate with ACME stenciled on the side...😉
I like to see the different prototypes and types of aircraft made by the Caproni company , and how they have found a place in history . Thanks for this well documented video.
I think that with some proper development the design could have been drastically improved. It's a ducted fan, and as we now know with R/C models ducted fans can boast serious performance over conventional propeller driven designs.
Not by chance Stipa designed it for large aircrafts, where the barrels, buried into the thickness of the wings, would have generated near to none additional drag.
Ducted fans are actually quite inefficient for most applications. Its not just a matter of the drag. Here is one way to conceptualize it: The duct benefits the efficiency of propeller by eliminating tip drag and directing the airflow more. When the aircraft is moving, the relative speed difference between the air moved by the propeller and the surrounding air is lower, reducing the benefit of airflow being more directed because it has less energy pushing it to being misdirected. So for high speed airplanes, ducted fans just produce more drag. The popularity of ducted fans for RC aircraft are actually more to do with the fact that you are limited to fixed pitch propellers at those scales. If you put a more powerful motor in an RC plane and want to put that power into the air, you need to either spin the propeller faster, or use a bigger propeller. You reach the practical limit for propeller size pretty quickly, and after that there is no way to go but higher rpm. The higher the rpm of the propeller, the higher the tip drag is, so pretty quickly tip drag just eats up any extra power you put into it and you just end up sucking down the batteries faster and making more noise to go the same speed. Ducted fans eliminate tip drag, allowing for higher propeller rpm, and therefore higher thrust for the size. The reason why real aircraft don't use ducted fans is because if you are using that much power, the only practical way to be generating that power is with a turbine engine. So its easiest to just make it a jet engine and not deal with the middleman of a power turbine and gearbox and propeller. RC planes that use that much power can only fly for minutes at a time while actually using that power, so the don't bother building electric planes that powerful. They barely bother to build electric planes at all.
@@lobsterbark You do realize that most commercial planes today use turbine driven ducted fans (aka: turbofan engines)? That type is the most efficient at high subsonic speeds, with turboprops better at low speeds and turbojets taking over at supersonic speeds. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan#Efficiency
@@svennoren9047 Yeah, those are technically ducted fans but nobody calls them that. I basically explained why with my long-winded comment. They could technically make them turboprops and it would be more efficient, but the prop size would have to be absolutely insane and the crazy stuff you would have to do with the design to make that possible would probably steal away any efficiency gains anyways.
um this idea but with 2 mods 1 2-big bypass turbofan's and 2 at altitude fly side ways to get into SS-sonic speed as the design of the wing tips looks like it might be good at cutting air as a nose and it looks like a flying wing so theoretically forward's and sideways flying is possible if not more efficient in different mode's
The first 100 people to download Endel by clicking the link below will get a free week of audio experiences! app.adjust.com/b8wxub6?campaign=rexshangar_may&adgroup=youtube F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible. Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
Thanks for posting this, I never knew it existed, but it makes a lot of sense despite its odd appearance. Most people don't realize that a large portion of modern jet engine success derives from the shape of the intake and exhaust ducting. A lot of engineering goes into getting the shape correct to feed the air through as engines these days are all about the fan on the front. The engine itself exists to drive that fan and control its speed. Stipa undoubtedly aided this work with his ducted fan research.
I came across this aircraft in a book I owned 15 years ago. I showed the picture of it to one of my bosses. He scanned it in and did a little color photo editing to it. Making it look like a flying Pepsi can.
Again a wonderous aircraft design I've never heard of before. Also nice that someone built a flyable scale version of it. Looking forward to the video on the N1.
Rex, your humour is more profound than one may initially realize with your joke about the Stipa being "..the lovechild of a Gee Bee racer and a garbage can". Both aircraft have a special trick up their sleeve in the manner in which they achieve flight. A bit like how a well executed grid iron throw gets maximum air time.
For years my dad had this toy plane that had the tail as a pair of scissors, a, tape measure on one wing, a pencil sharpener on the other wing, The tail was a plastic crayon sharpener and propeller could come off to reveal a dried out bottle of superglue. It looked like a Caproni Stepa in design with shorter front wings.
It's very hard to pilot a plane when you have shortness of breath, tears in your eyes and quite possibly wet pants. Quite the genius move by the Italians, they could have saved a fortune on not having to arm the planes.
To a technical layman this looks a lot like the grandfather of jet engines. Did the developers of the German jet engines know about this design and do we know if it had any influence on them?
Looks like a flying basking shark. But looks as if it was very stable in the air, with the various forces from all that air going through it. Interesting.
This is another one I knew of but I had long wanted to know more about. So thanks for that. You have to wonder what what a two or four engined flying wing version would have been like. I look forward to the ducted fan afterburner Caproni. Another one on my list I would like to know more about.
At about 8:10, there's a picture of the bare fuselage , with what looks like a bunch of rocks sitting on the tail surface? It might be the silliest looking airplane ever made. Like something from a cartoon of the same era.
The Stipa Caproni looks like a plane designer that first discovered what an Engine Cowling was and decided to make the entire plane an Engine Cowling. Which oddly makes it appear like an cartoon Jet.
This thing absolutely begs to be replicated full-scale. The engine is still quite common even ninety years later; I knew that was a Gipsy inside that crazy culvert of a fuselage before you said so. Someone please replicate it and fly it to Oshkosh...
This is one of those odd designs that make you wonder what could be done with today with new materials and improved engines possibly even as an EV aircraft
I doubt it wouldve made much sense in a fighter plane, or a bomber for that matter, for the same reason as the He 100 that used the entire wing surface as a radiator. Essentially youre running around with a way larger engine nacelle than you need to, which gets hit by bullets far more easily and I think holes in the duct would cause some problems, especially drag. Compare that with a conventional aircraft, and its fairly easy to realize why this idea didnt take off, even if the principle could have been integrated into a larger design more elegantly.
@@builder396 everything starts crude, and gets improved. Nothing pressurizes R&D like war. Already, we can see that there were multiple much more compact ducted fan designs on the drawing boards - what might have come if development had continued? One of the things that occurs to me is that you can do the same thing as the V-22 Osprey with ducted fans in place of the wingtip nacelles. Might we have seen, for instance, VSTOL transport aircraft? How would that have affected the shape of the Battlespace?
A truly fascinating flying 'freak' that worked! As others here have noted it paved the way for future more recognizable concepts like vector flight and the jet. This was an exceptionally interesting plane that I have never heard of. Spread the word! A proud subsciber and ex RAF Flight Sgt!
This legit looks like something that Wile E. Coyote would use to chase the roadrunner, and shortening the wings for better control would only enhance that.
This an the SNECMA Coleoptere are two of my favorite strange-looking planes. Thanks for talking about it in such detail. I had a book called "The World's Worst Aircraft", and you video goes into more detail on the Stipa-Caproni than the book did. Congratulations.
I guess you could say this airplane was _"a _*_barrel_*_ of fun"_ to fly...😊 FWIW: I have seen photographs and film footage of this airplane in the past, but this video is the most information I've ever learned about it.
The implication of a tube with a "folded over - circular" wing design creating lift is evidence that a wing does not create lift via the Bernoulli effect. That is the curved component creates a low pressure area which the flat side's higher pressure pushes up on. If this was the case the tube's bottom and top surfaces would cancel out resulting in no lift.
I feel your over simplifying a wing as just a Bernoulli device. Nearly all wings are curved upper and lower surface structures, some are even symmetrical and only make lift when essentially tilted up into the airflow. An F-104 wing only fly's as a stalled slab at slower speeds and has a very flat diamond cross section. One can best visualize the Stipa's fuselage as a super open blown wing or a zero stagger biplane pinched into a tube. A blown wing in the sense that the funneled thrust at the rear prevents any flow reversal on the outer tube surface allowing all airflow to remain lamina and flow across very varying thicknesses of relative airfoil sections around the tube making as many areas of lift as possible. All this would only be generated in some degree of pitch up or angle of attack. This is a normal flight regime in most aircraft and is often trimmed into the aircraft deliberately. Some lift is created inside the lower tube half, the rest is generated over the outer upper half of the tube. As you stated however I agree that the lift would be cancelled out in a zero angle of attack regime, this however I doubt is ever a regime of flight for most aircraft until the lift is greater than needed at higher speeds in which a nose down trim is needed. This can be seen in WWII fighter aircraft used in pylon racing, and is very pronounced when formating alongside a modern jet fighter just hanging onto lift at it's lower speed envelope while the prop fighter is way nosed over just to get the speed for level flight in that unusual formation.
To see my last point in vivid detail do an image search of "Spitfire and Eurofighter formation". I doubt you will also find any image of the Stipa Caproni flying at zero angle of attack which validates your original point in principle, however in practice not many wings fly as you inferred by your opening statement.
@@stevenborham1584 Its not a "Bernoulli device" that's my point and the opinion of aerodynamic experts. What you a describing is the redirect of airflow not low-high pressure differential.
@@bob19611000 I guess one can ague their point ad nauseam, and it will only be the situation of the 3 blind men describing an elephant situation with all descriptions being valid. Your point about the pin is a good one.
The four-engine design could have made an amazing bomber. The high lift would have enabled a heavy bomb load, and the inherent stability would have helped with bombing accuracy.
With a little extra effort, they could have worked a unique ejection seat system into this plane by putting a trap door under the cockpit seat. Just drop the pilot into the air duct and he is blasted clear of the plane.
One can call this a very early attempt to a jet engine. I will explain. A jet engine takes air from a scoop of some type and puts it through a tunnel. It then compresses the air. It then introduces a fuel air mixture into the compressed air/fuel. It then ignites the mixture (thus, creating a hot gas that propels the plane). As I see the plane, this is taking air, pushing through a tube, using a propeller, thus producing a thrust (to create movement over a curved wing) in order to create lift. The Vertical and Horizontal stabilizers are in a direct line to the tubed air. The wings then create lift (as they develop a fast and slow air flow [over and under the wings]. This is an experimental craft.
I would definitely own this if I could as it's just too cool not to want to and it would go with my weird car/SUV/station wagon/pickup thing only made for 2 years.
I’m also a car fanatic, and I’d love to know more about your vehicle. My mind pictures a Subaru Baja or a Ford Centurion conversion, but those were both made longer.
I've always liked this plane. even though it didn't get additional funding, it's a rare happy ending for one of these weird prewar experiments where it actually flies well
![Why The US Navy Built A Fighter Jet On Skis | Convair F2Y Sea Dart [Aircraft Overview #72]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DUpUpq9lhqY/mqdefault.jpg)
![Why The US Navy Built A Fighter Jet On Skis | Convair F2Y Sea Dart [Aircraft Overview #72]](/img/tr.png)
![The Polish-Built Hero Of Eastern Europe | PZL.24 [Aircraft Overview #94]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qM141DqhBJw/mqdefault.jpg)
![Perhaps The Worst Plane Ever Built? | The Christmas Bullet [Aircraft Overview #54]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q6akp_kxHJg/mqdefault.jpg)
The first 100 people to download Endel by clicking the link below will get a free week of audio experiences!
app.adjust.com/b8wxub6?campaign=rexshangar_may&adgroup=youtube
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
Popular Mechanics Magazine in the 1950's or '60's had plans for a flying model airplane named "Hoop Skirt", which used the same principles & looked like a flying barrel.
@@sparky6086 1:20 I fist thought, this was the logo of the aircraft manufacturer. A barrel with a propeller in it.
You don't need to do wind tunnel testing when your plane is a wind tunnel
😃🙃
Recursive AF.
You could put a plane inside this plane, test two at once, that's efficiency.
@@Robocopnik You have just proven why we need to show more respect for Italian engineering. 👨🍳😘😆
@@Robocopnik No, that’s completely compromising the design and effectiveness of the first plane.
I knew you were joking.
I just thought i’d be the bigger idiot 😆😳😬😆
It pioneered both the Jet engine principles and Vectored thrust. Nice.
More a ducted fan, which is used in jet engines but more large bypass ones as used on airliners. There has recently been some interest in ducted propeller design for modern electric propulsion. Definitely vectored thrust though.
Lol no
@@billinghamscuba How come
@@seriousthree6071 I think it qualifies as a jet powered aircraft. The forward thrust is indeed provided by a "jet" of air coming out of the fuselage.
A shame that the guy didn't know what he had. And where it would go.
The early days of aviation must have been an incredible time to be an engineer when all manner of crazy, radical downright wacky and outlandish designs were built and tested. Today anything too radical or crazy would never get funding
G'day,
Hmmmn.
Clearly you have yet to meet the Hadley Optica, intended to compete with Heligoflopters.
And perhaps ye ha'e yet to hear o' Elon Musk's Roquet Park, with all his dud Skyrockets lined up in a row, to reming him of what does not wurrrk...(?) !
To say nothin' about his "HyperLoopy" reinvention of the Tunnel.
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Unless you have the resources to fund it yourself.
It was like Christmas bullet
"Today anything too radical or crazy would never get funding" - well the F35 . . . .
@@emjackson2289 Not that radical more like an evolution of existing designs. It's airframe is conservative. Even its vertical take off has been done before. Truly radical would become something like the F117 nighthawk. Now that was worthy of bieng called radical. Things that are so outside the box that they shock the world are very rare these days
It appears to be the aircraft that destroyed enemy aircraft by eating them.
So, Italian Kirby then?
Om nom nom
William Windom flew a starship into its mouth to destroy it.
@@HarborLockRoad I get that reference.
how do you think it got so fat?
"Italy's weirdest plane" in the thumbnail. OK, you've set a high bar.
Bartini Beriev VVA-14: hold my beer.
....yes, a Soviet built aircraft....
...designed by an Italian.
the design isn’t far off from how jet engines work as IIRRC fanjets work the same way. his idea was an unintentional step towards the jet age, a decade before the rise of jet engines
It was the Tommy wiseau of airplanes
He was an experienced engineer, he was experimentating plausible solutions, it wasn't unintentional, it's not like he casually tried something out of a dream.
@@carta8399 his idea was sound and is basically used today in RC planes. Ducted fans work best with electric motors. The technology at the time wasn't really up to it.
@@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24 No of course, the idea was there but everything else wasn't.
@@carta8399 in the history of aviation this is actually common. The ones we regard as the 1st to create a new ground breaking design or idea usually weren't the 1st to think it up. Instead they were usually the 1st who could actually build it with the technology they had access to.
After all, it's a ducted fan. Great for the time and today we know, almost anything flies with this propulsion. Superman, a witch, a magic carpet... Why not, a cartoon plane? Thanks for the video!
Again, this time frame was the golden age of aviation. Everything one could think of was tried, some worked and others failed...miserably. It follows the principle of the high bypass turbine engines we employ, today. "The more things change, the more they remain the same."
Dear Rex, I appreciate all your work and expecially that about Italian "air oddities". Your pronunciation of Italian is pretty good and I'd like to give just an advice.
As you may probably know, Italian has pretty stringent rules of pronunciation and here are some of them:
C and G are "hard" before vowels A, U and O (like in "car" or "gun") while they're "soft" before I and E (like in "jet" or "cheese"). If you want to make them the other way round you must interpose another specific letter.
Therefore, C and G become "soft" before A, U and O by interposing an I. So, when you say "Giovanni", you must NOT make the I heard, for it just serves as a "softener", thus you should pronunciate it like "Jovanni".
Same (kind of) story if you want to have "hard" C and G before E and I: you must add an H in between. Therefore, Italian "chi" is like English "ki". I understand this is harder to remember for it looks the other way round in English.
Keep on the good work and ciao (pronounce as "chao", not "chiao") ;-)
Grande
Hey that was very informative
Another Well Done Episode …Imagine trying to calculate the aerodynamics with a pencil and a slide rule …Ducted Fans are still under development.. so this was way ahead of it’s time
‘’Courage taught me no matter how bad a crisis gets ... any sound investment will eventually pay off."
Making it out at a young age is quite difficult. I started a side hustle at 17, saved up and made some good investments. l'm 28,live on my own and having a good life for myself. Big ups to you and everyone out there trying
@@cryptocasey1083 Sounds like plan, how do you put money to work?
@@kathyfrugalsen3047 Yes it sure is. I put in money in investments and get profits. That 's how I make more money without working. This does not sound new to you right ?
@@cryptocasey1083 Thanks for replying me, I've heard so many people talk about investment but none had said how to do it right.
Am hoping on you can explain more on how you make extra income from investments
"Caproni's wierd aircraft design bingo card" is something I didn't know I needed.
What a unique project - and pretty ahead of its time design-wise.
It looks like it was delivered to Wile.E.Coyote in kit form in a wooden crate with ACME stenciled on the side...😉
I like to see the different prototypes and types of aircraft made by the Caproni company , and how they have found a place in history . Thanks for this well documented video.
I think that with some proper development the design could have been drastically improved. It's a ducted fan, and as we now know with R/C models ducted fans can boast serious performance over conventional propeller driven designs.
Not by chance Stipa designed it for large aircrafts, where the barrels, buried into the thickness of the wings, would have generated near to none additional drag.
Ducted fans are actually quite inefficient for most applications. Its not just a matter of the drag. Here is one way to conceptualize it: The duct benefits the efficiency of propeller by eliminating tip drag and directing the airflow more. When the aircraft is moving, the relative speed difference between the air moved by the propeller and the surrounding air is lower, reducing the benefit of airflow being more directed because it has less energy pushing it to being misdirected. So for high speed airplanes, ducted fans just produce more drag.
The popularity of ducted fans for RC aircraft are actually more to do with the fact that you are limited to fixed pitch propellers at those scales. If you put a more powerful motor in an RC plane and want to put that power into the air, you need to either spin the propeller faster, or use a bigger propeller. You reach the practical limit for propeller size pretty quickly, and after that there is no way to go but higher rpm. The higher the rpm of the propeller, the higher the tip drag is, so pretty quickly tip drag just eats up any extra power you put into it and you just end up sucking down the batteries faster and making more noise to go the same speed. Ducted fans eliminate tip drag, allowing for higher propeller rpm, and therefore higher thrust for the size.
The reason why real aircraft don't use ducted fans is because if you are using that much power, the only practical way to be generating that power is with a turbine engine. So its easiest to just make it a jet engine and not deal with the middleman of a power turbine and gearbox and propeller. RC planes that use that much power can only fly for minutes at a time while actually using that power, so the don't bother building electric planes that powerful. They barely bother to build electric planes at all.
@@lobsterbark You do realize that most commercial planes today use turbine driven ducted fans (aka: turbofan engines)?
That type is the most efficient at high subsonic speeds, with turboprops better at low speeds and turbojets taking over at supersonic speeds. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan#Efficiency
@@svennoren9047 Yeah, those are technically ducted fans but nobody calls them that. I basically explained why with my long-winded comment. They could technically make them turboprops and it would be more efficient, but the prop size would have to be absolutely insane and the crazy stuff you would have to do with the design to make that possible would probably steal away any efficiency gains anyways.
um this idea but with 2 mods 1 2-big bypass turbofan's and 2 at altitude fly side ways to get into SS-sonic speed as the design of the wing tips looks like it might be good at cutting air as a nose and it looks like a flying wing so theoretically forward's and sideways flying is possible if not more efficient in different mode's
The first 100 people to download Endel by clicking the link below will get a free week of audio experiences!
app.adjust.com/b8wxub6?campaign=rexshangar_may&adgroup=youtube
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
Thanks for posting this, I never knew it existed, but it makes a lot of sense despite its odd appearance. Most people don't realize that a large portion of modern jet engine success derives from the shape of the intake and exhaust ducting. A lot of engineering goes into getting the shape correct to feed the air through as engines these days are all about the fan on the front. The engine itself exists to drive that fan and control its speed. Stipa undoubtedly aided this work with his ducted fan research.
Always a good day when Rex uploads
Can we please appreciate how absolutely stunningly eye-pleasing the N.1 is?
And I think she's still around, too, in a museum in Italy. Could be wrong though.
Love the cartoonish look of the plane! It's like love at first sight!
I came across this aircraft in a book I owned 15 years ago. I showed the picture of it to one of my bosses. He scanned it in and did a little color photo editing to it. Making it look like a flying Pepsi can.
Pepsi Man’s own version of the Batmobile!
Wait, did you work at Dunder Mifflin?
Now, if Red Bull built a fleet of these for their races . . . 'Caproni gives you cans!'
NICE BV141 in your ad! Will never skip an ad after this!!
Excellent episode Rex, like the humour creeping in and more relaxed presentation style. Keep up the good work
That's just plain neat. Usually things that look like they shouldn't be able to fly never get off the ground, it's nice to see an exception to that.
Just plane neat
Again a wonderous aircraft design I've never heard of before. Also nice that someone built a flyable scale version of it. Looking forward to the video on the N1.
As an aeronautics neophyte, I love these videos. They're a great insight into early plane design. Please keep them coming!
Rex, your humour is more profound than one may initially realize with your joke about the Stipa being "..the lovechild of a Gee Bee racer and a garbage can". Both aircraft have a special trick up their sleeve in the manner in which they achieve flight. A bit like how a well executed grid iron throw gets maximum air time.
For years my dad had this toy plane that had the tail as a pair of scissors, a, tape measure on one wing, a pencil sharpener on the other wing, The tail was a plastic crayon sharpener and propeller could come off to reveal a dried out bottle of superglue. It looked like a Caproni Stepa in design with shorter front wings.
I need to get him a new of this toy/desk thing.
I need it
The only "kills" was by the opposition dying of laughter
It's very hard to pilot a plane when you have shortness of breath, tears in your eyes and quite possibly wet pants. Quite the genius move by the Italians, they could have saved a fortune on not having to arm the planes.
"kills"? It never pretended to be a fighter.
"... the love child of a Gee Bee racer and a dustbin..." LOVE IT!!!
Funky cars, planes, and firearms are my jam. I love this thing.
Watching the Caproni take off is like watching a guppy take flight.
Super Guppy do take flight tho but retired now
I'm glad to see a video explaining the airborne cartoon!
Ahhhhh yes the Italians. Delicious food, questionable governments, wonderful music, horrible vendettas, beautiful cars & wacky planes.
As wonderfully derpy looking as this is, I would love to see a modern attempt using composite materials and computer drafting.
🎶Roll out the Barrel
We'll have a barrel of fun🎶
Made by Luigi? No wonder it looks like a pipe!
“I’m not fat, i just have a large propeller”
Looking forward to a C.C.1 video BTW
The first known attempt at ducted thrust. Focused thrust.
Very nice. Never knew this flying keg existed.
To a technical layman this looks a lot like the grandfather of jet engines. Did the developers of the German jet engines know about this design and do we know if it had any influence on them?
Kind of the proto-jet in some respects. Genius design.
I'd hoped you would cover this absolutely odd yet creative beauty at some point :)
Love your videos man, keep it up !, Also your voice it's pretty good 👍
Looks like a flying basking shark.
But looks as if it was very stable in the air, with the various forces from all that air going through it. Interesting.
R/c inflatable, ducted-fan, 5' basking shark . . slowly cruising past someone's office window? . . This idea has legs : )
Everyone thinks this looks nuts but it's basically a prop version of early jets like the Mig 15 or F-86 etc
Looks like those flying Snoopy doghouses.
This is another one I knew of but I had long wanted to know more about. So thanks for that. You have to wonder what what a two or four engined flying wing version would have been like. I look forward to the ducted fan afterburner Caproni. Another one on my list I would like to know more about.
At about 8:10, there's a picture of the bare fuselage , with what looks like a bunch of rocks sitting on the tail surface?
It might be the silliest looking airplane ever made. Like something from a cartoon of the same era.
The Stipa Caproni looks like a plane designer that first discovered what an Engine Cowling was and decided to make the entire plane an Engine Cowling. Which oddly makes it appear like an cartoon Jet.
"...the strange love child of a GeeBee Racer and a dustbin..." LOL!
A real life cartoon Flying Basking Shark! Great video.
This thing absolutely begs to be replicated full-scale. The engine is still quite common even ninety years later; I knew that was a Gipsy inside that crazy culvert of a fuselage before you said so. Someone please replicate it and fly it to Oshkosh...
I just looked the other day to see if you did a video on this aircraft. And now I can't wait to see your video on the CC n.1!
Reminds me of Kirby :D
Looks like a plane put on a jacket before leaving the hangar.
10:20 Adding another sticker to his bingo card of weird planes. Lol, that's professional-comedy-level writing!
Wow, this plane looks ridiculous.
3/5 scale replica: Hold my beer.
I've just used a fan pointed into the corner of my room as a white noise generator to help me sleep for over a decade now.
Works great. :P
You sparked an interest for me in aircraft history well done sir!
I'm now convinced the entire international aviation community, from 1920 - 1930, were taking some kind of prerequisite, mutually agreed upon *Acid!*
I really want that plane. I'd love to fly to work in that thing.
This is one of those odd designs that make you wonder what could be done with today with new materials and improved engines possibly even as an EV aircraft
*So close* to early development of jet engines. For that matter, ducted fans could have been a fascinating addition to combat aviation technology.
I doubt it wouldve made much sense in a fighter plane, or a bomber for that matter, for the same reason as the He 100 that used the entire wing surface as a radiator.
Essentially youre running around with a way larger engine nacelle than you need to, which gets hit by bullets far more easily and I think holes in the duct would cause some problems, especially drag.
Compare that with a conventional aircraft, and its fairly easy to realize why this idea didnt take off, even if the principle could have been integrated into a larger design more elegantly.
@@builder396 everything starts crude, and gets improved. Nothing pressurizes R&D like war. Already, we can see that there were multiple much more compact ducted fan designs on the drawing boards - what might have come if development had continued?
One of the things that occurs to me is that you can do the same thing as the V-22 Osprey with ducted fans in place of the wingtip nacelles. Might we have seen, for instance, VSTOL transport aircraft? How would that have affected the shape of the Battlespace?
This aircraft was used to study the system of ducted fans. He is the grandfather of modern turbofans.
A truly fascinating flying 'freak' that worked! As others here have noted it paved the way for future more recognizable concepts like vector flight and the jet. This was an exceptionally interesting plane that I have never heard of. Spread the word! A proud subsciber and ex RAF Flight Sgt!
My third watch, this story with pics makes me happy. I feel the designer's physics, I had felt them as a kid, using a toilet paper tube. 1950s.
This legit looks like something that Wile E. Coyote would use to chase the roadrunner, and shortening the wings for better control would only enhance that.
Well researched and nicely presented. Thank you.
Flying Hairdryer....id love a kit of that
thanks, very easy to understand you, greetings from Austria
This an the SNECMA Coleoptere are two of my favorite strange-looking planes. Thanks for talking about it in such detail.
I had a book called "The World's Worst Aircraft", and you video goes into more detail on the Stipa-Caproni than the book did. Congratulations.
Love your channel Rex! I’d love to make an RC model of this thing, I bet it would be fantastic
thinkin about one myself-foam board & balsa to start.....hmmm where goes the batt.....cg be a bitch...
I guess you could say this airplane was _"a _*_barrel_*_ of fun"_ to fly...😊
FWIW: I have seen photographs and film footage of this airplane in the past, but this video is the most information I've ever learned about it.
The implication of a tube with a "folded over - circular" wing design creating lift is evidence that a wing does not create lift via the Bernoulli effect. That is the curved component creates a low pressure area which the flat side's higher pressure pushes up on. If this was the case the tube's bottom and top surfaces would cancel out resulting in no lift.
I feel your over simplifying a wing as just a Bernoulli device. Nearly all wings are curved upper and lower surface structures, some are even symmetrical and only make lift when essentially tilted up into the airflow. An F-104 wing only fly's as a stalled slab at slower speeds and has a very flat diamond cross section. One can best visualize the Stipa's fuselage as a super open blown wing or a zero stagger biplane pinched into a tube. A blown wing in the sense that the funneled thrust at the rear prevents any flow reversal on the outer tube surface allowing all airflow to remain lamina and flow across very varying thicknesses of relative airfoil sections around the tube making as many areas of lift as possible. All this would only be generated in some degree of pitch up or angle of attack. This is a normal flight regime in most aircraft and is often trimmed into the aircraft deliberately. Some lift is created inside the lower tube half, the rest is generated over the outer upper half of the tube. As you stated however I agree that the lift would be cancelled out in a zero angle of attack regime, this however I doubt is ever a regime of flight for most aircraft until the lift is greater than needed at higher speeds in which a nose down trim is needed. This can be seen in WWII fighter aircraft used in pylon racing, and is very pronounced when formating alongside a modern jet fighter just hanging onto lift at it's lower speed envelope while the prop fighter is way nosed over just to get the speed for level flight in that unusual formation.
To see my last point in vivid detail do an image search of "Spitfire and Eurofighter formation". I doubt you will also find any image of the Stipa Caproni flying at zero angle of attack which validates your original point in principle, however in practice not many wings fly as you inferred by your opening statement.
@@stevenborham1584
I can float a pin on water due to "surface tension" but its not why ships float.
@@stevenborham1584 Its not a "Bernoulli device" that's my point and the opinion of aerodynamic experts. What you a describing is the redirect of airflow not low-high pressure differential.
@@bob19611000 I guess one can ague their point ad nauseam, and it will only be the situation of the 3 blind men describing an elephant situation with all descriptions being valid. Your point about the pin is a good one.
The four-engine design could have made an amazing bomber. The high lift would have enabled a heavy bomb load, and the inherent stability would have helped with bombing accuracy.
Gute Besserung from Germany and thx for the nice vid
Yay strange aircraft
This 1940s plane, Caprinni, you will do a video about it?
Yay sponsor
What a piece of art 😍😍
With a little extra effort, they could have worked a unique ejection seat system into this plane by putting a trap door under the cockpit seat. Just drop the pilot into the air duct and he is blasted clear of the plane.
This is a concept that looks like it was far too ahead of its time. And it definitely was.
Great work Sir thank you
Great video and research@
Great vid Rex. What an interesting aircraft. Only the Italians 😎 Hope you get better soon
Man, I love Caproni.
One can call this a very early attempt to a jet engine.
I will explain.
A jet engine takes air from a scoop of some type and puts it through a tunnel. It then compresses the air.
It then introduces a fuel air mixture into the compressed air/fuel.
It then ignites the mixture (thus, creating a hot gas that propels the plane).
As I see the plane, this is taking air, pushing through a tube, using a propeller, thus producing a thrust (to create movement over a curved wing) in order to create lift.
The Vertical and Horizontal stabilizers are in a direct line to the tubed air.
The wings then create lift (as they develop a fast and slow air flow [over and under the wings].
This is an experimental craft.
Would this be the first intentional use of thrust vectoring?
The afterburning airplane looks _very_ interesting!
"the plane that ate too much"
fixed for you XD
that dual prop design would make an awesome bomber
That was a really interesting one. Way ahead of it´s time.
this is my favorite plane of early aviation
Great video, fascinating experiment.
Basking shark plane. :U
I would definitely own this if I could as it's just too cool not to want to and it would go with my weird car/SUV/station wagon/pickup thing only made for 2 years.
I’m also a car fanatic, and I’d love to know more about your vehicle. My mind pictures a Subaru Baja or a Ford Centurion conversion, but those were both made longer.
Ooh, new youtube channel with content the others haven't had!
Don't screw this up noob, I needs to binge on engineering and technology for a bit.
I've always liked this plane. even though it didn't get additional funding, it's a rare happy ending for one of these weird prewar experiments where it actually flies well
Looks wierd, but nicely solves the problem of the asymmetric airflow along the fuselage, wings and tail that you get with an exposed propellor.
True, some aircrafts were asymmetric to my surprise. Was it the C202? It's so subtle too
After this, ya GOTTA do a video on the Vought V-173 "Flying Pancake"!
You gotta tell what those books were in the sponsor!
Thank you