Aerospace Engineer Reacts to TOP GUN: MAVERICK

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 30 ноя 2024

Комментарии •

  • @cease_requiem6034
    @cease_requiem6034 2 года назад +751

    On the subject of supermaneuverability in USAF aircraft, the F-22 actually has thrust vectoring capability in the pitch and roll axis allowing it to perform very cool stunts.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +115

      Yes you are correct. I've seen the F-22 in action. It's awesome. Just not quite as maneuverable it's Russian counterparts.

    • @Echo-nj6jn
      @Echo-nj6jn 2 года назад +41

      Thrust vectoring is cool and all until you see an F-35 do just about the same maneuvers without it.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +90

      Technically the F-35B has thrust vectoring. They just use it for VTOL.

    • @dylanwhite3383
      @dylanwhite3383 2 года назад +29

      Well the f-22 raptor has 2d thrust vector capabilities where it's engine flaps can only go up and down while aircraft with 3d thrust vector capabilities allow the entire engine flaps can go in any direction

    • @kylereese4822
      @kylereese4822 2 года назад +4

      @@AviationAustin In the Walking Dead world it`s 8 years later... (forced alternative engineering methods)
      Would it fly....A 747 all 4 engines missing the replacement is F15(cropped wings tail remains)grafted on the engine mounts under each wing.. Tail section damaged beyond repair replaced with F2 engine/tail.. the miss-matched electronics forced to talk to each other.. interior stripped for weigh reduction, landing gear non/retractable(maybe taken off another aircraft forced to fit) engines running on Methane/Hydrogen.

  • @JinKee
    @JinKee 2 года назад +1632

    The most impressive thing about Top Gun Maverick is that it didn't have a spoiler leak in two years

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +126

      That's a great point. But I also avoid spoilers like the plague. I won't even watch trailers or teasers before a movie.

    • @Yukikazehalo
      @Yukikazehalo 2 года назад +63

      Not much to spoil besides "its actually good".

    • @MitchM240
      @MitchM240 2 года назад +16

      Yeah not much plot to spoil.

    • @DocWolph
      @DocWolph 2 года назад +15

      Other than the slowly increasing interest in the Darkstar, and as a result the SR-72.

    • @a55tech
      @a55tech 2 года назад +2

      what movies had leaks?

  • @ScottMana
    @ScottMana 2 года назад +467

    I was really amazed at how respectful the movie was toward everybody. From the NAVY to the pilots and planes and even Russia for their amazing planes.

    • @Historylord15
      @Historylord15 2 года назад +33

      You know why that is? Because the Pentagon looked over the script and „corrected“ it to make the Navy look better

    • @dustypluskrat7423
      @dustypluskrat7423 2 года назад +62

      @@Historylord15 they also made the enemy as ambiguous as possible to not piss off any foreign rivals. Geopolitics ruled over development of this movie in one way or another but I’m still surprised at what the crew managed to pull off in terms of the financial success for this movie.

    • @bens4801
      @bens4801 2 года назад +36

      5th gen fighter being downed by an f14 is very disrespectful actually,

    • @BigKidCertified
      @BigKidCertified 2 года назад +19

      @@bens4801 agreed, if in a broad, zero context situation. Given that the Felons were intercepting at close range and realized too late that the F-14 was a threat, it’s believable. Assuming the Felon has the same tech as at least an F-18 Super Hornet, they would’ve been warned by the master that another bogey was within 100 miles and never had been surprised by the F-18. Back to the close situation where the F-14 was discovered a threat, I think it was luck if the draw. The Felon out maneuvered with thrust vectoring, but still, Gun range is pretty far out and all it takes is a good angle and enough bullets to funnel into the target aircraft!

    • @equinoxnoosa967
      @equinoxnoosa967 2 года назад +23

      The enemy is not identified in either movie. Intentionally.

  • @keronlezama2391
    @keronlezama2391 2 года назад +16

    Rear Admiral: Thirty plus years of service. Combat medals. Citations. Only man to shoot down three enemy planes in the last forty years. Yet, you can’t get a promotion, you won’t retire, and despite your best efforts, you refuse to die. You should be at least a two star admiral by now. Yet, here you are, captain. Why is that?
    Maverick: It’s one of life’s mysteries, sir.

    • @SFisher1993
      @SFisher1993 Год назад

      Maverick took Captain Kirk’s advice: “Don’t let them promote you. Don’t let them transfer you. Don’t let them do ANYTHING that takes you away. Because while you’re there….you can make a difference.”

  • @grabtharshammer1458
    @grabtharshammer1458 2 года назад +275

    The Darkstar was my favorite part. I’m also an aerospace engineer so I loved seeing the advanced tech. Seems like a turbine based combined cycle engine with a fully cocooning turbine and hydrogen fueled scramjet. Most likely a dual mode scramjet and possibly oxygen augmented

    • @alexwalker2582
      @alexwalker2582 2 года назад +42

      .....I had to read that like 4 times to...mostly...understand it.

    • @lukemurphy3584
      @lukemurphy3584 2 года назад +35

      Yeah what he said.

    • @jerryandrews3699
      @jerryandrews3699 2 года назад

      How close are to making this a reality? Arent satellites more capable?

    • @dankinusmc1
      @dankinusmc1 2 года назад +17

      @@jerryandrews3699, How close? only the government knows, but in the civilian side, we are still a couple decades away. Is a satellite better? Yes and no. Satellites are better for general intelligence gathering, but for immediate intel over a specific sensitive site with little to no notice, manned aircraft are still the best option, as they are not predictable

    • @theo7371
      @theo7371 2 года назад +6

      Since you know your stuff can you explain what Maverick's suit is made of to survive ejection at Mach 10?

  • @XerrolAvengerII
    @XerrolAvengerII 2 года назад +130

    When pilots are practicing their 1 on 1 dogfights, the 3 different considerations are kinetic energy or airspeed, potential energy or altitude, and thrust to weight ratio. An aircraft with supermaneuvrability has the ability to trade airspeed for nose authority, meaning they can 'turn the plane' very very quickly and reliably at the cost of speed, but they can only really do it once in a fight because the act trades a large amount of speed for a one time advantage. Also yes, most incidents where a plane is shot down in air combat are at medium to long range with missiles so seeing an enemy first and being unseen by them is the priority (at least USAF) mindset.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +12

      That's the doctrine as I understood it. Thanks for the clarification!

    • @mikefuller363
      @mikefuller363 2 года назад +9

      what about off boresight firing solutions? doesn't that negate all the tactical advantage from those attributes?

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +7

      Off boresight firing solutions! Wow you really know you're stuff.

    • @JamaalSkeete
      @JamaalSkeete 2 года назад +6

      Lose sight... Lose fight.

    • @mobiuscoreindustries
      @mobiuscoreindustries 2 года назад +7

      Yep, the US doctrine was always maximizing the application of firepower. Not specifically having the most firepower in term of raw numbers, but rather what is going to inflict the most useful effect on target. This not only calls for thunderous firepower but an extremely focused one. This is why the US and NATO in general have such a big incentive on smart weapons, stealth and range. An F-35 may be slow and only "decent" in a dogfight but it matters little when all they really need to do is engage beyond the return fire range of their target and buzz off. May it be swarming ground targets with SDBs and joint standoff munitions or locking down an entire area of the sky with missiles, they will want to be gone before dogfight potential even matters. For now Only China seems to have achieved meaningful stealth capability as the SU-57 has been analyzed to have a pretty normal radar signature and only the J-20 seems to actually have stealth characteristics. which makes sense, the SU-57 is filled with design choices actively harming stealth while the J-20 follows the same design principles as other stealth aircraft that preceded it.
      Hell the US already transformed their B-52s into cruise missile carriers and I'm honestly shocked the US hasn't put more priority towards dedicated arsenal planes like their recent reveal of the pallet launched cruise missiles they can load dozens upon dozens into one of their transports and just fire from an absurd range.

  • @benbennit
    @benbennit 2 года назад +259

    The fact he ejected and survived an airframe imploding at mach 10.2 was quite incredible 👏

    • @matthewbrune5490
      @matthewbrune5490 2 года назад +28

      Bruh's pretty much the best pilot in the USN and USAF, so yeah

    • @ij1376
      @ij1376 2 года назад +13

      You I don't that would've been possible tbh lol

    • @jerryandrews3699
      @jerryandrews3699 2 года назад +46

      I think the phrase is, unrealistic. One of the things I disliked about the film. Have an emergency, get it down to a reasonable speed, eject. Could have bought that.

    • @juncearyoutube3336
      @juncearyoutube3336 2 года назад +72

      At that speed everything disintegrates, its a 100% not survivable.

    • @firefight77
      @firefight77 2 года назад +1

      Yeah, he would have been ripped apart.

  • @cloputzergaming2107
    @cloputzergaming2107 2 года назад +103

    I flew the darkstar in microsoft flight simulator and at mach 11 i lost control I thought it was just glitching out but now I know better. Thank you😊

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +21

      Haha! Yep not designed for Mach 11 😂 glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for watching!

    • @aliensporebomb
      @aliensporebomb 2 года назад +4

      @@AviationAustin But so much fun on the way there. But ease off - the need for speed only goes so far and best not exceed design spec for the airframe!

    • @ThePixel1983
      @ThePixel1983 2 года назад +7

      Also: Achieving mach 1 is hard if you forget to take the gear up. 🙈

    • @powerhouse8310
      @powerhouse8310 2 года назад +2

      How did you get it to mach 11. The most I’ve been able to get is 10.01.

    • @anthonystone2089
      @anthonystone2089 2 года назад +4

      @@powerhouse8310 you have to fly to the edge of space where the air resistance is less.

  • @BambiHughes
    @BambiHughes 2 года назад +62

    The advantage of fifth generation fighters is absolutely in no way “small”. K/D rations in Red Flag have been recorded as being in excess of 20/1. There is no debate over abandoning advanced fighters, that would be ludicrous.

    • @stevechristensen9762
      @stevechristensen9762 2 года назад

      that's BVR, dogfighting the F-16 still kicks its ass. and it costs 6 mil compared to 337 million along with 35 thousand for every hour of flight time in the f-35. All the F-35 is a pro at is raping the american people for the benefit lockheed martin

    • @petrisorpetru
      @petrisorpetru 2 года назад

      Mucea.

    • @nerofl89
      @nerofl89 2 года назад +5

      @CHAD THE BORIS Funny you should type this considering the movie went out of its way to hype up the Su-57 which is no where near as much of a threat as the movie made it out to be. The Su-57 is at best a 4th+ generation aircraft and fails many of the accepted expectations of 5th generation. There are currently only 2 airframes that meet the definition of 5th generation and that is the F-22 and F-35, both the J-20 and SU-57 are lacking and are nothing more than upgraded 4th generation airframes.

  • @jpatt1000
    @jpatt1000 2 года назад +5

    I like the fact that when the movie shows the scramjet switch over it works just like Republic's setup for the XF-103 with a ramp coming up, blanking off the engine and diverting air into the scramjet portion of the engine.

  • @BigKidCertified
    @BigKidCertified 2 года назад +156

    Well, given that the Lockheed Skunkworks engineers built the full sized mock of the Darkstar, I’d imagine that it was spot on! The mock up was so impressive, that China redirected their spy satellites to fly over to take pictures as they had the mock up parked outside a hangar in Nevada. The NAVY tracked it and had a laugh with the engineers and Tom Cruise about it. The interview with the NAVY guys and movie producers talking about it is pretty entertaining!

    • @matthewbrune5490
      @matthewbrune5490 2 года назад +9

      Just goes to show you why the original and Maverick are basically freaking perfect

    • @PUNISHERMHS_2021
      @PUNISHERMHS_2021 2 года назад +11

      Whoever discovered the Darkstar mock up probably got a severe punishment

    • @logicplague
      @logicplague 2 года назад +8

      Should have written "Hello" in Mandarin on the tarmac.

    • @apollo1694
      @apollo1694 2 года назад +1

      @@logicplague Mandarin isn't a writing system

    • @PrograError
      @PrograError 2 года назад

      @@apollo1694 nah that's just being american...
      they often lump the entire Asian dispora together just cos we " looked" the same...

  • @wyvernbravo
    @wyvernbravo 2 года назад +51

    Can we just talk about how when the SR72 took off the general wor whatever didn't budge yet the roof of the guard hut jumped like 3 feet backwards

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +28

      Good thing too. They destroyed the set on the first take

    • @linusa2996
      @linusa2996 2 года назад +38

      Cause Ed Harris/ Admiral Drone Ranger was a genuine Bad Ass.

    • @tyrantfox7801
      @tyrantfox7801 2 года назад +11

      Surface area

    • @tsefcik
      @tsefcik 2 года назад +14

      The navy liaison to the film really loves that, called Ed Harris a stone cold killer for taking that to the face and not budging.

    • @karnage04
      @karnage04 2 года назад +4

      He had Michael Jacksons shoes

  • @AJHTGE
    @AJHTGE 2 года назад +12

    Just came across your channel, went through a few videos, and I absolutely love it. I love the simplicity. This kind of pure enthusiasm is rare nowadays. I just want to thank you for what you do.

  • @terencew3840
    @terencew3840 2 года назад +1

    Plot armor so thick it saved him from vaporizing when ejecting at mach 10

  • @cinemantics231
    @cinemantics231 2 года назад +34

    Super maneuverability becomes relevant in the context of 5th gen aircraft duking it out. If both adversaries have stealth, then beyond visual range firing is no longer an option in which case, we're back to dogfights.

    • @zacharyberry5019
      @zacharyberry5019 2 года назад

      Unfortunately for the rest of the world they still don’t meet the mark on stealth

    • @Klanosek
      @Klanosek 2 года назад +5

      At this point we don't even know how well russian jet perform when NATO radars would be blasting them in war-like scenario. For now russians are losing jets over Ukraine and still had not tried to pull out their best jet. That could mean, just like T-14, that it's still a long time before it will actually be ready to face combat.

    • @maxeffeKtt
      @maxeffeKtt 2 года назад +1

      @@Klanosek russian not losing jet,because on ukrain no more airforce)we use SU25SM3,old workhorse hor support tank and troops.no need stelth 5 gen figher aganst troops with stingers and "igla"

    • @Klanosek
      @Klanosek 2 года назад +1

      @@maxeffeKtt Also S-300, Piorun (best MANPAD in the world) and many more anti-air projectiles. Russian airforce doesn't do much on the war for now.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +9

      Oh buddy. You gotta get your news from outside the motherland. Russia still has absolutely NOT gained air superiority. It's honestly embarrassing at this point.

  • @a3bilbaneo842
    @a3bilbaneo842 2 года назад +11

    5:39 i think at those speeds the forces on the airframe and the g load even on the slightest inputs are MASSIVE, definetly enough to rip apart the craft with asymetric thrust alone

  • @RandomFactorio
    @RandomFactorio 2 года назад +39

    On the subject of drones being wingmans. A drone can never replicate human instict and judgement mechanisms. I think we will always have human pilots but whether they will be in the plane or on the ground is another subject.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +9

      As for right now, i think you're spot on. I think we're several decades away from even seriously considering taking humans completely out of the loop.

    • @johnathanclayton2887
      @johnathanclayton2887 2 года назад +5

      Why do you think a drone could never replicate instincts? They have much more information available, and faster processing power. The limiting factor is the learning model. I think with commercial advancements in AI and autonomous driving, an accurate model isn't very far away. Of course, there are ethical considerations though.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +3

      FSD and other AI driving isn't really making potentially war starting decisions either. I think we're further than most people say.

    • @johnathanclayton2887
      @johnathanclayton2887 2 года назад +2

      Yeah, liability for war starting is definitely a big concern. Maybe we need more reliable jamming resistant network connections before we deploy autonomous fighters. I would think they would have a lot of advantages from g forces, staying aloft, and lower cross section requirements for stealth.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      very true. Those factors would be very instrumental in scenario like in this movie.

  • @Jasmaths2016
    @Jasmaths2016 2 года назад +12

    Did you know that the first SR 71 Had the same situation as the Darkstar. At Moc 3 one of the engines flamed out and the pilot had no control of the aircraft as it started to rip apart. The pilot and the systems officer ejected. The pilot made it safely but the systems officer broke his neck ejecting similar to Goose.

    • @skipperg4436
      @skipperg4436 2 года назад

      I guess if we ever make such aircraft we would make it with single engine...

    • @Prodagist
      @Prodagist 2 года назад

      @@skipperg4436 The problem in that case is that there isn't an engine powerful enough to make a plane reach those kinds of speeds without having a second

  • @TheSuperhomosapien
    @TheSuperhomosapien 2 года назад +65

    Supermanuverability is also only really good in one on one dogfights, which almost never happen in reality. It can give you an advantage against a single aircraft, but leaves you slow and in a low energy state and easy pickings for any other enemy fighters in the combat zone. It is a lot of expense and engineering added to an aircraft for a very situational advantage.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +8

      Those nozzles are incredibly complex and by far the most expensive part of the engine.

    • @anuvisraa5786
      @anuvisraa5786 2 года назад

      it is really important missile evation

    • @TheSuperhomosapien
      @TheSuperhomosapien 2 года назад +5

      @@anuvisraa5786 Exactly! Stealth is king in modern air to air combat and lobbing missiles at your target beyond visual range before they even detect you or the missiles is how it will be done. If you get close enough to your target where supermanuverability becomes a factor then something went horribly wrong along the way.
      Supermanuverability leaves you in a slow and low energy state and is pretty much only used when the aircraft are within visual range of each other. If you use it and don't get a kill on your intended target or there is another enemy aircraft in the combat zone dogfighting you, then you end up in a situation where you will be an easy gun kill. It doesn't matter how stealthy you are then, you're not going to be invisible to 25mm shells being fired at 3,300 rounds per minute.

    • @captainobvious9188
      @captainobvious9188 2 года назад +1

      It's the aircraft version of drift style driving an automobile. In racing, there is a very narrow set of situations where it can be the correct solution - that is, the fastest - but it sure looks amazing.

    • @Scheiseposter
      @Scheiseposter 2 года назад +1

      @@anuvisraa5786 Yes, one missile will be evaded, second will be eaten due to how much speed is bled. There is good reason, why best defense is roll and dive into dense air - it trades energy for speed and drags missile into dense air, where it looses a lot of speed and not vector into something that looses all speed horizontal speed and then accelerates from essentially stall. Pilot wants to convert energy gradually, not kill speed and start converting energy into speed.

  • @dgrimes438
    @dgrimes438 2 года назад +19

    This scene actually was real they flew a blue angel plane low level, and it did blow the roof off the guard shack it was about 12 ft off the ground. The darkstar plane was with an ovelay over the original aircraft

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +11

      I did hear that. I also heard they did it in one take because they couldn't do it again

    • @dgrimes438
      @dgrimes438 2 года назад +2

      @@AviationAustin a pilot by the name of Frank 'walleye" Weisser did an incredible job throughout the entire film he did every low level scene in the movie.

    • @linusa2996
      @linusa2996 2 года назад +2

      @@AviationAustin Time constraints, it was the last run of the day before the F/A-18 had to land due to lack of light, No stunts during low light conditions.
      It was actually the 19th pass.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      Oh, I thought the BTS i watched said it was the only take. Maybe I misremembered

    • @linusa2996
      @linusa2996 2 года назад +5

      @@AviationAustin No, they only had 1 take to get it on film, the pilot made 18 passes at different altitudes in order to see which altitude/speed combination would give the film makers what they wanted on film. That 19th pass was the one pass with Harris in the shot, camera's rolling and the F/A-18 blowing the roof off the guard shack.

  • @ProFF77
    @ProFF77 2 года назад +7

    10:45 "if you are in a dog fight between F-22 and Su-57, the F-22 is gonna fire before it even sees the Su-57"
    Well, that is assuming the F-22 can actually not only detect the Su-57 at that range, but get a lock on it without being detected itself. It might well be possible but since most data including actuall radar cross section of the Su-57 is unknown at the moment, its impossible to assume
    Also, we have to be aware that if both planes are approaching each other at the speed of sound, 20km gap is covered in just about 14 sec. If they are approaching at supersonic speed that gap is just from 13 to 6 seconds.
    In stealth aerial warfare, maneuveravility has just become MORE important than for previous generations as mutual detection might not happen until the point that both pilots can both see each other visually.

    • @JZainbear
      @JZainbear 2 года назад

      The Indians cancelled their SU57 purchase partially because of poor stealth characteristics. Also the SU57 has been radar tracked by the Isrealis and others.

    • @WigSplitters
      @WigSplitters 2 года назад +1

      i think the su 57 also has a better radar than the one in the f22, as it is a lot newer, su 57 also has irst which would certainly help detection at closer ranges due to the large bore angle of it, the rating of 5.8 is a bit silly imo

  • @spfadden082711
    @spfadden082711 2 года назад +16

    I love that they really tried to be accurate with this film. In some films that doesn’t matter but I’m glad to see this was really close.

    • @robertmcnearny9222
      @robertmcnearny9222 2 года назад

      Really? They have a guy walking away unscathed after ejecting at mach 10.2. They had a F-14 easily beating a SU-57. There wasn't anything accurate about this movie.

    • @Saikelu
      @Saikelu Год назад

      @CHAD THE BORIS They didn't beat a SU 57. They were about to die. May be you should watch the movie again.

  • @OSRS2ndBase
    @OSRS2ndBase 2 года назад +3

    By far the most realistic hypersonic aircraft depiction I’ve ever seen - from someone who works with this stuff every day

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      People really don't like the turns and the ejection scene. But the aircraft itself is great.

    • @OSRS2ndBase
      @OSRS2ndBase 2 года назад +1

      @@AviationAustin That one turning scene I thought to myself (wow that’s a lot of Gs) and yeah the ejection was just plot armor hahaha but the rest was fantastic

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      I totally agree

  • @Kathlanus
    @Kathlanus 2 года назад +20

    I didn't expect all that much of it when I walked into the cinema. But they really did hit an incredible balance between nostalgia, realism and actually making it an entertaining movie. Fully agree with your ranking

  • @AnthonyDDean
    @AnthonyDDean 2 года назад +44

    Mach 11 is no different from Mach 10 other than increased dissociation of air particles. Dr. Javier Urzay's Stanford Hypersonics lectures are available on RUclips. Also, the Microsoft Flight Sim is way off with the max cruise altitude for Mach 10 being above MECO altitude for Falcon 9, unless you pull up and shut off the engines to perform a zero-lift ballistic to hit an apogee in the aircraft. William Heiser's 1994 book "Hypersonic Airbreathing Propulsion" trajectory tables (available on Amazon) puts Mach 10 max altitude at around 150,000 feet.

    • @mrjones29
      @mrjones29 2 года назад

      very advanced stuff

    • @DG-EditsYT
      @DG-EditsYT 2 года назад

      This is nothing, i saw someone fire a solid fuel rocket from a hoover pipe in my street on UK Firework night when i was a kid. blew my mind

    • @laurencef8535
      @laurencef8535 2 года назад

      Dissociation likely wouldnt occur in any reasonable amount at mach 10, thats a re-entry speeds thing (Im thinking mach 25). Youd get vibrational excitation for sure, but dissociation would be alot let likely. Youve got to be very hot for that, and at those temps youd be flying with a blunted body and ablative cooling

    • @kelly2631
      @kelly2631 2 года назад +1

      I'd imagine that the airframe/engines were just not suited for anything past mach 10, which would have led to sub-optimal flow over the wings/through the engine.

    • @everythingjustincox7467
      @everythingjustincox7467 2 года назад +1

      Classified Top Secret but is very real

  • @JZainbear
    @JZainbear 2 года назад +6

    If you had a flame out at high mach perhaps the computers would instantly disable the other engine to prevent loss of control. Just a thought.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      That would be smart

    • @rsrt6910
      @rsrt6910 2 года назад +2

      That's EXACTLY what was done with the SR-71 Blackbird, though not until after they lost one due to an engine flameout.

  • @stanscharlin2426
    @stanscharlin2426 Год назад +2

    I think you did a very nice job explaining some of our aircraft and the different engine types. We also have some updated aircraft that are truly amazing that fly at around mach 9 and went operational in 1990 and can possibly fly to the space station. The engine technology on our vehicles that travel beyond mach 9 is above my pay grade.

  • @No_Way_NO_WAY
    @No_Way_NO_WAY 2 года назад +4

    What i liked in top gun was the attention to detail. They didnt just yada yada over stuff and showed things that no regular movie staff member would know, like the breathing pure O2 before maverick put on his helmet for the dark star flight. This is done to minimize the chances for decompression sickness during high altitude flights in only semi pressurized cockpits.

  • @iHelpSolveIt
    @iHelpSolveIt 2 года назад +13

    To say a drone can, never forget to date there is still a pilot flying the drones. Drones have been captured.
    The USA would need to have 6th generation integrated stealth plus actually making a faster plane.
    All the stealth craft have been getting slower and slower.
    Not only do the Russian aircraft have the super manoeuvre ability the EU craft have it and so do others.

    • @briananthony4044
      @briananthony4044 2 года назад

      The canards

    • @codename1176
      @codename1176 2 года назад

      @@slimerewoods5766 speed is life its the only thing an aircraft can rely on when it absolutely needs to leave an area.

    • @solarissv777
      @solarissv777 2 года назад

      there are developments in new radar absorbing coatings that are much less susceptible to high temperatures and thus highs speeds. Also there are developments in new engines, particularly with variable bypass, and with good enough engine you can make even brick supersonic. I believe NGAD and Tempest will be able to get to Mach 3 speeds, maybe even supercruise at Mach 2.

    • @solarissv777
      @solarissv777 2 года назад

      @@slimerewoods5766 speed gets to be very handy to lob gliding munitions in order to not even get into area you are not supposed to be in.

  • @MintythecatIsABeast
    @MintythecatIsABeast 2 года назад +5

    Your description of the classes of propulsion systems and their engine geometries I found very interesting. I have learned something today. Many thanks.

  • @MrTeff999
    @MrTeff999 2 года назад +1

    How does one survive the disintegration of their aircraft at Mach 10.2. This is five times faster than the space shuttle Challenger was traveling when it disintegrated at 49,000 feet. I thought, well this is gonna be a short movie.

  • @winhas
    @winhas 2 года назад +3

    I love this channel. I sometimes for fun do very similar things like this! Really deserves more subs than he has

  • @dksl9899
    @dksl9899 2 года назад +3

    I'm no aeronautical engineer, but when Mav was trying to build up his speed in the Darkstar, why on earth was he TURNING?? other than to look cool on camera.

    • @TFinch
      @TFinch 2 года назад +1

      I thought the same thing.... surely a bank that sharp at that speed would rip the aircraft to pieces. 🤷‍♂️ or at least be wasting his acceleration in a different direction

    • @dksl9899
      @dksl9899 2 года назад +1

      @@TFinch I re watched the movie, to be fair he only turns once around mach 9. At that speed, he may have needed to turn back in order to have fuel to return to base.

  • @jamesdelgado2009
    @jamesdelgado2009 2 года назад +3

    I just love the inside helmet lighting. The first time I remember seeing that was in the Colonial Vipers of Battlestar Galactica. What a great concept, shine light into the pilot's face!

    • @richardcorfield9926
      @richardcorfield9926 2 года назад

      It. must make it quite hard to act, as the actor would presumably see their own reflection in their helmet visor. (Is there a visor? I've not watched the film so wonder if they could leave that bit out and pretend it's there?).
      Of course it is to allow us the audience to see the actor's face in a situation where a normal helmet glass or even the shadow from the sides would obscure it.

  • @SackyX
    @SackyX 2 года назад +18

    There is a ton of CGI done in the movie. Pilot C.W. Lemoine interviewed a guy who worked on the movie in the CGI department and there are scenes that were done so well you just can't tell. They did a good job.

    • @freedonx
      @freedonx 2 года назад

      Actually you're wrong. Most of the movie was real. Of curse the actors didn't pilot the actual military planes. But the planes and scenes are real

    • @SackyX
      @SackyX 2 года назад +1

      @@freedonx Well according to the person that worked on the movie in the CGI department broke down all the scenes, what was real and what was fake. As an example the F-14 Tomcat was obviously fake as well as the Su-57 Felon. However there was plenty of scenes where they used real footage of aircraft flight scenes and composited them together to create a flight scene that never happened during filming.

    • @Harthorn
      @Harthorn 2 года назад +1

      SU-57 and F-14 was definitely not filmed in real-time, definitely CGI.
      You think Russia will just give SU-57 to fly for a film?!

    • @Pixel.Loving
      @Pixel.Loving 2 года назад +2

      People like to diss cgi and say it's bad but most of the time they are looking at great visual effects and they have no idea it's vfx. And then they see one bad vfx (probably because of budget or time constraints) and say 'omg cgi is terrible'. I do appreciate that they flew planes for real though, but for sure there is a lot of high end, well done visual effects hidden in the movie, as there are in most movies nowadays

    • @Harthorn
      @Harthorn 2 года назад

      @@Pixel.Loving yes, a combination of VFX and real vid captures.

  • @Treadstone7
    @Treadstone7 2 года назад +26

    I think the Darkstar scene would have been acted out better if they just told Maverick beforehand why he shouldn't go faster than Mach 10. In the movie it seemed more like an order and they didn't show that this order had an engineering background. Maybe if they told him why, he wouldn't have taken the risk. Although as a test pilot for hypersonic aircraft, you should know your physics...
    I also didn't know about the principle of a scramjet until now, that's why I was a bit confused during the movie when they said he should not go over Mach 10, not even a bit because I thought, well if the target is Mach 10 and you reach 10.2, even better, right ?
    But as I said, they didn't explain why.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +6

      Yeah if it were real they would've explained better for sure

    • @kombasanpracka
      @kombasanpracka 2 года назад +7

      But without that accident he wouldn't have ended up in that bar with his ex. They just needed to make a story to start with :)

    • @5133937
      @5133937 2 года назад +1

      @@kombasanpracka I think he would have still ended up in that bar even without the accident. The movie made clear he was ordered to Top Gun school because he was the only pilot who had actual combat experience in every aspect of the mission, and thus the only one who could actually teach it. That order would have happened regardless of the outcome with Darkstar.

    • @michaeltaylors2456
      @michaeltaylors2456 2 года назад +2

      The aircraft breaking up as it went beyond its design capability was how us stooopid popcorn munchers knew. The program was being cancelled, so why not be ballsy and get what you can get speed record wise with your one opportunity ?

    • @DavidHyman031
      @DavidHyman031 2 года назад +7

      If you are going mach 10 it's over 2 miles a second. I think if Maverick had an issue at Mach 10 they'd need an electron microscope to find what is left of his matter hitting the air at that speed. Other than that I thought the movie was great

  • @ChrisFranklin.2260
    @ChrisFranklin.2260 2 года назад +1

    There was actually a ton of CGI in the film. But also a ton of real flying. Even some of the basic shots of hornets in formation were CGI with only one real jet. Incredible film. Loved it so much

  • @SaeedAcronia
    @SaeedAcronia 2 года назад +5

    When you want to enroll in AE program, everyone tells you not too because of defense, career limitations, etc. But you do it anyway and that comes with a huge risk and a lot of sacrifice. The course is also heavily specialized to nurture aerospace engineers and it's extremely tough.
    Please don't get me wrong but I find it unfair that other majors also call themselves aerospace engineers without having gone through the pain.

  • @hellfire5108
    @hellfire5108 2 года назад +1

    Let me guess at the beginning. The movie is not totally accurate when it comes to aerospace engineering. What a surprise.

  • @philstuf
    @philstuf 2 года назад +9

    @0:32 Stopped at spoiler warning. Already liked though. As Arnold said in Terminator, "I'll be back." Props for putting in a spoiler warning... Closing this tab and going to hit your other videos.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      Thank you! Make sure you check it out while it's still in theaters! It's fantastic!

  • @krzysztofjarzyna3194
    @krzysztofjarzyna3194 2 года назад +4

    The Su-57 jets are not a threat to anyone - Russia has got only 4 of them (the 5th has already crashed). They had issues with engines, fire control units and radars. With the current situation - Russia is not going to complete these jets soon.

    • @Forgotten1
      @Forgotten1 2 года назад

      Also not true 5th Gen. I doubt they'll ever fly 🪰 and if they do it'll still won't be able to threaten the Raptor or F35. They may as well mothball them.

  • @MrFantastic23
    @MrFantastic23 2 года назад +7

    I know the Raptor was the 1st '5th Gen' and newer near peer '5th Gen' have 'super maneuverability' but the Raptor is no slouch as you did say slightly better. From my understanding it isn't just about BVR combat but also the US is not a fan of losing energy(kenetic and potential). They don't believe the benefits to doing some of these super maneuverable moves out weighs loss to the energy state. Or at least that's my understanding. So while the SU57 may do a lil more cool moves the Raptor will maintain more energy and that in its self is an advantage.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +2

      That's exactly correct. That's why the F-22 remains on the top of my list

    • @shibumi5210
      @shibumi5210 2 года назад +2

      A friend of mine in the industry said it best in the "us" and "them" debate about current tech Russian fighters... "Yeah, they make really pretty targets"... 😂

    • @PaulGuy
      @PaulGuy 2 года назад +1

      Yeah, coming to a stop to make a sharp turn seems like it just makes someone an easy target.

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад +1

      Well except the F-22 does also have super maneuverability. It has thrust vectoring and control vectoring that kind of don’t make it as maneuverable as the Su-57, but it’s damn close.

    • @MrFantastic23
      @MrFantastic23 2 года назад +2

      @@KneedsItsGat no doubt! My point was the Raptor has functional super maneuverability. Not just fancy air show stuff.

  • @anthonywilliamson5412
    @anthonywilliamson5412 2 года назад +1

    Anyone else amazed that Ed just stood there while the roof of the guard shack lifted up?

  • @coreymunroe8073
    @coreymunroe8073 2 года назад +5

    With regard to military bearing, when you are very very very good at what you do you can get away with pushing some boundaries. Especially when you get results. Maverick being that good of a pilot with real-world experience can get away with more. Plus he had Iceman acting as a sort of protector.

  • @Ihat-b2j
    @Ihat-b2j 2 года назад +19

    The most impressive thing for me about the Navy is, that they run the second largest Air Force in the world… off of boats
    Edit:grammar

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад

      Yeah it is pretty wild isn’t it. We really like our planes.

  • @spiritsofthedistilledkind3633
    @spiritsofthedistilledkind3633 2 года назад +3

    Having our 5 Gen fighters being detectable is different from being targeted. Different radar is used in targeting systems, it’s this that the F35 and F22 are good at evading.

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад

      Yeah it seems that people don’t really know how radar works. And that you can literally detect everything, but to specifically find and target something like an F-22 is close to impossible from certain distances. Like finding a needle in a haystack.

  • @davidbenton2510
    @davidbenton2510 2 года назад +1

    Oh my goodness at this comment section here. Let me clear some of this up if I may. The F-22 vector thrust up and down. The Russian SU-57 has vector nozzles that go in all directions. The stealth capability is higher on the F-22 because the SU-57 is mostly stealthy from the front nose on. As far as planes being flat on bottom for stealth, the F-117 Nighthawk was completely flat on the bottom that isn't new technology it has been around since the 1970's. The power to weight ratio on both of these planes are ridiculous and the fact they can vector thrust at all makes them highly maneuverable compared to a typical fighter like the F-18, F-15, F-14 and so on. Given that they are faster and more maneuverable (F-22, SU-57) they would be a complete mismatch for any fighter developed prior in a dog fight. I think both are very capable air crafts and with both Russia and US having High Off Bore Sight missiles this makes these fighters that much more effective in the air. As far as the movie, just from what I have read the human body can't withstand 10Gs of force so the movie isn't exactly accurate on that point. This is a great movie though absolutely loved it.

  • @verifiedfivesmedia
    @verifiedfivesmedia 2 года назад +7

    Great, video. Definitely like these types of videos! Keep it up!

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      Glad to hear it! If you haven't already, feel free to check out all my videos I've already made on the channel.

  • @peterjones6114
    @peterjones6114 2 года назад +1

    the only person who talks about mav bieng a test pilot thnks so much

  • @Chihi101
    @Chihi101 2 года назад +7

    The Darkstar could have been a whole film, but it's so cool that we only got the climax of that storyline. maybe the best opening of a film I've ever seen.
    Also, just wondering why the film didn't showcase their newest gear, apart from wanting more two seaters. I'm assuming the Navy/Air Force wouldn't want cameras or actors anywhere near an F-22 or F-35?

    • @Seanph25
      @Seanph25 2 года назад +5

      Yeah they weren’t allowed to show inside the cockpit in either the F-22 or the F-35 so they used the F-18 super hornet instead

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад +1

      @@Seanph25 yeah plus the Navy gave the go ahead to be able to use these F-18s in the movie. And there was no way they would’ve allowed them to use F-35s

  • @JustRedBed
    @JustRedBed Год назад +1

    If they program that drone damn good it will be better than humans

  • @Chieferd81
    @Chieferd81 2 года назад +3

    Love it from an engineering point of view. I work at GE Aviation and make several blades for this F404 Turbofan engine!

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      That's awesome. My dad used to work for them as well!

  • @kevinh5349
    @kevinh5349 2 года назад +2

    The two most unbelievable aspects of the movie were - they all, lieutenants to admirals, had about 2 more rows of ribbons than they would have had in real life, and, especially, the way Mav took jets whenever it suited him. First of all the prep work in getting one of those things in the air, and the number of people involved means it couldn't happen, and if perchance it did, he'd do it one time and be tossed out on his fanny. Oh, well, that's "dramatic license" in action.

    • @woodiemarv
      @woodiemarv 2 года назад +1

      Would not be Maverick without breaking rules. We all know no military would tolerate it but looks good in a movie

  • @smeminem1258
    @smeminem1258 2 года назад +5

    anybody else think the supermaneuverability thing was really cool but also super goofy looking, like it just randomly twirl in the air then pops right back into the fight

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +4

      It almost looks fake on camera. I think it looks cooler in person.

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад +1

      Yeah it’s definitely real though lol. And the F-22 can actually do almost the same thing.

  • @arcaipekyun4232
    @arcaipekyun4232 2 года назад +2

    10:40 there is another reason.
    USA has studied supermaneuverability with 3 aircraft, modified versions of F-16 (the VISTA) F-15 (ACTIVE) and F-18 (HARV) and it was achieved on these research vehicles.
    They found that, while these modified versions managed supermaneuverability well, it wouldn’t be as helpful in a dogfight too. (Not only BVR.)
    USA prioritized energy conservation. Supermaneuverability looks cool and all, but bleeds of energy like crazy. USA point of view is that after doing a move like a Cobra, you’re basically frozen mid air, sitting like a duck. The enemy jet can just easily turn and blast it out of the sky.
    Supermaneuverability can maybe help as the fight continues on, and the energies (speeds) of both jets have dropped, along with their altitudes. So basically a low altitude (deck level) and low speed combat. Jets without supermaneuverability will require at least some speed to be able to turn well. Supermaneuverability will then enhance nose authority and may bring victory in that type of a fight.
    But the idea again is that the fight could just end before that point, especially with missiles like AIM-9X.
    Also;
    13:30 man that’s injustice against the Viper :(
    Viper should at least be much closer to F-35.

  • @jimmychu7917
    @jimmychu7917 2 года назад +3

    Liked subbed and downloaded. Crazy I've never seen your videos before considering how much aviation themed content I watch on RUclips. Looks like the algorithm blessed you on this one!😊 I'm going through the rest of your uploads now, looking forward to this binge.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      It's been a long time coming. Seems like people are just starting to find me! Thanks for sub and enjoy the binge! Forgive me for my earlier videos!😅

  • @naroon5455
    @naroon5455 2 года назад

    An elderly skunk works engineer called a radio station and said the classified top speed of the SR-71 was just over mach 14. The higher it went, the faster it went due to a decrease in drag, but also, the higher you go, the faster you HAVE to go in order to feed the engines.
    I wanna know what we replaced the SR-71 with. Seismic stations have picked up sonic booms from something traveling MUCH faster.

  • @desborneoneil2375
    @desborneoneil2375 2 года назад +5

    This is a very good engineering review of the Top Gun Maverick movie. There is an older movie called "Stealth" starring Jamie Fox, Josh Lucas, and Jessica Biel. In this movie the question of having a UCAV in the military is explored. I would love to see you put your engineering mind on this movie, if you have not done so before. Cheers Bro.

  • @AugmentedGravity
    @AugmentedGravity 2 года назад +1

    Saying Skunk Works has a long history of making incredibly advanced aerospace technologies is almost not doing it enough justice. I cannot express enough how much Lockheed Skunk Works has contributed to aerospace development and other technologies for that matter. They don’t just make very advanced products, they are absolutely cutting edge and set the bar for everything else to come. Their CV with things like the SR-71, F-117, F-22 and F-35, there is absolutely no one else in the world that come even close. I was so frikkin excited when i saw the skunk on the joystick and vertical stabiliser. Absolutely beautiful to see this in the movie.

  • @5133937
    @5133937 2 года назад +19

    _"There's pretty much no way he's walking away from this stunt of his with his wings."_
    Or his life, I would argue. There's no way a pilot would survive a Mach 10 breakup and disintegration like he did, much less walk away from it. That's like the Space Shuttle Columbia breakup and disintegration. There's no safety cage or capsule or anything that survives that.

    • @broncoteno7181
      @broncoteno7181 2 года назад +2

      This is the fact i was hoping this video would make

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +3

      Well some modern rockets have abort procedures for any stage of the mission, so theoretically there could be a capsule that he could escape from. But the way it was depicted in the film, you're right. Not going to happen

    • @anuvisraa5786
      @anuvisraa5786 2 года назад +1

      @@AviationAustin
      something like the b58 ejection pod

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      Yeah something like that.

    • @fighteer1
      @fighteer1 2 года назад +3

      I wanted someone to point this out because it was one of my own first thoughts. A Mach 10.3 breakup is unsurvivable. Yes, Maverick should have been stripped of his wings and possibly imprisoned for destroying the aircraft, but they’d have to prosecute a diffuse cloud of human ash.
      A rocket going that fast on ascent is already out of most of the atmosphere, so if the crew is in a reentry capsule that performs an escape maneuver they might survive, but ejection seats and parachutes are worse than useless.

  • @dotsmassacre
    @dotsmassacre 2 года назад +1

    The predominant doctrinal consideration relating to unmanned is filling airspace. I don't think there is anybody who honestly believes that unmanned aircraft in any decision-making role have the same acute inferential judgement that a human being on station has. But from a pivot and manoeuvre standpoint more planes and ostensibly more radar negatives gives every manned craft at least a 200% survivability boost in direct aerial combat, providing that your unmanned craft are sufficiently well capable of support and defend.

  • @TURTLE32092
    @TURTLE32092 2 года назад +3

    Great analysis and break down as always Austin!

  • @jolicska
    @jolicska 2 года назад +2

    In a documentary of the SR-71 was mentioned that no pilot survives ejection at hypersonic speed. in fact ejection at supersonic speed if you survive will take you to hospital with broken bones and haematomas like experiencing high speed carcash. So the movie was bollocks. Thanks for this great video

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      No problem. Theoretically if there was an escape capsule then he may have survived. But definitely not from a traditional ejection seat.

  • @Psychotol
    @Psychotol 2 года назад +4

    One vulnerability I see with RPA is the datacomms, and as much as I think it vanishignly unlikely fully (I caveat "fully" to try to exclude most guided missiles) autonimous weapons would go full skynet, I do think any autonimous systems would be an insane liability just from how it could fuck up on a day to day basis. Going against near peers, I don't think we can do without in person piloting.

    • @reaganharder1480
      @reaganharder1480 2 года назад

      Honestly I wouldn't be worried about a skynet situation, but for the amount of times self driving cars have driven into highway dividers or pedestrians or deer or any number of other things they're supposed to avoid, I would not trust an AI controlled combat vehicle, especially if it's AI controlled for the express purpose of being more effective than human piloted vehicles. I think it could be useful in a situation where most of the controls are AI and it requires human authentication to confirm targets before it fires, so either wingman or remote link to AWACS type situation.

  • @ericwilkinson9447
    @ericwilkinson9447 2 года назад +2

    Awesome.. so glad I found this channel.. I gotta tell my buddies about it.. we're all into Jets and the history

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      I appreciate the recommendation! Welcome!

  • @jimr7154
    @jimr7154 2 года назад +17

    Thanks for the review
    Movie was simply awesome
    Great flying scenes and I do believe the Darkstar exists
    When they retired the SR 71 I was sure it’s had been replaced by another aircraft either manned or unmanned
    Satellite technology is great to a point but you can’t replace real time intelligence like obtained through an airplane like SR71 or Darkstar
    Takes time to reposition satellites and orbit are predictable where as an aircraft can be in your airspace at anytime
    Just my 2 cents
    If it doesn’t exist, boy O boy
    It should 👍

    • @DannyPhilipsen
      @DannyPhilipsen 2 года назад +1

      The Darkstar was built specifically for the movie by Skunkworks, and it was based on the SR-71. One prototype exists, which is the one you see in the movie

    • @edwinlongwell
      @edwinlongwell 2 года назад

      @@DannyPhilipsen the SR-72 “dark star” is a UAV reconnaissance plane supposedly in development by LM. The plane that reportedly replaced the SR-71 was “Aurora”. It seems to be mostly conspiracy theory at this point. But the USAF kept the F-117 secret for a long time.
      Also, it’s been reported that the Darkstar movie prop put the fear of god into the Russians and Chinese.

    • @DannyPhilipsen
      @DannyPhilipsen 2 года назад

      @@edwinlongwell I did some more digging, and you are correct

    • @nicoleskorupsky1007
      @nicoleskorupsky1007 2 года назад

      I think if they did decide to make the “Darkstar” a real thing they wouldn’t use humans they would most definitely just make AI technology and the jet would be its own pilot. And I’m more than sure that they wouldn’t use Tom Cruise to test those even after him having a shit ton of flight licenses.

    • @terrylandess6072
      @terrylandess6072 2 года назад

      Watching videos on 'declassified' information is enough to realize people CAN keep a secret.

  • @danielleriley2796
    @danielleriley2796 2 года назад

    At 3:50 are you saying that the SR71 had a ramjet as well as it’s turbine?
    That spike is there to adjust where the shock wave was so supersonic airflow didn’t enter the engine. If it did the engine preformed an ‘unstart’ and the airflow tried to flow in reverse. There was only one engine a turbine engine and it had two turbine engines.

  • @bryanrussell6679
    @bryanrussell6679 2 года назад +4

    I think realistically the Su-57 has very limited stealth capabilities as well.

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад

      Yeah it does, not a stealthy as the F-22 or F-35.

  • @catthewondahokulea6515
    @catthewondahokulea6515 2 года назад +2

    Ok going into Aircraft Mechanic school, would like videos on understanding how to do the math, read the manuals of civilian or commercial aircraft. To me a Aerospace Engineer explaining why fixing an aircraft in a particular manner is good for the aircraft and safety. I would even take you explaining the "FAA-H-8083-31A, Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook-Airframe Volume 1" and manuals because no one really breaks down the concepts.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      You're asking the wrong person. 😬 If you ask any mechanic they'll tell engineers cant fix anything 😂 your best bet is going to be finding an experience aircraft mechanic to help you. I could do the math or teach how to read engineer but those wouldn't be good videos. Good luck!

  • @pops55650
    @pops55650 2 года назад +4

    I really enjoyed this movie, a pretty good trench run on the DeathSt- I mean enemy weapons plant. Tim Cruise is the man and I’m glad Val Kilmer was included, a great actor even after his real life throat cancer

    • @terrylandess6072
      @terrylandess6072 2 года назад

      Yesssss. Capt. Kirk-- I mean Maverick didn't want to give up the chair did he?

  • @WhosRonnyy
    @WhosRonnyy 2 года назад +2

    Depends on how you out we haven’t implemented super maneuverability. Our current F-22 Raptors are equipped with vertical vectoring nozzles, just not all around vertical and horizontal such as the Su-57. So we can still preform high AOA maneuvers.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      Yes I'd say the F-22 and F-35 do have some supermaverability capabilities. But that decidedly not the focus of the aircraft's design.

    • @WhosRonnyy
      @WhosRonnyy 2 года назад

      @@AviationAustin 100% Agreed

    • @Scheiseposter
      @Scheiseposter 2 года назад +1

      Also, Russia doesn't have any meaningful number of SU-57, or means to make enough of them in short enough time.

    • @ivanlagrossemoule
      @ivanlagrossemoule 2 года назад

      ​@Truth Be Told Russia has lost over 50 combat aircraft in Ukraine and have not suppressed Ukrainian air defenses nor established air superiority. They absolutely need 5th generation aircraft and are paying a heavy price for having nothing better than a couple Su-57s. And they definitely are bombing targets in Ukraine so they definitely need them.
      Also your understanding of air defenses is terrible. They deny an airspace, they can't establish air superiority. Russia is losing air defenses to old HARM missiles rigged to MiG-29s, and you're delusional enough to think they'd be able to go against actual 5th generation aircraft without taking massive losses.
      I never thought I'd still see this delusional trash after Russia's performance in Ukraine lmao

  • @JinKee
    @JinKee 2 года назад +5

    5:30 instead of two engines which can cause thrust asymmetry, why not wrap the aircraft around one giant engine? That way if you get an engine flame out you just become a glider.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +5

      Usually this is done for redundancy. If you loose an engine you can still fly semi-normally, unless you're going mach 10 😅

    • @jaredharris1970
      @jaredharris1970 2 года назад +1

      @@AviationAustin but won’t having one engine out throw it’s thrust off balance

    • @tobymaltby6036
      @tobymaltby6036 2 года назад +2

      Or, in the case of an F104 ... a "tent-peg" ...

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +3

      It will, but the pilot can trim the airplane to compensate.

    • @gregbarnes4083
      @gregbarnes4083 2 года назад +3

      Also having one giant scramjet engine would be problematic as combustion oscillations could cause a flame out as they disturb the supersonic airflow in a larger combustion chamber

  • @sid35gb
    @sid35gb 2 года назад +2

    As for drones the logical use is higher risk missions where a pilot could be lost. Also stealth swarming attacks would be a useful option to have where the stealth could be switched off at an appropriate time to draw interceptor aircraft and AA fire away from manned craft as part of an air defence suppression operation.

  • @Leester-rx8rs
    @Leester-rx8rs 2 года назад +3

    Now I’m kinda curious what your thoughts would be on the fictional super planes from the Ace Combat franchise like the ADFX-01 Morgan, XFA-27, or maybe even the CF-44 Nosferatu or X-49 Night Raven

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +4

      I'm considering ranking those, but there are so many production aircraft out there I'd almost feel it is a disservice to put them against fake ones.

  • @michaelboydston9668
    @michaelboydston9668 2 года назад +1

    I’m proud to say I make engine parts for some of these military aircraft. Been doing this for over 11 years now.

    • @techphile3262
      @techphile3262 6 месяцев назад +1

      Can u recommend any book for beginners who want to make jet engines for military air craft and propulsion

  • @johannesbiber2616
    @johannesbiber2616 2 года назад +10

    hey, loved the video! If you're looking for more stuff to do reaction videos about, I'd like to recommend the Expanse - I know it's a TV show with 6 seasons, but it has so many cool details about spacetravel and combat and an overall great story (even though it starts off slow), I think you would really enjoy that.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +2

      I might check it out. What's it on?

    • @johannesbiber2616
      @johannesbiber2616 2 года назад +2

      @@AviationAustin Prime Video. Have fun, it's one of the best, if not the best scifi shows i've ever watched :D

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +4

      Wow high praise. You've definitely peaked my interest.

    • @johannesbiber2616
      @johannesbiber2616 2 года назад +1

      @@AviationAustin what can i say, I'm a fan ;)

    • @ilike2watch66
      @ilike2watch66 2 года назад +1

      @Aviation Austin It got an 8.4/10 on IMDb...so, I’ll 2nd that. It’s the best science fiction space show I’ve seen where the concepts make total sense. At least to me..lol
      It’s got a huge following, I’m sure a handful of people would enjoy hearing your opinion on it..
      Keep making videos man, they’re insightful and enjoyable!

  • @hrhamada1982
    @hrhamada1982 2 года назад

    I really love when the green wrinkly dude tells the young pilot not to think, when they go down the trench of the deathstar to shoot the vent and when the Millenium Falcoln appears out of nowhere to save our heroes

  • @gregorymaupin6388
    @gregorymaupin6388 2 года назад +3

    Drones have their place but we’re years away from taking men out of the aircraft.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +2

      I'm inclined to agree with your assessment.

    • @rsrt6910
      @rsrt6910 2 года назад

      No we're not, all you have to do is lift the canopy and climb down the stairs.

  • @LostAnFound
    @LostAnFound 2 года назад +2

    One of the coolest things I recently learned about the SR-71 is that the nacelle was an advanced plastic. This may not sound like a big deal, but it was designed in the late 1950s!
    Amazing

  • @fahdkhan6780
    @fahdkhan6780 2 года назад +5

    Awesome video. I don't agree with your score for Su 57. but honestly the video was awesome 👌🏾

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад

      Glad you enjoyed it! It will be interesting to see how it stacks up as the rankings continue

  • @Geeksmithing
    @Geeksmithing 2 года назад +1

    The E-2 was the greatest cameo in cinema history.

  • @kennethfharkin
    @kennethfharkin 2 года назад +4

    It is interesting to continually have the Pentagon devalue close range maneuverability for speed and beyond visual range engagement... only to repeatedly be put our forces into scenarios requiring visual confirmation for engagement. When dealing with no fly zones, warzones, naval exclusion zones, and a host of neighboring regions not in conflict with a host of both civilian and allied aircraft not always readily identified electronically the concept of shooting from 30+ miles away becomes nonsensical as all those inherent advantages are dissolved by real world rules of engagement.
    Amazingly the F-14 was an excellent platform for just such scenarios due to the high magnification camera system which allowed the RIO to zoom in and identify aircraft from well outside normal visual range.
    Pissing on concepts like supermaneuvrability while at the same time putting your pilots into engagement scenarios where just such capabilities become critical is the epitome of swivel chair short sightedness.
    I also appreciated the nod to reconfigurable engines to transition to higher mach numbers and agree, continuing to push past the envelope for that test, especially after the numerous temperature warnings began to sound, was a complete Hollywood moment.
    Seeing the old F-14 back was a nice nod and of course this had to be "not Iran" as that is the only nation still flying them. Having Maverick have to start the bird from the ground cart at least remotely connected this other Hollywood moment to reality. I got a kick out of his reaction to entering the cockpit with the mass of analog controls and dials. I think he said something along the lines "It has been a hot minute" upon being confronted with the panel. Rooster's response was even more entertaining as an aviator having been raised entirely in the next generation of aircraft.
    It is nice to see a series of videos with an informed opinion on these matters. BS Aerospace Engineering ERAU 1992.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +2

      That's a great point about the rules of engagement crippling the same BVR capabilities we like to tout. It will be interesting to see if/ how those policies would change if the US were to enter a conflict with a near peer force.
      Glad you enjoyed the video!

    • @pkmanley50
      @pkmanley50 2 года назад +1

      Thanks for raising ROE impact on combat effectiveness. Very frustrating to see the risk it adds to our warriors.

  • @reaganharder1480
    @reaganharder1480 2 года назад +1

    I'm not an engineer, but I am a nerd, and there was one detail that did bug me. The SAM sites were stated to be radar guided, but then when actually engaged by them, the F18s used flares as a countermeasure. Flares are for heatseeking missiles. To counter radar you need chaff.
    But otherwise... The darkstar bit was great. Loved the detail of it being a skunkworks project, and the fact that it crashed when Maverick flew it beyond it's design capabilities... I was a little annoyed that they were going to run it up to Mach 10 before even testing at Mach 9, but given the gravity of the situation I could understand it. But pushing beyond that... Maverick is an idiot, simple as that.

    • @zidniafifamani2378
      @zidniafifamani2378 2 года назад

      Aren't the countermeasures usually contain chaff that are integrated into the flare which also created absolutely lousy radar signature? I mean while their size is extremely small they're also only need to create few seconds distractions

    • @reaganharder1480
      @reaganharder1480 2 года назад

      @@zidniafifamani2378 that level of detail i'm not sure. You are right about only needing a few moments of distraction though

  • @wozmac771
    @wozmac771 2 года назад +10

    Maverick has been lucky, he had one of his colleagues and friends and former rival looking out for him in the boardrooms. Glad they made it very obvious in the movie. Shows the value of faith in someone's capabilities and friendship.

    • @fighteer1
      @fighteer1 2 года назад

      It shows an egregious case of an unfit pilot being shielded from the consequences of their actions by a friend in a high ranking position. I wish I could say this was unrealistic.

    • @wozmac771
      @wozmac771 2 года назад +5

      @@fighteer1 If he was an unfit pilot, he would not have been able to be a test pilot. I would agree, he went against the grain. He was testing the limits of everyting including human constructs i.e., orders and military ranks and technology. If we study history, the unfit people had been the reason for the world's development. Some become so popular and powerful that their negatives are considered positives.

    • @dallasyap3064
      @dallasyap3064 2 года назад

      @@fighteer1 He wasn't unfit. It's just sometimes his character makes him wanna do more or just try to have fun and not always follow strict orders. Commander of US Pacific Fleet (4-star rank) has huge authority, both administrative and operational, to do many things. So it's not exactly totally unrealistic.

  • @joaovitorsilvagohl682
    @joaovitorsilvagohl682 2 года назад +1

    Aparently russia is still making the flight manual/doctrine for the Su-57. They also are being conservative with production because they don't want to use the Al41 but the new engine that is going to enter service next year.

  • @aiestef
    @aiestef 2 года назад +19

    I watched TG:Maverick in cinemas twice, and both times I went "woots!" when the SU-57 suddenly "pulled up" mid-flight. Uh-ma-zing to see.
    I'm an aspiring aerospace engineer, currently in my 2nd year Bachelors in Aerospace Systems. Loved coming across your video & channel! I've always been a civil aviation geek, but watching TG:M (and this video!) is making me really consider charting a career path for military aviation.
    Anyway, great review, @Aviation Austin! 😁

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      Glad you are enjoying the channel! Thanks!

  • @bshinn4884
    @bshinn4884 2 года назад +1

    I remember back in 01 working at Boeing when several aviation companies were fighting for the JSF contract (became the F35) and watching some test vids of Boeings entry, which had super maneuverability. Was crazy watching some of the maneuvers in those videos. And that was in 2001

  • @homesteadishdad
    @homesteadishdad 2 года назад +4

    Finally saw Top Gun last night at it was incredible. Also, it is super cool to see something I've worked on in your video. Thanks for the content!

  • @juncearyoutube3336
    @juncearyoutube3336 2 года назад

    I think at over Mach 10, you can have a problem anywhere in the fuselage, it doesnt have to be a flame out, and at those speeds, you don't "spin" you deviate slightly from your meant path and your aircraft desintegrates.

  • @japhethpatterson5901
    @japhethpatterson5901 2 года назад +5

    Are we just going to ignore the ridiculous turn that he takes at 4:59 at Mach 10? That turn is way to tight. The G's would be astronomical and the aircraft is likely not built for that acceleration.
    Great video though! I really enjoyed it :)

    • @DjisasXIII
      @DjisasXIII 2 года назад +3

      Most everything in that bird would not sustain mach 10, not even the pilot...
      The SR-71 needed miles to turn safely...

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      Thank you yeah, that was just done cause it looked pretty

  • @walterhernandez1768
    @walterhernandez1768 2 года назад

    Scram jet, by definition, cannot create thrust because there is no compressibility at the inlet diffuser. It’s not that it can’t get up to speed, it cannot move. The scram jet engines usually have solid propellant, and when the compressibility from the forming shocks kick in, that’s when scram jet takes over.

  • @Eric-zf6gm
    @Eric-zf6gm 2 года назад +4

    What I tell everyone, being in this industry. The Air Force and the Navy are mostly run by pilots, if not completely... Pilots live to fly... There is no way that we will ever have a pilotless Air Force or Navy while this is the case. Furthermore, I can tell simply by looking at the SU-57 that it is not completely stealthy. It would be a terrible look for the Russians if they were to lose a SU-57 in Ukraine hence why I think you'll never see one there unless they become desperate. And I agree with you. I believe very few of these aircraft actually exist. I'd venture to guess that all of the operational copies were destroyed by Maverick and his wingmen... :-D

    • @KneedsItsGat
      @KneedsItsGat 2 года назад

      Yeah I’m pretty sure they have around 6 Su-57s. And yeah the Su-57 has a lot of stealthy downfalls, such as the thrusters they use.

  • @EJL2004
    @EJL2004 2 года назад +1

    This makes my top 10 favourite movie list now. My assignment today in Navigation systems and Instruments (Master level) class is to provide a detailed presentation on how we as humans are irrelevant and Autonomous ships are here to replace us as seafarers. So to me the Darkstar scene is huge.

  • @mannywatson638
    @mannywatson638 2 года назад +6

    Wow, great video (first time viewer). Darkstar.....Skunk Works has been in the fight for a long time and is capable. Hopefully, they have lots of goodies nestled away in those underground bases in California, Arizona, and Nevada. That being said Darkstar/Red October could be seen as a first strike weapon by Russia and China.

    • @AviationAustin
      @AviationAustin  2 года назад +1

      Thanks! Feel free to check out my library of other content as well. Yeah probably not a great idea to fly them near Russia and China.

  • @eeiko321
    @eeiko321 2 года назад

    When that hypersonic jet flew past, causing the roof on the dwelling to lift and shifting that large SUV, the Admiral stood still, just shows how hard and tough of a man he is 😂

  • @EXTRANCE396
    @EXTRANCE396 2 года назад +8

    Please make a reaction any movie genre about technology that relates to your channel. Thank i love it 😍

  • @ObamanableSnowman
    @ObamanableSnowman 2 года назад

    One thing about air breathing vehicles is they can typically travel faster with a higher energy to weight ratio. The O2 from the air saves weight instead of having to store an oxidizer as fuel.

  • @penksvubalam3977
    @penksvubalam3977 2 года назад +5

    lt had been long time to see u, love from india.

  • @ImInLoveWithBulla
    @ImInLoveWithBulla 2 года назад +2

    The whole movie could have been handled with an ICBM. But then we wouldn’t have gotten one of the coolest climax scenes in movie history. That whole mission had me squealing.

  • @Righteous628
    @Righteous628 2 года назад +3

    I cried when Maverick thanked Rooster for saving his life.
    There were so many awesome scenes and I enjoyed all the flashbacks and the scenes that used lines from the first movie.
    The fact that Tom Cruise made sure Val Kilmer was in the movie speaks to how awesome he is.
    I hope this Movie grosses 2 Billion.
    It's that Good 👍