The HUGE American Ekranoplan that was ALMOST built...

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
  • Start speaking a new language in 3 weeks with Babbel 🎉 Get up to 65% OFF your subscription ▶️ HERE: go.babbel.com/...
    NEW CHANNEL:
    • Launched from the bigg...
    Discord: / discord
    My News Channel: / @aviationstationyt
    Join this channel to get access to perks:
    / @foundandexplained
    Patreon:
    / foundandexplained
    Get the 3d model here: www.artstation...

Комментарии • 506

  • @piccoloatburgerking
    @piccoloatburgerking 2 года назад +310

    I always kinda wanted to live in a world where ekranoplans became the norm or at least widely implemented ever since i learned about these behemoths. I know there are tons of technical problem in actually attempting that but just imagine, a giant nuclear powered ekranoplan built according to modern or even futuristic technology just flying across the ocean without a care in the world. I've always had a fascination for extremely large machines of all kinds so the mental image of such a scene feels really amazing to me.

    • @vgames1543
      @vgames1543 2 года назад +3

      Somewhen...

    • @The_Raydinator_2008
      @The_Raydinator_2008 2 года назад +21

      Same here, except with Zeppelins

    • @Pete...NoNotThatOne
      @Pete...NoNotThatOne 2 года назад +3

      Not a care in the world. Not even that ship that’s coming up…

    • @doankhang9496
      @doankhang9496 2 года назад +3

      I want the giant flying boat like the Saunders-roe queen to be the future

    • @onlygaming69
      @onlygaming69 2 года назад +4

      But they need to design a hallway down the wings with rooms in each end that would be so cool to basically sit on the wing and watch the "plane fly"

  • @rodrigonogueiramota4433
    @rodrigonogueiramota4433 2 года назад +90

    "It has enough seat for thousands"
    Ryanair: we will seat MILLIONS

  • @nucflashevent
    @nucflashevent 2 года назад +101

    Speaking of the ability to fly at 10K feet, this is a capability that would likely never be used in general operation **but** needs to be able to do sense quite simply the ocean surface may not always be in a condition that allows for safe skimming in ground effect mode (storms, etc.) It also allows for the ability to hop over land between bodies of water so as to not limit your range...one example I could see would be flying over the Atlantic Ocean, climbing to 10K for a hop over the northeastern US and landing in the Great Lakes, etc.

    • @ChessMasterNate
      @ChessMasterNate 2 года назад +7

      Does not matter. They can just land on the water and wait for the weather to clear. It is big enough, and sealed, to withstand a few waves.

    • @nucflashevent
      @nucflashevent 2 года назад +21

      @@ChessMasterNate Yes but if you're actually flying on a schedule...getting paid per trip...you don't *want* to "land and wait"...you want to be able to always operate even when it's raining, lol.

    • @ChessMasterNate
      @ChessMasterNate 2 года назад +7

      @@nucflashevent The whole point of an ekranoplan is to be able to carry stuff that is much heavier than a regular airplane of similar size can carry, but using a similar amount of fuel. I think the customers would be less pleased if you dumped their cargo into the ocean, so you could fly over the storm.
      And likely it would have to be a very gusty storm, to requite putting down. The rain itself should be no issue.
      With AI and elaborate sensors, it may even be possible to fly through the worst weather. Though, you probably don't want to do that with 2,000 barfing, terrified passengers. It would have to be freight, for that fun.

    • @profo4544
      @profo4544 2 года назад +6

      @@ChessMasterNate Lightning strikes are still a issue and would be for a giant thing like that, a lightning strike would almost 100% hit it all the time if it flew directly thru storms. A plane exploded in the 70s from a lightning strike. Planes nowadays can take them, but they try there ass off to avoid them, you can bet that. Only like 1-2 a year get hit, and usually nothing happens, major. But theres almost always blown fuses and small things that get effected, on something this massive idk how well its designed to dissipate a lightning strike, and if u get a loss of thrust on one side or happen to plummet into those waves, thats a huge huge loss thats like a cruise ship crashing suddenly, thats like 9/11 happening in 2 seconds. Not good. Until we have engines that can effective and efficiently lift us off the ground, like anti grav or something, its the ground that makes these ground effect vehicles dangerous in the first place.

    • @michaelmartinez1345
      @michaelmartinez1345 2 года назад +2

      @nucflashevent , as easy and simple as that appears to be, not necessarily easy to actually do.. 1) I takes a LOT of power and lift to be able to ascend from the water in any flying sea vessel... Even if it is already skimming along, to get that huge monster to break the ground effects it is riding on and ascend, might not be possible because of the weight, and lack of power & lift... 2) All commercial flights have assigned routes, flight altitude profiles and speeds at which they operate, to avoid mid-air collisions... Even if they could get off of the top of the ocean and be able to fly around or over the storm, ATC would have to be able to assign them another route to them that they never had, during a mid-flight movement... By the time ATC can clear a route for them, they might already be caught in the middle of the storm...

  • @atanasvasilev3228
    @atanasvasilev3228 2 года назад +34

    Its worth noting that 63 C17s can carry 4 times less cargo than 12 Aerocons. Money wise sounds like a decent deal.

    • @davespin9034
      @davespin9034 7 месяцев назад +1

      I was thinking the same 👍

  • @zangryomani1257
    @zangryomani1257 2 года назад +110

    "So, he could design a viable American version"
    Also, him: *Crams an entire ass city into airplane*

    • @DundG
      @DundG 2 года назад +3

      Not airplane, ecranoplan. For ecranoplans, the bigger, the more efficient. So bigger = better!

    • @zangryomani1257
      @zangryomani1257 2 года назад

      @@DundG r/whoosh

    • @zyoungson215
      @zyoungson215 Год назад

      Just put a McDonalds in there and it will sellout every trip

    • @wnose
      @wnose 7 месяцев назад

      Since it floats, it's more like a boat. And 1627 tons for a boat is very light.

  • @casey6104
    @casey6104 2 года назад +49

    Interesting to note, this vehicle actually has the range to travel from Washington DC to pretty much anywhere in the world (except for a small portion of Australia).

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 2 года назад +3

      Well.. in theory.... not in reality. The issue is that it only have that range in ground effect mode. If its in full flight, the range is reduced drastically.
      So while it can sort of "jump" over places like panama where the range in flight would be fairly short. Jumping over a whole continent would eat into the range significantly.

    • @casey6104
      @casey6104 2 года назад +3

      @@matsv201 I actually considered this exact same thought. The fact that this vehicle had a flight ceiling of 4,000 M is the thing that makes me question just how theoretical this range is. I would imagine that if a vehicle like this can achieve 4,000M of altitude, I would imagine that both the upwards and downwards glide planes would be extremely long. In terms of range, if these vehicles were used in a manner similar to how pan am operated commercial flights, these planes could basically reach everywhere in the world. Theoretically these vehicles could fly over land just as well as they do over water.
      Just like the designer of this plane, I actually have a similar acknowledgement of the extreme potential of the ekroplane concept- to the point where I actually left a reminder to myself to further study them. One of the things I wonder is if whether or not you could use these as large logistical transports because these vehicles could potentially utilize things like the US Interstate as sort of travel lanes. The especially interesting part for me would be how the hotter air from the pavement and vehicle exhaust could actually potentially increase the strength of the ground effect, similar to how birds ride thermals. Though this could also be the opposite as well, seeing as how ground effect utilizes air compression and hotter air would be less dense.

    • @Menelutorex
      @Menelutorex Год назад

      hahahaa
      making predictions on non existing stuff, which are only on paper xD
      A estimate range on 500 000km vecouse i can :P

    • @casey6104
      @casey6104 Год назад

      @@Menelutorex I mean look at the super heavy dump trucks. With a vehicle like this, size only adds capability. That range is possible if you make it nuclear powered. It’s only theoretical because this concept has only been physically evaluated from a military perspective.

    • @taurussho86
      @taurussho86 7 месяцев назад

      Yes, all with 50 times the fuel

  • @captain_commenter8796
    @captain_commenter8796 2 года назад +202

    What were the engineers on in the 80s, *and where can I get some?*

    • @edwardfletcher7790
      @edwardfletcher7790 2 года назад +8

      In this case, I'd suggest the designer suffered from the Dunning Kruger effect !

    • @26th_Primarch
      @26th_Primarch 2 года назад +23

      Cocaine is a hell of a drug

    • @spaceout2520
      @spaceout2520 2 года назад +15

      It’s called US military budget

    • @The_Raydinator_2008
      @The_Raydinator_2008 2 года назад +14

      It’s called left-over WW2 German Scientists from “Operation Paperclip”

    • @rolflandale2565
      @rolflandale2565 2 года назад +2

      It would be more cost effection, to use the modern Airbus model engines, only the intake would require pivot upward, versus other natural flying obsticals

  • @Allan_aka_RocKITEman
    @Allan_aka_RocKITEman Год назад +8

    (1) I never knew the US considered a vehicle like this before now.
    (2) I think the name _"Caspian Sea Monster"_ is SO COOL...😊

  • @venusiancreative1774
    @venusiancreative1774 2 года назад +19

    This concept is insane! I wish the designer had worked on a smaller version to start out and then later on we could have this wingship!

  • @captain_commenter8796
    @captain_commenter8796 2 года назад +32

    Engineers in the 70-80s: BIGGER IS BETTER

    • @Counter-snake
      @Counter-snake 2 года назад +4

      they were half right!

    • @alexanderweigand6758
      @alexanderweigand6758 5 месяцев назад

      That is not so wrong.
      At least in this case.
      Less problems with huge waves.

  • @t3h51d3w1nd3r
    @t3h51d3w1nd3r 2 года назад +28

    Imagine a cruise liner version, it would be brilliant for coastal and island trips. The entertainment on board would be amazing, imagine playing basketball or football at 400 mph, lol

    • @itswindyyy
      @itswindyyy 8 месяцев назад

      I know momentum exists, but I feel like that speed would slightly change the trajectory of balls

  • @ColdWarAviator
    @ColdWarAviator 2 года назад +13

    It's a shame that ARPA recommended against funding the project... This thing would have become a legend! The breakdown at the end said it all though: based on the dollar amount they estimated, they could get so many C-5 cargo aircraft that it wouldn't make sense financially... And the C-5 is incredible... We used to load up a few helicopters, several trucks, all of our personal gear, and the take the whole Air Cavalry squadron upstairs to our seats and try to get comfortable. But that's the problem....I think they grossly overestimated what each of these monsters would cost! General officers in the military, as well as politicians are notorious for favoring time tested, proven technologies over new, untested things, and this is another example of the decision makers being afraid to pull the trigger.

  • @CarloDavid
    @CarloDavid 2 года назад +60

    One of the reasons for the unviability of Ekranoplans was the exhausting amount of concentration demanded from its pilots over long periods of time. Small errors in pitch could send the craft plunging into the water, nose first. An accident involving a craft plunging into the water at that speed would not be survivable.

    • @Hazan12345
      @Hazan12345 2 года назад +30

      But modern day computer technology can handle that in place of its pilots

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +15

      yes, by `1970s technology.
      Tiny RC foam GEVs do it with LIDAR today.

    • @secondsein7749
      @secondsein7749 2 года назад +9

      @@Hazan12345 the problem is that it would need to be functional all the time it is in flight. If it suddenly get turned off for whatever reason and the weather is bad, the pilot likely won't have time to get control and the worst happen.
      Compare to planes where the autopilot doesn't need to be functional all the time. If it gets turned off mid-flight, the pilot would have ample time for manual control.

    • @borabingol6797
      @borabingol6797 2 года назад +6

      That would not be a problem with todays technologies of AI, surveillance and navigation. If Tesla can drive cars, a pitch correction/auto pilot can’t be a problem.

    • @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958
      @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958 2 года назад +18

      @@secondsein7749 Most fighter jets made today will fly out of control and disintegrate if the fly by wire system is turned off, so the need for computer stabilization is no more serious for the ekranoplanes. They tend not to pitch down, except when slowing down. The biggest problem is keeping them down in ground effect, not allowing excursions into non-ground effect flight where these things go into asymmetric stall real quick.

  • @benhuston310
    @benhuston310 2 года назад +19

    This ekranoplan weighs as much as 165,241,829,264 hamburgers.

  • @Intrepid17011
    @Intrepid17011 2 года назад +21

    Not attractive? That think looks cool as hell, just as cool as the original EK

  • @smorrow
    @smorrow 2 года назад +11

    "The Aerocon airship looked like a cross between a Space Shuttle and the Caspian Sea Monster"
    And a tube of Aquafresh

  • @henryvonedelkase6604
    @henryvonedelkase6604 2 года назад +23

    I am sure you meant 300 howitzers not 300 shells. 300 105 mm shells would only weigh about 4-5 tons.

  • @UncleManuel
    @UncleManuel 2 года назад +6

    These type of crafts are made for a perfect world where's no waves or weather. Hoovercrafts share the same fundamental problem as ground effekt vehicles: as soon as the seas get rougher they are useless. This includes the starting and landing phase. And this is also the reason why there are no more large commercial hoovercrafts or flying wingboats... 😜✌️
    Btw: high sea states were also the reason why they had to reinforce the skirt for the SR.N4 Hoovercraft - the waves simply shredded the rubber skirt to pieces...

    • @Yirayol
      @Yirayol 3 месяца назад

      For enourmously huge GEV (2000+ tons) the ground effect will be so strong it would be able to fly on an estimated height of 20+ metres above almost any waves.

  • @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958
    @ninehundreddollarluxuryyac5958 2 года назад +10

    To fly over large ocean waves, he was right, these need to be really large. Efficient flight is limited to a height about equal to the wingspan. Within ground effect, drag drops off to near zero compared to conventional wing borne flight. People who have not worked with ekranoplane models never appreciate this. In Russia, the program was called "project steamboat". At the time, there was the death penalty for saying the word "ekranoplane" outside of work. It was that secret.

  • @donaldgrant9067
    @donaldgrant9067 2 года назад +10

    Don't throw those plans away, we may need them to get troops and supplies to Taiwan. A normal freighter will be a sitting duck with what China has in anti ship missiles,

    • @timkc1638
      @timkc1638 13 дней назад

      Not going to war with China over Taiwan. Sorry.

  • @ajm33605
    @ajm33605 2 года назад +30

    Yet another insane design. Thank you found and explained for another great video

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 2 года назад +1

      The diffrance is that with a ground effect aircraft, the upper bounds of scale and weight is much lower.
      For a normal aircraft the optimal size is about the size of a Boeing 787. Any larger, and the wing is to big, any smaller, and there is to much parasitic drag.
      The reason for that is that the span to weight sets the angle of attack in level fight, that in turn sets the efficiency of the wing. Because the wing span scale linearly and the mass scales cubic, the optimal size is very specific. This is also the reason why Concorde can super cruse, but most fighters at the time could not.
      For a ground effect plane its the area of the wing in steed of the span that determines the wings efficiency. The area scales to the square while the mass still scales to the cube. There for the size can be much larger before it falls out of optimal size.
      A ground effect aircraft also fly in much thicker air, again benefiting larger aircraft's.
      As a last benefit of a ground effect aircraft, the speed of sound is about 100 knots faster at sea level than at 40 000 feet. This allows the top speed, typically 90% of the speed of sound, to be about 90knots faster.

    • @ajm33605
      @ajm33605 2 года назад +1

      @@matsv201 cool 👍

  • @ChessMasterNate
    @ChessMasterNate 2 года назад +24

    This is exactly the size to build these, maybe even double the size. I think the real problem with the cost was because our presses that got built in the 1950s and make many aircraft parts up to the present day, would not be capable of making analogous parts for this aircraft. These massive presses are why the US has had an advantage in commercial aircraft for decades (lighter, saves fuel, and operators have to stay competitive). In 1976 the French built a big press, which is why Airbus is competitive. Later, Japan and China built one each. China has the biggest at 100,000 Tons. We have two, 50,000 ton presses. And there is a newer 60,000 ton press in Los Angeles somewhere, owned by Germans, built in 2018. The soviets got a big one because they got the plans from the Germans at the end of WW2. And the biggest one the Germans had, which was a 33,000 ton press. The US took home a couple about half that size.
    Look up the US Heavy Press Program, when in the 1950s the Feds ordered 10 big presses made. It was investigated whether we might benefit from a larger one. They decided we would not, as we made nothing so big it would need it. Kinda backward thinking. You don't make anything you can't make. They needed to think what could be made possible. They did not anticipate aircraft like this, massive hovercraft, massive helicopters, massive rockets, or anything else massive. See the great video "America's Iron Giants".
    The presses are very important because they can make parts that otherwise must be made of dozens or even hundreds of parts, and result in something heavier and weaker anyway. The Germans figured this out in WW2, and we had no idea how they were making airplane parts out of magnesium that were so strong.
    The reality is that If we had made these bigger presses, that were considered, but not built, we could have made large rockets cheaper, like the Saturn V, and all these other large machines. We need bigger presses today. I think we need ones 6x larger and stronger (300,000+ tons) With these much larger presses, we could make these Ekranoplans without the massive, high price, much more quickly, and lots of them. Should actually be quite a bit less on a volume basis. And lifting capacity would probably be even greater, because it would be lighter.

    • @c.s.oneill2079
      @c.s.oneill2079 2 года назад +1

      Great comment. Very informative and pertinent. Thank you!!!

    • @misdelivereddishwasher1011
      @misdelivereddishwasher1011 Год назад +1

      fantastic and essential information that honestly should've been in the video. to make this plane without a press like one you've described (300,000+ tons), you'd basically have to construct it similarly to a cruise ship. certainly not practical.

    • @dougdanzeisen9608
      @dougdanzeisen9608 11 месяцев назад

      Thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights. Comments such as yours are the reason I read comments on interesting topics, to gain insight and knowledge. Your references to the press issue are eye opening.

  • @jerrykr7kz
    @jerrykr7kz 2 года назад +13

    The height above the water is less than 12 feet. Do the math! At 460 knots and running smack into a wave over 15 feet = Danger! or, Debree everywhere after the crash!!!

    • @Malamockq
      @Malamockq 5 месяцев назад

      It would use a reinforced hull obviously. When it's that big, the hull can be made very strong. The crest of waves at 12 feet isn't a problem for something that massive.

    • @Malamockq
      @Malamockq 5 месяцев назад

      Actually I double checked the video, and you're wrong. It can clear waves at 20 feet in height.

  • @poodlescone9700
    @poodlescone9700 2 года назад +8

    I can see ekranoplanes for cargo to make it cheaper than air, but with the speed of air travel. I never understood why it did not catch on using new and exclusive cargo routes by sea.

    • @ABrit-bt6ce
      @ABrit-bt6ce 2 года назад +2

      Sea state is the Ekranoplans Achilles Heel. They would have a bad time on something like the great lakes.

    • @cedriceric9730
      @cedriceric9730 2 года назад

      luckily now may be the time

  • @omega465
    @omega465 2 года назад +9

    Not very attractive my ass, that thing looks super cool

  • @dennyliegerot4021
    @dennyliegerot4021 2 года назад +5

    I'm not sure why they didn't like the looks... I think it looks amazing and pretty badass. Not really wise to have so many assets contained in one craft though, one missile and they're all gone. A much smaller version for special operations or civilian use would be cool.

  • @mikeks8181
    @mikeks8181 2 года назад +3

    Two things!
    First at That Speed above the water? It would need a Flight Plan from one location to the other so as not to interfere with shipping( yes I know it can Rise Up If? Radar Is Good?!)
    Second seems the best?! Why Not Make smaller versions that will Launch from Amphibious Landing Craft Ships?!
    Offshore 20 Miles and be able to maneuver That Fast!
    Thank You for sharing this video!

  • @nerdwatch1017
    @nerdwatch1017 2 года назад +9

    Ok so here’s another project that they canceled any future possibility of continuing the work of creating this incredible project!! I mean there’s had to have been some beneficial breakthroughs regarding technology that could really help this beast fly!! I do wish we could use nuclear energy to power its engines but idk if we’ve made that possible yet!! But the reason’s to definitely have continued the work on this project are plentiful!! From cargo transport!! For both civilian & our armed units!! But also to use as probably what could make the 1st International Coast Guard!! Having at least 5-10 of these could be helpful if we’re trying to search for a downed plane or boat!! With each ship comes high powered and incredibly long ranged drones!! In each ship comes with 1-150 of these drones that are programmed to spread out in search patterns!! And if they find something they automatically sure it is a person they lock down those locations numbers and after sending that signal that drone will automatically stay with that person so it can keep sending signals where there located so in case of drifting!! Among all kinds of use’s still to say!!! Plus I think the design of it is so futuristic but I also mean we never build anything with imagination inspiration and dedication!! Anymore here in America!!

  • @merafirewing6591
    @merafirewing6591 2 года назад +5

    The love child of the Space Shuttle and Caspian Sea Monster.

  • @equisnrolly
    @equisnrolly 2 года назад +6

    “One of the largest aircraft ever designed” *laughs in Lockheed CL-1201*

    • @FoundAndExplained
      @FoundAndExplained  2 года назад +2

      I’ve done that on my channel!

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +1

      Which should have had options to land on water and fly in GE.
      Bartini designed a 5000 ton GEV that was also worked into an aircraft carrier, though I like a mixed freight/passenger cruise liner that visits ports of call.
      Beriev has a design the Be-5000 that has ludicrous number of engines and can fly.

  • @cliffwoodbury5319
    @cliffwoodbury5319 2 года назад +5

    I have been waiting to see this aircraft covered for years. U should cover every single one of them!!!! That's a great analogy on how advanced these ekranoplans really are!!!

  • @DocWolph
    @DocWolph 2 года назад +3

    So, has anyone looked into whether this plane is doable NOW? Every time some committee says "IT's great but NOT today" the thing disappears.

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +1

      Beriev and Bartini designed 5000 ton GEV/planes. DARPA today is working on a logistics GEV.

    • @DocWolph
      @DocWolph 2 года назад +1

      @@JFrazer4303
      Cool. they just need to remember they can not rely on the Govt to foot the bill for them. Most of the coolest stuff, since the1950s, has been shelved and lost because they makers expected Uncle to pony up for it.

  • @Ghost-hs6qq
    @Ghost-hs6qq 2 года назад +9

    Another main problem that the ekranoplan had was that it needed to have insanely long distances to turn (around 1 to 3km) and concerning that this plane is 5x bigger yeah that is a big problem.

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +4

      Who expects a 400 knot jumbo plane to turn quickly?

    • @brawlertop6459
      @brawlertop6459 7 месяцев назад

      @@JFrazer4303 а если мобильник дома забыл?

  • @TheSlamburger
    @TheSlamburger 2 года назад +3

    Lunatic Cold-War era engineering projects will always be interesting.

  • @glike2
    @glike2 2 года назад +5

    Missing is the fuel economy vs:
    1. Ships
    2. Air cargo (traditional)

    • @Yourlocalhuman8
      @Yourlocalhuman8 2 года назад

      Fuel economy? A-90 Orlyonok (Soviet) uses turboprop engines to maintain itself flying, jet engines are used to get her lifted

    • @Malamockq
      @Malamockq 5 месяцев назад

      It's a ground effect vehicle, it's more efficient at flying than traditional airplanes for the same weight.

  • @rolflandale2565
    @rolflandale2565 2 года назад +14

    7:57 the craft could've been feasible, by simply not traveling that fast (460mph), that low. Some cargo spare volumes at the rear, could've offered serious altitude engines. The lower wing span just needed some base width, to elongate. With an edge wing tip, of pivot raft nods.

    • @aribamamarjeet8814
      @aribamamarjeet8814 2 года назад +2

      No no no no no no no

    • @Archimedes.5000
      @Archimedes.5000 Год назад +1

      What

    • @rolflandale2565
      @rolflandale2565 Год назад

      @@Archimedes.5000 heh, when is last time you landed a touch down at 400+mph, the word "What" would only be part of your lyrics. Essentially in a modern age, we all just needed a multi vtol that renders water, air & landing ports.

    • @Archimedes.5000
      @Archimedes.5000 Год назад +1

      @@rolflandale2565 your comment is just nonsense, "the only way to make ekranoplan is to not make an ekranoplan" is essentially what you are saying.
      If you took away the ground effect then this vehicle wouldn't be able to fly efficiently at all

    • @rolflandale2565
      @rolflandale2565 Год назад

      @@Archimedes.5000 nope, what you said is *genuinely* "nonsense," think about. There is NO "ground", it's WATER. The flight method was to make a vessel, go fast enough over it, *literally* over it. Which *must land* before breaking! 0:37...
      The video host was setting example of how *insane* it was to go over 400+mph with a *1.4+thousands👀 of tons heavy* vessel. (Wass the designer trying to make us all laugh?)
      🤔To do so, it simply needed to go *at least 20 story's high, for EVERY 200mph* just to be safe/feasable. This *still requires* VTOL maneuvering!

  • @angelomendoza1174
    @angelomendoza1174 2 года назад +2

    Ekranoplans or wingships was an interesting concept but as for myself it's a hobby in my spare time, I built three fancy ekranoplan models out of Cogo construction bricks, I had built an ekranoplan model based on Bartini aircraft carrier concept, the other is a delta winged ekranoplan ballistic missile launch platform and an overall black stealth aircraft carrier based on AVPRO UK's STAC (Stealth Trimaran Aircraft Carrier) design which I'd also converted into a super ekranoplan using leftover Cogo parts for the two lift engine pods mounted under the leading edges of the winged flight deck.

  • @rikulappi9664
    @rikulappi9664 2 года назад +2

    Since the cold war had just ended, cool stuff wasn't financed any more. There were no fundamental technological reasons not to build such a craft.

  • @b.w.9392
    @b.w.9392 2 года назад +3

    Didnt expect to see the dutch airforce in this vid

  • @apokalipsx25
    @apokalipsx25 2 года назад +13

    Would like to see a video about Aereon III airship made by USA in the 60s and some more stuff from Aereon Corporation. Not many know about them but they have build some really crazy flying things )))

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад

      Little Aereon-26 test plane flew well, is in a museum today.
      They planned a 600 meter long cargo monster, of their "Dynairship".

  • @stephenp7057
    @stephenp7057 2 года назад +10

    On every single long flight the craft would be guaranteed to get numerous bird strikes through the engines.

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 2 года назад +3

      There is not much birds at sea level 100 miles away from the coast. After you traveled 5-10 minutes out from the coast, there would not be much birds around. This is not much diffrent from a normal airliner.

    • @Ltulrich
      @Ltulrich Год назад

      Not to mention dolphins and whales popping up in the wrong place at the wrong time

  • @calebanderson6355
    @calebanderson6355 2 года назад +1

    Yoooo, Mustard did this, and now you! This is awesome! I'm loving this.

  • @NecromancerTO
    @NecromancerTO 2 года назад +12

    It's interesting you mention DARPA declared this infeasible but in past few months DARPA has renewed it's efforts to make wing effect vehicle a reality. Check out DARPA Liberty Lifter and I hope you make a video on it soon.

  • @thebaccathatchews
    @thebaccathatchews 2 года назад +2

    Two words: fusion reactor.

  • @DubsBrown
    @DubsBrown 2 года назад +1

    Imagine a commercial use where it’s the amenities of a a cruise ship but as fast as a flight.

  • @themacker894
    @themacker894 2 года назад +8

    Seems it would have a hard time over rough waves, and that a rogue wave of 60-70 feet could take it out in one strike. Chances of encountering such a wave would be considerably higher when looking at the miles of ocean it would regularly traverse.

    • @NuckElBerg
      @NuckElBerg 2 года назад +7

      Not really though. Waves typically only get that high when large moving bodies of water gets "squashed" into significantly smaller "crevaces", such as bays, underwater cliffs, etc. In other words, while waves can get decently high on the open sea, they'll typically never get THAT high, especially not with well-planed routes.

    • @blaster915
      @blaster915 2 года назад +5

      Ah but storms that generate such waves they would have already lifted themselves up to 10 thousand feet to clear safely the wavez

    • @pegasusted2504
      @pegasusted2504 2 года назад +4

      It did say in the video being able to fly upto 1000's of feet above the surface so even the heaviest seas would not be an issue.

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +2

      They obviously wouldn't send one over such seas when carrying too much to fly, and they'd have sensors to watch out for such waves.

  • @baitboy3191
    @baitboy3191 2 года назад +3

    Ground Effect vehicles always intrigue me.

  • @viktor_v-ughnda_vaudville_476
    @viktor_v-ughnda_vaudville_476 2 года назад +4

    Damn that thing is badass it’d be awesome if these existed but god forbid something was accidentally in the way of that gargantuan thing moving at those speeds……YIKES!!

  • @vustvaleo8068
    @vustvaleo8068 2 года назад +16

    basically as close as we can get a Star Wars ship in real life.

  • @notoriousbigmoai1125
    @notoriousbigmoai1125 2 года назад +12

    why do I have a feeling that this vehicle is vulnerable to collision?

    • @Counter-snake
      @Counter-snake 2 года назад

      yes

    • @glenn_r_frank_author
      @glenn_r_frank_author 2 года назад +3

      yeah, imagine trying to turn to miss a freighter or even a smaller boat. yikes.

    • @pegasusted2504
      @pegasusted2504 2 года назад

      In the video he mentions the ability to fly at 1000's of feet so not an issue, especially with modern radar and "ai" assisted piloting.

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад

      Who expects a 400 knot, many hundreds of tons transport to be maneuverable?
      Who would send one out without knowing the route, and overloading it so it can't fly over any expected waves?
      If it meets waves over 3km tall, we've got other things to worry about.

    • @Yourlocalhuman8
      @Yourlocalhuman8 2 года назад +1

      My guy this is not the 70's anymore, computers that works perfectly exist

  • @delten-eleven1910
    @delten-eleven1910 2 года назад +2

    Maybe not that big, but you'd think the USN and possibly air and sea cargo companies would be intrigued.

  • @KuDastardly
    @KuDastardly 2 года назад +13

    I wonder if the Aercon has been revisited to see if today's technology is now feasible.🤔

    • @Archimedes.5000
      @Archimedes.5000 Год назад

      Last time I checked there is no technology to flatten sea yet

    • @sharunsan2683
      @sharunsan2683 Год назад

      @@Archimedes.5000 there is no need to though simply fly above the harsh waves

    • @Archimedes.5000
      @Archimedes.5000 Год назад

      @@sharunsan2683 which is already out of ground effect

  • @baystgrp
    @baystgrp 2 года назад +3

    This is inspired, and reminds me of Norman Bel Geddes’ “Airliner Number 4” from the early 20th Century, and at the same time of the aviation engineering adage that if you put enough power on a brick, it would fly.

  • @The_Raydinator_2008
    @The_Raydinator_2008 2 года назад +4

    Did the math, a SINGLE one of those Ekranoplans would’ve cost around $1.16 BILLION DOLLARS

    • @gabedarrett1301
      @gabedarrett1301 Год назад +1

      That's pretty cheap compared to our current amount of military spending

    • @NorbertKasko
      @NorbertKasko 9 месяцев назад

      Not bad, not terrible. 1 single B2 spirit bomber was almost 2 billion when it was released. (The world's most expensive aircraft)

  • @jimmyj1969
    @jimmyj1969 2 года назад +3

    Inasanely expensive or not, impractical or not, if it was proposed by an established corporation of the Industrial-Military-Complex, it would have probably be approved!

  • @hugoekman6072
    @hugoekman6072 2 года назад +1

    some might say he got hooked...

  • @vitsirosh3722
    @vitsirosh3722 2 года назад +1

    The Soviets actually built theirs. No bragging rights for designing something ten times bigger

  • @Q_Channel1
    @Q_Channel1 2 года назад +3

    How did you fail to include information on DARPA's Liberty Lifter program?

  • @amadine770
    @amadine770 2 года назад +1

    Need to save your stories to binge on a weekend.

  • @neveraskedforahandle
    @neveraskedforahandle 2 года назад +2

    I actually love the look of the design, it just seems to promise too much.

  • @KomradZX1989
    @KomradZX1989 2 года назад +1

    “Project force or fly passenger routes…” two of my favorite phrases in one great place 😍

  • @Michael_Michaels
    @Michael_Michaels 2 года назад +3

    6:20 If it had rockets, it would be like the North American X-15 in XXL size!!

  • @mathismohr1356
    @mathismohr1356 2 года назад +4

    Uhm, I'm pretty sure they didn't follow up on this because ground-effect on the open ocean is a bit.. bumpy.. if at all sustainable.

  • @ericphillipssr.4381
    @ericphillipssr.4381 2 года назад +2

    With the military budget that America has, I wouldn’t be surprised If a version of this aircraft is being revisited

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад

      Today, DARPA is working on something called "Liberty Lifter" (after "Liberty Ships") for long deployments in the Pacific. A twin-fuselage plane with thick center wing for GEV or airplane flight.

  • @alimzazaz
    @alimzazaz 2 года назад +2

    Animation is tip top. Superb job

  • @kearsargeyt8848
    @kearsargeyt8848 2 года назад +2

    The next video will be about A-12 Avenger II, right?

  • @michaelmccotter4293
    @michaelmccotter4293 Год назад +1

    As a small boat enthusiast. Sailboats etc..., I have to imagine the safety concerns of a massive ship flying at 400 plus mph, 20' off the water. How navigating around small craft might be a nightmare? Sport boats, fishing boats, kayaks, and smaller craft would never know what hit them as they are sucked into this extreme air wave under such a beast. AIS is great, but most sport craft don't have it onboard.
    Picture this ship leaving Miami heading to the Mediterranean. How many small yachts and sport craft might be in open waters 5 miles to 50 miles offshore? What could go wrong?

  • @congnghequansuvn474
    @congnghequansuvn474 2 года назад +5

    next the X43A pls. I hate the Russian thinking that they are the first to reach hypersonic

  • @fabianseewald7884
    @fabianseewald7884 2 года назад +1

    a shame that it is to dangerous to fly that low at such high speeds, imagine losing the entire plane and payload and 2000 troups instantly through a flock of seagulls or flying fish, there is no margine for error in ekranoplanes, they work fine the technology is mostly understood, but as soon as anything fails it destroys itself kompletely in an instant

  • @m1a2abramsmainbattletank58
    @m1a2abramsmainbattletank58 2 года назад

    I wished passenger ekranoplans can not only be operated by airlines, but also ferry companies

  • @Venn_Diagram
    @Venn_Diagram 2 года назад +2

    300 howitzers are crazy

  • @arronjones6985
    @arronjones6985 2 года назад +6

    Such a shame it never came to light. 😞

  • @glenn_r_frank_author
    @glenn_r_frank_author 2 года назад +2

    Not attractive? It looks beautiful to me.

  • @DenisKz
    @DenisKz 2 года назад +1

    Imagine a collision with a container ship at sea at 740 kmph. I don't think any black box would survive that.

    • @gabedarrett1301
      @gabedarrett1301 Год назад

      You'd be surprised: electronics encased in resin can handle 1000s of g's of acceleration. And memory is solid state so there are no moving parts

    • @DenisKz
      @DenisKz Год назад

      @@gabedarrett1301 Can you calculate the force of something traveling at 740kph hitting a stationary object? If it can survive that, then I would be surprised.

    • @gabedarrett1301
      @gabedarrett1301 Год назад

      @@DenisKz The problem is that you can't calculate the force without more information such as the time duration of impact, amount of collision inelasticity, mass of the target, etc. I assume you meant to say acceleration, but the above still applies.
      Also, the reason we have electronics that can survive thousands of g's is because the military shoots them out of artillery (ex: the proximity fuse)

  • @terrablader
    @terrablader 2 года назад +3

    Makes one wonder how would they avoid running over other craft flying so low over water

  • @crazycain1984
    @crazycain1984 2 года назад

    The concept & idea is BADASS don't get me wrong. But we've all heard of "rougue waves" that tend to pop up. And when they do, they can reach heights 3 times the size as waves around it. Imagine smacking into 1 of those at 400mph. The craft would most likely desentigrate because we've seen what they do to massive cargo ships going 20mph.

  • @stangundam01
    @stangundam01 2 года назад +1

    can you do a comparison between this beast & the c-5 galaxy & the possible super pelican?

  • @jamon2242
    @jamon2242 2 года назад +4

    always asked what would happen to ground-effect airplanes if the sea/ocean is angry/not calmed?

    • @BrapBrapDorito
      @BrapBrapDorito 2 года назад +1

      They could fly slightly higher into the ground effect (at the cost of efficiency) or if their wings are able to generate lift outside of the ground effect, they could bring it to higher altitudes in an emergency

    • @jamon2242
      @jamon2242 2 года назад +1

      @@BrapBrapDorito thanks

  • @SJRPhotographics
    @SJRPhotographics 2 года назад +2

    I wonder what a ground effect vehicle would be like on the Atlantic crossing. I would be worried about rough seas.

  • @kennethmcdonald4807
    @kennethmcdonald4807 7 месяцев назад

    On the Soviet version the big engines on the front were only used for take off, after which they would be shut down and cruise power maintained by the two small engines in the rear. Being in ground effect would would allow it to safely flown under the most severe weather at near jet speed with very low fuel consumption. It's about the coolest example of Ruskie tech that I'm aware of.

  • @siautomatic117
    @siautomatic117 13 дней назад

    Алексеев Ростислав Евгеньевич - гениальный советский конструктор, Отец экраноплана.

  • @scottwolf8633
    @scottwolf8633 Год назад

    Its not ,"Wingship", but WIG, Wing in Ground, Ship. The effect especially on hot days can ruin your day as you crash and burn, unable to leave the effect and gain Altitude, as you rotate and begin your alternating, 30 degree angle of bank, to make sure you have cleared the airspace. That's what was procedure for VT-6, NAS Whiting.

  • @jmi5969
    @jmi5969 2 года назад

    - Doctor, I have a problem... Each and every person I met is now seeing things...
    - And what are these things?
    - Big... huuuge...
    - And what is your name, again?
    - Monster. Caspian C. Monster.

  • @DrPotato0
    @DrPotato0 2 года назад

    You should cover this thing called the arrow which is a supersonic UCAV by kelley aerospace based in singapore

  • @randallsemrau6911
    @randallsemrau6911 4 месяца назад

    The chance of eventually running into an obstacle while flying at that height, makes the safety of the operation... pretty tenuous.

  • @Bzhydack
    @Bzhydack 2 года назад

    Maybe you heard, but DARPA wants to build Ekranoplan now. They call project Liberty Lifter.

  • @ekuche8335
    @ekuche8335 2 года назад +1

    What size waves could it fly over? Like if the waves are over 10 feet would it crash?

  • @JSDudeca
    @JSDudeca 7 месяцев назад

    Like Airships, the main failure mode is the killer. Airships: Wind, Ekranoplan: Waves. Both were not made for planet earth.

  • @OwenMahoney_
    @OwenMahoney_ 2 года назад +2

    Big boy

  • @ВячеславКозинцев-л3р
    @ВячеславКозинцев-л3р 8 месяцев назад +1

    Случайная волна достигшая поверхности приведет к катастрофе на такой скорости

  • @brianmgrim
    @brianmgrim 7 месяцев назад

    Imagine a craft almost 2 football fields in length hitting a tall rogue wave at 460 MPH! Apparently the designers were imaginatively-challenged…or never planned on being a passenger themselves.

  • @rob379lqz
    @rob379lqz 2 года назад +1

    I think John Travolta has one… I think I heard that.

  • @megadavis5377
    @megadavis5377 2 года назад +1

    This would never work. You'd have much less time than the Titanic had: "Iceberg, DEAD AHEAD!!"

    • @JFrazer4303
      @JFrazer4303 2 года назад +1

      Not many icebergs are over 3km high, and Titanic didn't have radar and satellites (though it did have warnings, and chose to ignore them)

    • @Yourlocalhuman8
      @Yourlocalhuman8 2 года назад +1

      (Psssh, he didnt know that routes that already set before traveling exist)

  • @IonorRea
    @IonorRea Год назад

    This thing flying at speed near the water's surface would create a large disturbance in the water together with huge noisy jet engines transmitting sound into the water detectable by the passive sonar of the submarine for hundreds of miles, so any submarine with high-speed anti-ship missiles would be able with some software modifications kill this thing with ease from afar.

  • @michaelzehnle8853
    @michaelzehnle8853 2 года назад +1

    And what happens if a wave Hits the plane

  • @cmbaz1140
    @cmbaz1140 7 месяцев назад +1

    Why they dont build cool stuff like this is beyond me...

  • @NameNotAlreadyTaken2
    @NameNotAlreadyTaken2 Год назад

    If there was demand for it, these would be great to replace transoceanic cargo flights. The increased fuel efficiency is really great, and you could build terminals for it next to container ship ports. Not sure how you could keep it from crashing into ships, though.

  • @MrHusang23
    @MrHusang23 Год назад

    Those huge windows in the back would be a great point to aim at

  • @Marginal391
    @Marginal391 2 года назад +1

    Thank you 🙂

  • @alexeverson2015
    @alexeverson2015 2 года назад

    wish we had ideas like these today