That 787 did not break the sound barrier. There is a difference between airspeed and ground speed.

@zackaplowitz

3 жыл бұрын

Ah, someone else noticed.

@johnj8639

3 жыл бұрын

It is technically possible it did if it hit turbulent air it’s moment could’ve carried it through allowing it to be super sonic even if only briefly

@cfield2434

3 жыл бұрын

100%. I was going to post the same, but happy others got to it first.

@ExcretumTaurum

3 жыл бұрын

@Nicolas IIRC there was an Air China 747 that had a nose dive just off the California coast back in the 80s (?). I think that one might have briefly been supersonic. Either way it did lose some body panels.

@almerindaromeira8352

3 жыл бұрын

@Nicolas cheddar got it wrong. For an airplane the only important speed is airspeed which is the speed of the airplane relative to the air surrounding it. Groundspeed is the speed of the aircraft as measured by an observer on the ground. It was this one that "broke" the theoretical speed of sound. It doesn't really mean anything. Jet stream is an air mass from west to east and does indeed speed the journey up. However the airspeed remains subsonic because the whole air around the aircraft is moving in the same direction. The sound barrier itself is only broken when you reach an airspeed (meaning relative to the air around you) higher that said number (depending on altitude and temperature). I don't know if that made sense. Feel free to ask, maybe someone explains it better than me or you can read the Wikipedia on airspeed. There are IAS, TAS and CAS.

One correction: The Virgin 787 did NOT break the sound barrier. Its airspeed did not change. It did not move faster in relation to the air, which is what the speed of sound is based on - the sound barrier does not care how fast you are across the ground. The 787's airspeed would have only been around Mach 0.85-0.90.

@johnj8639

3 жыл бұрын

Correction, it’s momentum if it hit turbulent air could have allowed it to briefly be supersonic.

@cookieflavoredoreo4685

3 жыл бұрын

The speed of sound is much slower than I thought if traditional airliners can reach about almost 90% of it in normal cruise

@zackaplowitz

3 жыл бұрын

@@elweewutroone Those are normal cruise speeds, but are not the Maximum Mach Number (MMO), which is why I included a range.

@trubinize385

3 жыл бұрын

The B787’s ✈️✈️✈️ 801MPH speed was only the ground speed, but as far as the plane was concerned it was flying at its normal air speed and chilling 😴😴😴 on the way to its destination. 😎😎😎

@seraphina985

3 жыл бұрын

@@cookieflavoredoreo4685 The speed of sound is a function of temperature Vs = 331 * (T/273.13)^0.5 gives an approximation of the speed of sound in air in meters per second (T is the temperature in Kelvin). So yes at the higher altitude where airliners cruise the speed of sound is lower than at sea level simply due to the air temperature being significantly lower.

Wendover crowd: "It's quite simple, really."

@JuanWayTrips

3 жыл бұрын

I was expecting this to be a remake of Wendover's video but was pleasantly surprised when they focused more on the meteorological aspects of it and how it is and will change in the future.

@stevegruber4724

3 жыл бұрын

I literally thought it was a Wendover video until I heard the narrator. In my head I still hear the title in Sam's voice.

@JAYWASSERMAN

3 жыл бұрын

The jet didn’t break the sound barrier because of the airspeed around it. If it had caused a sonic boom it could have damaged the plane as they are not meant to handle those forces

@dmhendricks

3 жыл бұрын

It is typical leftist fear mongering. Green New Deal will bankrupt the U.S., cost a _massive_ number of jobs and cause hyperinflation. $93 trillion!

@StrickerRei-Chn

3 жыл бұрын

@@dmhendricks okay boomer.

It's the shortest route and the jetstream helps to push the aircraft

@h4m1cx94

3 жыл бұрын

Shortest route between two highly populated areas of the world, having both populations rich enough to be able to, and knowledgeable enough to want to, fly to the other site.

@fockwulf1

3 жыл бұрын

Decompressed an almost 10 minute video into one sentence. This is what KZread needs to be. Edit. Didn't even meed to watch more than 5 seconds of the video. thank you so much

@TheSheiban

3 жыл бұрын

@@fockwulf1 Well in all fairness, I have to credit this channel for explaining the science behind it, and I appreciate that they cited their sources too 🙂. Not a fan of clickbait-y titles though but it's an interesting topic

@mrpositronia

3 жыл бұрын

Your comment is best imagined chewing gum in class. Teacher: "Okay, Mr Smartypants: What is the jet stream and why does is exist?" :^D

@andyc9902

3 жыл бұрын

Duh

a plane video? this isnt Wendover productions though!

@josephlucacapecchi6077

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly my thought.

@jasonremy1627

3 жыл бұрын

Damn it. Just made the same joke. Should have read further down

@6z0

3 жыл бұрын

Cringe

As a pilot, the information about the flying distance between airplanes are just the laws of flying, it doesn't mean that the airplanes are flying that close to each other. Otherwise you would see 4 airplanes at the same time In that route. Which you have to be super lucky to see

@garfieldsam

3 жыл бұрын

Honestly this is the last straw. Why do I watch this shitty channel when they consistently report shoddy or even misleading information? Bye guys.

@frzstat

3 жыл бұрын

@@garfieldsam yes they get it wrong all the time. But I learn a lot from the comments, when people correct the shoddy reporting. Seriously!

@rolandhandy9030

3 жыл бұрын

I was thinking the same thing. You don’t see that many planes.

@KDeds21

2 жыл бұрын

Lol, that's what I thought when she said it. How often do you see multiple planes flying over eachother? I live pretty close to a major airport and I've never seen anything like that in my life. More global warming fear mongering.

@frankwu4839

2 жыл бұрын

And seriously what is radar “communication”? This channel is composed of garbage videos full of misinformation.

A lot of this video, namely the “planes getting close to each other” parts are violently over exaggerated in their implied risk. It’s literally not dangerous at all.

@SixFootScream

3 жыл бұрын

Was wondering the same.

@rylans.5365

3 жыл бұрын

Right it's not dangerous, the 1000 ft minimum exists for a reason 🤦🏽🤦🏽🙄. I hate when videos know nothing about airplanes

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

25 miles is a lot of space for a plane that is typically no bigger than just 200 feet

@sjpeckham1

3 жыл бұрын

@@SixFootScream exactly. Way too much inaccurate information. As stated by many, however, the comments are excellent!

@almahnak12

3 жыл бұрын

everybody gangsta till 2 planes collide

Corrective note: The oceanic air traffic centers DO NOT PLAN THE FLIGHTS.They plan the track system (NAT OTS). Airlines plan the routes and what track they will take. Airline flight dispatchers take into account what tracks are currently available and what weather is to be expected out there for that day. Then they plan around what they can using that days issued tracks. ATC controllers jobs are to keep aircraft separated. They do not plan routes. That is the job of the airlines Flight Dispatcher.

@keithfreitas2983

3 жыл бұрын

Might add its a good paying job, at least 60k to 80k a year depending on the airline.

@HakingMC

3 жыл бұрын

@@keithfreitas2983 well it's a pretty important job.

@bernardmoorman8483

Жыл бұрын

Yes, that is true, however, also take into consideration that being a flight dispatcher is also the most fined employee by the FAA in the airline industry. Because he/she authorizes, regulates, and controls commercial airline flights according to government and company regulations to expedite and ensure the safety of flights. These fines are given to the aircraft dispatcher for the violation of government regulations.

@onebadlt123

Жыл бұрын

@@bernardmoorman8483 You are 100% wrong. I've been a dispatcher for 15 years and never once has any of my coworkers, at any airline even been fined by the FAA. Lol. Even if mistakes were made. We file self disclosures for known violations and safety actions are performed to correct the issue. That or you go back into training. Nobody gets fined, ever.

@davidt8087

11 ай бұрын

Well what did you expect. It's cheddar. And it's youtube. They Google something for two minutes, get half the details wrong, truly understand NO PART OF IT, ans then talk about it like they're experts and know more than actual pilots or people in the industry, and then ask for subs. No wonder cheddar hasn't broken a million subs. I've seen their annoying videos since start of 2017. How do they even function? Who's venture capital firm or investor did they successfully scam over and over? There is no way they've ever made 1 single penny of profit. How thr fk do these kinds of companies keep popping up and continually succeed in scamming investors to pay for their employees and salaries and costs while they only lose money? Not only that companies like this always overspend like crazy too. Like seriously

When the KZread comment section has more accurate information from random people

@mumble3535

3 жыл бұрын

aviation youtube is pretty active- so you make one mistake and 40 enthusiasts crawl out of the woodwork to correct you

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

Most of us are pilots just tired of seeing the same random nonsense the media feeds people. I mean really? Super Sonic 787's XD I mean just the lack in knowledge and expertise in explaining it is unreal. You wanna know about aviation, just go get real lessons from a real flight instructor, who knows how to explain aviation to someone who knows nothing.

“That year, Japan launched around 9,000 silk hydrogen balloons...” WHAT year?

@sinoroman

3 жыл бұрын

July 1937

@slavicnonatho8062

3 жыл бұрын

@@sinoroman Nope, 1944. 1937 was 2 years before the war began

@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis

3 жыл бұрын

@@sinoroman, that was when Japan began invading the rest of China, after having invaded Manchuria in 1931! 1944 is when the balloons were launched.

Me: think I’ll be productive Cheddar: ✈️

It’s incredible that that many planes are in the sky at any given time, yet, it looks like they’re all alone.

@ajmaj5288

Жыл бұрын

Because of the scale of the video - airplanes look much bigger compare to the distance between places.

@michaelnorth2055

Жыл бұрын

@@ajmaj5288 🤣💀

This is what you get when producers do not have fact-checkers that are pilots.

I flew once from Taiwan. The plane arrived 2.5 hours early. I got my bags first off the carousel land was home two hours before the original landing time. Unbelievable day. I think it clocked at 800 mph.

@raven4k998

11 ай бұрын

hey if it's safe who cares if it's over crowded as long as they don't hit each other it's fine

@climber950

6 ай бұрын

@@raven4k998ground speed and air speed are separate things. On a bad day, the same flight may have been 2 hours longer.

1:57 This was Virgin Atlantic’s Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner flying over Pennsylvania (on the route from Los Angeles (LAX) to London Heathrow). So this incident didn't happen over the Atlantic Ocean, as it could sound from the video.

@Dukenukem

3 жыл бұрын

Activism doesn't care for fact accuracy, they take those that fits the narrative

@qv6486

3 жыл бұрын

@@Dukenukem activists do not care about facts if it impedes the propositions they are advocating for. For instance, Activists that want to ban nuclear energy fail to grasp that safety improvements have increased since 1986(Chernobyl). Nuclear energy uses less real estate than other forms of power generation.

@douglasslotolowicz9454

2 жыл бұрын

An airliner flying from LAX to London Heathrow wouldn’t come anywhere close to Pennsylvania.

Not mentioned of course is the fact that in the Northern Hemisphere the Jet Stream flows West to East. So flights from Europe to North America try to choose altitudes to avoid the Jet Stream as it will lengthen flight time significantly and of course increase fuel burn. The second reason why many flights use the Northern Transatlantic Corridor is because of ETOPS (Extended Twin-engine OPerations), Most long haul flights operate under ETOPS-180 meaning that the flight cannot be more than 180 minutes from a diversionary airport should the aircraft lose one of its engines. Remember that flying on one engine will be slower than on two engines, and the Jet Stream is likely not pushing you in the right direction, and the aircraft may not be able to maintain as high an altitude on one engine. So aircraft flying the North Atlantic Corridor will need to be closer to Gander, Newfoundland, and then Reykjavik, Iceland. For the more southern route to Portugal and Spain it's Bermuda and the Azores Islands for diversions. ETOPS-240 is possible, but only a select few Airlines can meet the rigorous maintenance and operational standards needed to receive that authority.

@keithfreitas2983

3 жыл бұрын

Dispatch much. What airline?

I have flown across the Atlantic 8 times in the last 8 years and never had ANY turbulence. The only turbulence on any of those flights was going over the mountains between Vegas and LA on A380 from LHR to LAX.

@raven4k998

11 ай бұрын

as long as they obey tcas everyone's safe cause tcas will keep them from crashing should something go wrong

@davidt8087

11 ай бұрын

@@raven4k998did you learn about one single thing aka TCAS and now you think you know everything pilots know? TCAS is a final "fail safe" system. They don't fly blindly and then avoid TCAS. TCAS is for emergency situation. When they plan routes and flight altitude and time, all that in advance is meant to avoid ever hearing TCAS alert in the air in the first place.

@davidt8087

11 ай бұрын

Thays because mountain tops create turbulent air. As a pilot, I love getting throw around by turbulence. The more severe it is the better. Idk how you passengers keep freaking out thinking we will crash. What do you assume your pilot is just a sky Uber? Most peolle don't understand what it takes to be a pilot. They think it's as easy or slightly more difficult than getting a driver's license. Some ppl even think to become a pilot you get hired by an airline with zero flight experience. And they immediately train you in jets for a month and boom now youre a pilot. Lmao

Bruh Wendover did this video like 5 years ago

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

Wendover does a way better job talking about aviation. I highly recommend him!

2:00 A plane moving at 801 MPH ground speed does *not* necessarily "break the sound barrier" if the tailwind behind it is also moving fast in the same direction.

6:24 the guy TELLS you it's cause of climate change. 10 seconds later 6:35 there's a quiz - "What's causing this gigantic change? if you guessed climate change, bingo."

@Ascertivus

3 жыл бұрын

I had the same thought; it was already mentioned.

@blogengeezer4507

2 жыл бұрын

-Must have been some Real drastic 'Climate' change in the past. Chixulub [sp] for sure.. End of Ice Ages. Beginning of Ice Ages (4-5), Little and Big. Now we have knowledge of Hiawatha Crater?.... Lots of Climate' has changed, far more radically, and 4.5 billion years of Climate' changing... it's still here.. ;}

This video: "All planes..." Southern Atlantic Ocean: am i a joke to you?

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

Yea I wanna see a video on some other route not New York to Europe for once. Don't planes fly from LA to Australia or something? How about NY to Hong Kong? Why does it always have to be Atlantic routes?

Just so everyone knows. Every commercial plane has a TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) built into them, it warns the pilots in advance if a collision will happen so they can avoid it. Also all commercial planes have radar built into them so the pilots can see the position of other planes near them. Most importantly it is part of the standard operating procedure to monitor the systems of an aircraft during flight and yes that includes TCAS. With a system like that in place the chance of a plane to plane collision during flight is very low.

@Fomites

2 жыл бұрын

I didn't think planes can detect other aircraft with radar because as far as I know the only radar they have is weather radar which only detects precipitation.

@austriankangaroo

Жыл бұрын

@@Fomites its not radar, they are communicating

@davidt8087

11 ай бұрын

@@Fomiteswell the system is new, idk if airliners have it. But a lot of planes especially smaller ones have ADSB IN, it let's us see the position and altitude of nearby planes. I've actually had my life saved once by this system. It's not exactly radar, its like a GPS system with ground stations that transfer the information. Look it up. It's called ADSB. And I don't think airliners have that system installed though I'm not sure

787’s can’t break the sound barrier.

@jan-lukas

3 жыл бұрын

They can't whilst flying normally. In a nosedive they can though

@jamielonsdale3018

2 жыл бұрын

@@jan-lukas Actually the plane would break up before going transonic, and the individual pieces experiencing exponentionally more drag would prevent even the majority of the debris from going supersonic.

It takes you eight minutes to say: because it's the shortest route to connect a bunch of huge european airports with a bunch of huge east coast USA airports. Unless the topic is that this route is severely overcrowded, and not "why are they even flying there" in which case, put that in the title instead, why don't you?

"The globists are paying every airline and country to fly on a curved route for... Reasons" I love flat earthers.

@watema3381

3 жыл бұрын

@BigfootSquad BWPP Bahamas Living Convincing? Uh... no. You're just easily brainwashed. Every "theory" put forth by the Flat Earthers has been debunked by science.

@shaunstark4263

3 жыл бұрын

@@watema3381 perhaps you have been brainwashed by your god of science. You live in a realm. 3 dimensional thinking equates to a "flat line" Consider God

@watema3381

3 жыл бұрын

@BigfootSquad BWPP Bahamas Living The flag on the moon is merely for symbolism. Sure, theres no wind: But the fabric that makes the flag still follows the laws of gravity. Would you expect it to be fully unwrinkled when they erected it? Of course not. That's just silly.

@shaunstark4263

3 жыл бұрын

@WSB News a curved route wouldn't work either, fool. Neither makes sense, yet confirmation bias wont even allow you to see the other side to make an educated decision.

@watema3381

3 жыл бұрын

@@shaunstark4263 My belief in science stems from tangible facts, concrete evidence that things are the way they are. Not once have I mentioned "God" or if I believe in it here, so don't question my religious beliefs

A few things here, a planes TCAS system will prevent any collisions if it is flying too fast and close to another plane, airliners in a overspeed condition would reduce speed and drop into another attitude to avoid undo stress to the air frame, when traveling outside of radar or VHF range a plane would use gps tracking and communications, the North Atlantic track is preferred because of fuel savings and time but a flight would need permission and if there is too much traffic or other factors a plane would be scheduled on the track traveling closer to Iceland when crossing

The plane that sped up because of the wind, would not "catch up" with those flying in the same direction at the same altitude. They would all speed up. It's relative to each other. The separation is the same over the USA, which is even more convoluted, because planes fly in so many more directions. We don't just use ground radar either. In 2020, ADS-B became required, but was installed in a lot of airplanes 10 years prior. It uses a combination of GPS and altitude sensors to report and communicate with satellites. You are NOT invisible up there. Even without any ATC around, you can see the other airplanes yourself on the moving map, and get warnings from it.

So many exaggerations and inaccuracies in this video! In addition to what other people have said, another false statement is that turbulence might cause planes to run into each other. Clearly, not enough research was done for this video. Even extreme turbulence doesn't cause loss/gain of 1000 ft. Turbulence only poses a risk simply because of possible injury to passengers during extreme situations. Moreover, turbulence has been increasing due to increased amount of planes in the sky [prior to covid], not necessarily due only to climate change, but that is debatable.

Long flights across the Atlantic can be very boring if you struggle to sleep on an airplane. Nothing wrong with a little turbulence to spice things up.

Very nice video, although I would like to comment on the fact that the B787 did not break the sound barrier. The mach number (what measures the ratio of an airplane speed with respect to the speed of sound, where M = 1 corresponds to a sonic speed) depends not on the ground speed but on true airspeed. When an airplane has a big tail wind (which was the case of this B787) ground speed increases but airspeed remains constant (if power inputs remain also the same). For that reason, even though the B787 was traveling at a ground speed of 758 mph, it’s true airspeed still remain well below the speed of sound. I hope this made sense.

It didn’t break the sound barrier. Speed of sound is local, their airspeed was still ~600 mph. If a passenger plane broke the sound barrier, they would have a lot more to worry about than separation on a travel lane

Always nice to see a new Wendover video

Somebody's been watching Wendover videos again...

@frankczw

3 жыл бұрын

the least they could animate the air highway correctly

@tarcal87

3 жыл бұрын

Like that guy has exclusivity rights on the topic or something

@tarcal87

3 жыл бұрын

@BigfootSquad BWPP Bahamas Living Gets tiring after a while. Under any flight video, fans somehow feel the need to mention that they know Wendover's channel as if it's a hidden-gem type channel. It's got 3m subs. Luckily we don't have to scroll through 3m random comments per video. (I googled conch salad, it looks yummy!)

@tarcal87

3 жыл бұрын

@BigfootSquad BWPP Bahamas Living I've googled Exuma Cay. What else can you tell about it?

@jasonremy1627

3 жыл бұрын

So it looks like I was the 17th person to make this joke...

I'm not certain of the connection between the jet stream and the Tacoma Narrows bridge. The bridge collapsed due to a design flaw that was exacerbated by high winds. I'm confused.

@johnstuartsmith

9 ай бұрын

You aren't as confused as whoever thought the Tacoma Narrows collapse had anything to do with the jet stream.

When I heard Gander all I could think of was Come From Away

@nghicks42

3 жыл бұрын

Look into the town of Gander, especially what happened after the 9/11 attacks.

@seagullseagull7678

3 жыл бұрын

@@nghicks42 that’s actually what the musical Come From Away is about! Obviously it is dramatized a bit but it was very interesting

@nghicks42

3 жыл бұрын

@@seagullseagull7678 Gotcha-never heard of the song. Been to Gander... once. Such a small town, yet such compassion.

@seagullseagull7678

3 жыл бұрын

@@nghicks42 it’s a great musical, really brought attention to such a beautiful story.

Thanks very much for the video, this is great information for my air band monitoring activities. I used to receive New York and Santa Maria ATCS clearly couple of years back. All the electronic noise pollution has made it difficult these days. I get Shannon volmet very feebly. 😢

"What do you think of the increased turbulence in the jet stream?" Is that a trick question? What do I think about having to breathe oxygenated air? Well, it's a nuisance, so I'll vote against it next time. 🙂 Science doesn't give a fig about what any of us think. It's something we just have to live, or die, with. Twitter users will of course disagree ... 🤣

@jamielonsdale3018

2 жыл бұрын

I love your sarcastic wit. I had such a grin reading your comment.

That is so interesting! I love to learn about aircraft

@uptin

3 жыл бұрын

Me too! 😄

Awesome video ✈️✈️❤❤

ok so id thought id give my explanation on this video 1, the nats are not dangerous each plane is atleast 4 mins away from each plane and 1000ft above or below in RVSM airspace. 2, you do not report ur position every 4 mins you report passing the waypoint/ cord enroute with a message as follows "GTI8083 passed 40N30W at 1300Z mach .85 FL360" and this is done through satcom/dlink. 3, that virgin 787 was not in any danger as its airspeed did not change only its groundspeed changed (airspeed is the speed realitive with the air and ground speed is the speed over the ground) also id note that it did not "get close to other planes" because the other planes were flying in RVSM airspace with 1000FT vertical seperation between them and other planes at the same altitude would experience the same winds. I would also add that in RVSM airspace aircraft going west 180-359 degrees fly at a different set of altitudes then aircraft flying east 000-179 degrees. My tip, please have an understanding of how aviation works before u make a stupid video and make urself sound stupid because u dont actually want to take the time to do proper research you just want to spread "fear" into gulable minds who to know nothing about aviation.

That is Wild Earth! Always changing, Never static. And certainly never catering to mankind's comfort zone. We are not owners of this Beautiful Planet, only Inhabitants.

Great info

In Ireland, looking up and you always see trans-Atlantic planes.

@CuriousMuse

3 жыл бұрын

Ireland 😍

@garykaplan7728

2 жыл бұрын

I’ve never been to Ireland, but I have flown over it many times.

Severe turbulence is reported more than it was in the past. It is on the rise but much more met reports are gathered. BTW- the aircraft that encountered the jet streak didn't break the "sound barrier", an archaic term, its groundspeed increased while its speed through the moving air mass remained the same.

We fly great circle routes because, due to the bulge of the earth, that route is shorter than a direct route say from Paris to New York. I crossed the North Atlantic as a B-767 captain exactly 100 times and 99 of those were flown on the great circle tracks. One time I departed Geneva, Switzerland and as I was approaching the west coast of France, I got re-routed almost directly to Newark, my destination. That direct routing took 1:15 hours longer than my flight plan route that would have taken me way north, then over Nova Scotia then Newark.

@patrickbell5107

11 ай бұрын

Thank you! was hoping someone would mention this

@12345fowler

8 ай бұрын

Interesting, why is that you couldn't take the NATS ? Equipement failures ?

We maintained separation from other airplanes flying the great circle tracks once out of radar contact by maintaining a precise assigned airspeed, lateral track, and altitude.

I actually appreciate the shift from optimism about what could be prevented if governments took action to a more realistic resignation towards the hazards we are certainly going to face and face now because we know they won’t.

I knew I was playing Microsoft flight simulator wrong

@HeenaPatel253

3 жыл бұрын

And that’s how u know the game is really good

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

You wanna "break the sound barrier" kid, just set the winds from the west at 400mph, and fly an airliner at the fastest Mach speed it will go. Bingo. New York to London in 2 hours ;)

Crossed the atlantic at least 40 times and only ever had turbulence in the winter months (maybe 2times where it was severe) and right when we were about to cross from the ocean to a land mass and vice versa. Don’t worry folks, airplanes are designed to withstand turbulence waay stronger than we have on Earth.

Passengers on the fast 800 mph flight: thank you for getting me to my destination much faster. Why can't all fly that speed?

It broke the sound barrier... Are you sure about that? I'm only two minutes in. I'm out.

@TrainerAQ

3 жыл бұрын

Comment section was fun though. I stopped too.

@HieronymousLex

3 жыл бұрын

@@TrainerAQ I see you, fellow aviation nerds

Should have explained what vertical wind sheer actually is.

@jamielonsdale3018

2 жыл бұрын

Vertical wind shear is when winds shears vertically. That is the level of explanation you'd get from Cheddar. I'm here for the incredulous commenters, not the low-bar video. Cheddar is a terrible source of information.

If I was piloting a plane that was in a jet stream going 800 mph and hear a sonic boom I would go on the loud speaker and say "hey guys, you ever been on a concorde before?"

@elweewutroone

3 жыл бұрын

You would not hear the sonic boom from inside. Anyway, airspeed is measured relative to the air and ground speed is airspeed + wind speed.

@HDTomo

3 жыл бұрын

@@elweewutroone eh, still would've known

VERY BEST WORK

Recently, when I was flying from Toronto to Dubai, the airspeed of the plane was 545 MPH and the ground speed was 750 MPH.

The 787 did not break the sound barrier

3:45 Wow. I think that's absolutely beautiful.

The real problem is London Heathrow taking in entirely too many flights ✈️ they have completely screwed up that airport. It’s always been busy yes, but they need to get that extra runway installed asap

25 seconds in and im already WOWING lol.

Thank you

Traffic jam? Airspace is a 3-dimensional environment. Imagine a shared route that's just 50 miles wide and ranged from 30 to 40K feet. You could give each trans-Atlantic aircraft its own 2-cubic-mile block of space to occupy and you'd still have room for almost 250,000 airliners moving at the same time from New York to London. The flight paths aren't where the crowds are, it's the AIRPORTS.

So what about on their journey from Europe to America flying against the flow of jetstream. I guess the main reason the planes use these routes, both ways, is because it's the shortest distance.

At timestamp 1:34 you forgot about Reykjavík Oceanic Control Area (“OCA”).

@zackaplowitz

3 жыл бұрын

Don’t forget Bodo!

@ScottRothsroth0616

3 жыл бұрын

@@zackaplowitz I honestly never heard of Bodø Oceanic Control Area. (If I missed any others ↙️: North Atlantic Operations - Airspace - SKYbrary Aviation Safety www.skybrary.aero/index.php/North_Atlantic_Operations_-_Airspace; )

@julesw1403

3 жыл бұрын

@@ScottRothsroth0616 thank you for that link so I can read the info.

The “airport” were seeing at 08:15 is a train station. St Pancras international to be precise!

If the 787 broke the sound barrier the elevator would lose effectiveness from compressibility and the aircraft would have permanent structural damage. It did not break the sound barrier, it's ground speed equivalent in KCAS or true airspeed would be supersonic, but the 787s systems would deploy the spoilers, airbrakes and bring the engines to idle if it came anywhere near it's Vne. Also you guys didn't take ETOPS into account.

Me, a person that flies from Portugal to the US. I'm too good for that corridor.

@altrag

3 жыл бұрын

Can only make that flight once without going back to Portugal! Though I suppose you could just take a series of westward flights.. Portugal->NYC->LA->Hong Kong->Portugal or whatever similar combination.. then you could fully avoid the jet streams over both oceans!

If I remember correctly , wendover production made a video about this too. Edit, except the meteorlogy part.

@MoonLiteNite

3 жыл бұрын

and his didn't have 10 facts wrong...

I’m scared of flying but for some reason I watch all these aviation videos

You realise that bridge collapsed because of resonance, not wind speeds...

I grew up in Newfoundland. All day long, I’d watch jumbo jets flying back from Europe in the morning, and going to Europe at night.

Thanks for the video. Now I know two consiquenses caused by jet stream. On you explained here. Another one is the weather in Toronto, for example. Did you know that Toronto is more southern most city than Florence? Yes, it is. But the weather in these two cities is quite different. Florence doesn't have Canadian jet stream.

I guess we'll have to take a ship across the arctic the next type we need to fly to the other side of the pound (thanks for the SI units conversion)

0:31 Swim my little Michael Phelps. Go for the finish line 😂

All planes do not take that crowded route Got that ?

"An immeasurable amount of planning and precision."

@jamielonsdale3018

2 жыл бұрын

I literally paused the video as they said that and repeatedly the line to my significant other. We both said it makes no sense. For it to be precise, it must be very accurately measured... Right?

nice video

good video

3:12 that's why my mom says "don't touch what doesn't concern u"

Haven’t started this vid yet but I also think they take this route because of the Gulf Stream and also shipping lanes so if anything happens it’s easier to find. Plus it’s shorter due to the earths curvature

I didn’t know that the 787 could travel over mach 1

@johnp139

3 жыл бұрын

Because it can’t. As Abraham Lincoln once said “Don’t believe everything that you see on KZread.”

@caribbeansimmer7894

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnp139 lol

2:29 Is this a part earth?

So basically - wind

1. More planes does not necessarily equal more danger 2. Lack of Radar coverage is becoming less relevant as more aircraft include on board radar and collision avoidance systems At least do a little more research. Aviation is a very well organized field. Understanding the nuances is very important.

Flew from Canada to Italy then to Lebanon and It was so Smooth I feelt Like im on the ground. It was the best Flight.

illuminating.

Stock footage from St Pancras - which is a train station! :)

Same across the world. The atlantic is no different. Flight paths can also seem unusual on a map but are stright flights in realirty. This can explain arctic paths. Shortest point is a straight line but on a globe will look like a parabolic path. Jetsreams vary with altitude weather etc so vary in flight. Direction also varies in flight direction with east to west facing headwind drag

I bet you didn't know that the Gander and Shanwick areas come together at what's called the "Molson-Guinness Line".

Set the speed to 1.5. You'll thank me later when you realize she still sounds normal lol.

Strange! satellites are not available for a major priority such as this? Now I wonder why this is?

In Nov. of 1997 I flew EWR to FCO considerably under 7 hours on a Continental DC-10-30. The Captain told us we had a 200 + mph tail wind. I have made that trip many times before and since that was my shortest flight. By the way the return trip was over 8 hours 40 minutes.

Because there is stops like you need to reach point A before you reach point B. Thats why it's like a 'highway'

This is why i have no problem with economy when going home from the US east coast.

No matter what the tail wind is, a commercial- jet DOESN'T break the sound barrier !!!

I believe this in 2019 flew from NY to London and omg the turbulence was terrible the whole entire 8 hour flight. People were screaming it felt like a roller coaster.

@uhohhotdog

3 жыл бұрын

Sounds like fun

@Jcguy123

8 ай бұрын

That’s one flight

"Gather your wits and hold on fast. Your mind must learn to roam."

Con razón la última vez que vole en AEROMEXICO, éste vólo desde la Cd. de México pasando del Golfo xde tlántico Norte hasta cerca de Irlanda donde doblo hcia Londres.

So all these satellites, but limited communication?

At 5:24 at least show the correct controllers in NATS who determine the routes. Hint, it's not at an airport control tower that will literally only be dealing with landings, takeoffs and ground movements at that airport.

45 miles apart 1000m vertically a d 1000 miles vertically? Lawl that's a high and low flight