This is an excellent video if you make sure you take the technical explanations with a grain of salt. I understand that it's difficult to simplify certain concepts, but I'm an aerospace engineer...
This is an excellent video if you make sure you take the technical explanations with a grain of salt. I understand that it's difficult to simplify certain concepts, but I'm an aerospace engineer and it's frustrating how many things he gets almost-but-not-quite right. So don't put too much stock in his specifics of supersonic flight and jet propulsion.
That said, I've never seen a rundown of the Blackbird in such detail, and the animation is gorgeous. I particularly loved the bit about the controls mixer – such an elegant mechanical solution to a problem we'd probably just solve with electronics these days.
Yeah, Jake from Animagraffs is an infographics designer turned animator... so I'm not surprised to hear that there are a bunch of mistakes in his technical explanations. But to his credit, as with...
Yeah, Jake from Animagraffs is an infographics designer turned animator... so I'm not surprised to hear that there are a bunch of mistakes in his technical explanations. But to his credit, as with most of his videos, there is a pinned comment thread with a bunch of technical addendums/corrections, and a call for expert feedback. So if you happen to have some free time, and a desire to help correct some of the mistakes and clarify some of the details for everyone, that would be a good place to do so, and help the channel creator out.
p.s. Brian McManus (Real Engineering) is an aerospace engineer, like yourself, though. So I tend to put more stock in his technical explanations... and he also released his own SR-71 video a few years ago that is probably worth checking out for those interested in more information: The Insane Engineering of the SR-71 Blackbird
I watch a ton of edu-tainment content on YouTube as a guilty pleasure. Its great entertainment until they cover something you're intimately familiar with, then it's just a little infuriating 😂. I...
I watch a ton of edu-tainment content on YouTube as a guilty pleasure. Its great entertainment until they cover something you're intimately familiar with, then it's just a little infuriating 😂. I still love the content though, I just need to remember it might not all be totally accurate.
Which is why I just can't, I've tried but I can't, watch movie or book "commentary". So many people want to fill their Youtube channels, because money. And some of them even have...
great entertainment until they cover something you're intimately familiar with, then it's just a little infuriating
Which is why I just can't, I've tried but I can't, watch movie or book "commentary". So many people want to fill their Youtube channels, because money. And some of them even have video/presentation skills, though some don't which is two strikes against those.
But so many of them don't know anything about storytelling, or characters, arc, theme, any of it. They think they do, since they assume consuming a lot of movies/books/tv makes them knowledgeable. But they'll pop up a video with flash and polish and say meme stuff that's crowd pleasing. Then all that crap filters into Reddit and the rest of social media, and before you know it people are arguing with you over stuff like "Of course X is the antagonist, he's the bad guy!"
I like technical stuff, if it feels like they might have put some actual effort into it. But I wouldn't study for a professional certification by watching videos. To help me do yardwork, or fix a home device, sure. The thought of an aircraft mechanic "cramming" for his shift by watching a "How the (model of aircraft) works; an infographic presentation" makes me want to run screaming from the thought of ever getting on an airplane. And I already don't like flying.
Helicopters have these too. I have seen one up close, and it looked like someone put a crate of erector set parts in a cement mixer. This is not the one I've seen, but it gives the idea. I am...
I particularly loved the bit about the controls mixer – such an elegant mechanical solution to a problem we'd probably just solve with electronics these days.
Helicopters have these too. I have seen one up close, and it looked like someone put a crate of erector set parts in a cement mixer. This is not the one I've seen, but it gives the idea.
I am aware of efforts to convert them to electromechanical by-wire control, but last I heard, there were some issues. The reliability of software is a much different problem then the reliability of mechanical parts. Boeing did this finally with the 777 (their first model with all by-wire flight controls), but the markets for airplanes and helicopters are completely different.
cc: @updawg, since you posted about that unique SR-71 predecessor variant, so are presumably interested in the subject, and I thought you might enjoy this.
cc: @updawg, since you posted about that unique SR-71 predecessor variant, so are presumably interested in the subject, and I thought you might enjoy this.
Thank you very much! I have been seeing it in my recommendations so I'll try to watch it today if I get a chance! But I also still have to watch last night's episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm!
Thank you very much! I have been seeing it in my recommendations so I'll try to watch it today if I get a chance! But I also still have to watch last night's episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm!
What astounds me most about the SR71 is that it first flew in 1964. This bird is 60 yr old technology! Which only begs the question - how much more advanced are the planes the public doesn't even...
What astounds me most about the SR71 is that it first flew in 1964. This bird is 60 yr old technology! Which only begs the question - how much more advanced are the planes the public doesn't even know about?
Edit: After watching the whole video, I have to say this animation is really well done. Not often an technically based animation can keep my attention for an hour, but this one does.
It's quite astounding that a plane built with that kind of speed and power was still controlled by cables that ran from the cockpit to the rear mixer. At Mach 3.2 everything came down to a couple of wire cables.
And damn good thing it was built in the 60s. Can you imagine the outcry from the greens for flying something that used 10,000 gallons of fuel an hour? :)
This is an excellent video if you make sure you take the technical explanations with a grain of salt. I understand that it's difficult to simplify certain concepts, but I'm an aerospace engineer and it's frustrating how many things he gets almost-but-not-quite right. So don't put too much stock in his specifics of supersonic flight and jet propulsion.
That said, I've never seen a rundown of the Blackbird in such detail, and the animation is gorgeous. I particularly loved the bit about the controls mixer – such an elegant mechanical solution to a problem we'd probably just solve with electronics these days.
Yeah, Jake from Animagraffs is an infographics designer turned animator... so I'm not surprised to hear that there are a bunch of mistakes in his technical explanations. But to his credit, as with most of his videos, there is a pinned comment thread with a bunch of technical addendums/corrections, and a call for expert feedback. So if you happen to have some free time, and a desire to help correct some of the mistakes and clarify some of the details for everyone, that would be a good place to do so, and help the channel creator out.
p.s. Brian McManus (Real Engineering) is an aerospace engineer, like yourself, though. So I tend to put more stock in his technical explanations... and he also released his own SR-71 video a few years ago that is probably worth checking out for those interested in more information: The Insane Engineering of the SR-71 Blackbird
Edit: Just remembered another he released on the SR-71: Titanium - The Metal That Made The SR-71 Possible
I watch a ton of edu-tainment content on YouTube as a guilty pleasure. Its great entertainment until they cover something you're intimately familiar with, then it's just a little infuriating 😂. I still love the content though, I just need to remember it might not all be totally accurate.
Which is why I just can't, I've tried but I can't, watch movie or book "commentary". So many people want to fill their Youtube channels, because money. And some of them even have video/presentation skills, though some don't which is two strikes against those.
But so many of them don't know anything about storytelling, or characters, arc, theme, any of it. They think they do, since they assume consuming a lot of movies/books/tv makes them knowledgeable. But they'll pop up a video with flash and polish and say meme stuff that's crowd pleasing. Then all that crap filters into Reddit and the rest of social media, and before you know it people are arguing with you over stuff like "Of course X is the antagonist, he's the bad guy!"
I like technical stuff, if it feels like they might have put some actual effort into it. But I wouldn't study for a professional certification by watching videos. To help me do yardwork, or fix a home device, sure. The thought of an aircraft mechanic "cramming" for his shift by watching a "How the (model of aircraft) works; an infographic presentation" makes me want to run screaming from the thought of ever getting on an airplane. And I already don't like flying.
Helicopters have these too. I have seen one up close, and it looked like someone put a crate of erector set parts in a cement mixer. This is not the one I've seen, but it gives the idea.
I am aware of efforts to convert them to electromechanical by-wire control, but last I heard, there were some issues. The reliability of software is a much different problem then the reliability of mechanical parts. Boeing did this finally with the 777 (their first model with all by-wire flight controls), but the markets for airplanes and helicopters are completely different.
cc: @updawg, since you posted about that unique SR-71 predecessor variant, so are presumably interested in the subject, and I thought you might enjoy this.
Thank you very much! I have been seeing it in my recommendations so I'll try to watch it today if I get a chance! But I also still have to watch last night's episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm!
What astounds me most about the SR71 is that it first flew in 1964. This bird is 60 yr old technology! Which only begs the question - how much more advanced are the planes the public doesn't even know about?
Edit: After watching the whole video, I have to say this animation is really well done. Not often an technically based animation can keep my attention for an hour, but this one does.
It's quite astounding that a plane built with that kind of speed and power was still controlled by cables that ran from the cockpit to the rear mixer. At Mach 3.2 everything came down to a couple of wire cables.
And damn good thing it was built in the 60s. Can you imagine the outcry from the greens for flying something that used 10,000 gallons of fuel an hour? :)
Follow up video:
How I reconstructed the SR-71 Blackbird (in depth research, 3D modelling, animation, and more)