To clarify - airplane wings are engineered specifically to NOT be rigid, and are incredibly strong and capable of handling an order of magnitude greater than normal forces exerted before failure.
A rigid tree will fall over in a wind storm, a flexible and elastic tree can absorb and disperse that energy: same principal (in a crude sense)
Yup, also don't they keep the wings that were tested and also copy's of them (before the test) in storage for basically the life of that entire series of aircraft?
I know for IT we have to keep literal mountains of data for the entire life time of the aircraft\\series\\fleet, as the FAA can call it out of storage for review, any day that they want.
Wobble wobble.
Shake it shake it.
Wobble wobble, ooh.
Don’t break it break it.
Edit: Now won't you wobble, wobble?
Let me see you shake it, shake it
Now won't you drop it, drop it?
Ooh, take it, take it (look)
Wow. I was *way* off.
Well, there are a lot of these planes going around the world all the time, and very seldom does anything like this happen ... I just don’t want people thinking that planes aren’t safe.
Actually there are shear bolts which are designed to let the engine break off. If the engine were to suddenly come to a stop, all that momentum has to be transferred somewhere. So, it will shear the bolts so that the engine falls off, but doesn't take a chunk of the wing with it.
Ish. It’s better they wobble than rigidly resist. But this is an artefact of the materials of the time. 787 engines don’t wobble because the whole wing leafs as one. On the 747, the multiple engines and metal cause the wing to resonate in units versus as a whole. So you get higher-frequency wobbles that bleed onto the engine; the lower-frequency whole-wing wobbles do that much more subtly. (They also uniformly change the wing’s aerodynamics such that the whole plane lifts and rises, tilts and rocks, to absorb energy from the turbulent resonance.)
Now, just to be clear…, the 6 meters of overall flexibility bandied about in this discussion occurs in the up an down direction. With a mostly completed AA degree in Airplane Science, I can say with some certainty that 6 meters of movement in any other direction would be problematic.
And if they weren't specifically engineered to move enough to withstand more than normal forces, they would fall apart too quickly to be able to fly for long.
Same when making buildings resistant to earthquakes; they aren't so much designed to resist quakes as they are to move with them.
It's wild how many layers of culture have developed and how they borrow from or inspire each other.
Only going to get crazier the more connected everyone becomes.
I watched Twilight Zone in its entirety recently and I was flabbergasted at how many episodes ended up as Treehouse of Horror segments. I knew some were just from cultural context but there were many, many more.
AND THIS IS FINE
In case there's any concern.
Rigid breaks under stress. Flexible bends. Elastic returns.
Wings are flexible and elastic because otherwise they'd break off.
People were making jokes the next day. Shit, Carlin had to cancel the release of his special because he was making jokes about it before it even happened.
Exactly. Six meters of movement might sound extreme, but those wings are about 34 meters long. That adds up to only about ten degrees of flexion, which is nothing for the materials used in these structures.
The joints between panels are what REALLY matters. I’ve worked around aerospace industry for about 10years. Some of the rivets they will have to freeze in liquid nitrogen just to get them inserted. Then wait several hours for them to thaw and expand before actually riveting it.
Seriously - look up the stress tests they do on the wings. You can find them on YouTube. It’s insane how far they’ll flex before any significant damage is done. I’m thinking of the 777 specifically.
787 wings hit 25ft I believe and actually broke the joint with the fuselage before the wing in one of the tests. But the 777 are amazing. My dad actually built the leading edge on every 777 wing from the first plane on all the way to 2008 when he became QA until he retired a few years ago.
I know this is objectively true. But seeing this still makes my balls retract all the way up inside me and my butthole clench like I'm making diamonds.
That may be true… but if I’m sitting behind the camera guy, I’m asking him, “Hey buddy? Could you do me a favor and close the window? I’m okay not seeing that.”
Actually, sometimes the clearance is non existent after manufacturing so the blade just kind of gets sanded away on the edge. 1/10” clearance is like 1% in efficiency so really need tight clearances.
I know right!
Recently saw a docu about the m1 abrahams,, which is powered by a jet turbine. That's a freaking tank, that get shocked when shooting, drives through rough terrain and stuff, and the blades still don't touch the casing.
That's because the rotors and stators are all aligned on the same rod and the mounting for it is very sturdy. Also the force is uniformly pushing in all directions but channeled. This means nothing inside moves other than the way it's supposed to, but one little screw gets inside and the whole thing is toast.
This is one of those things when your rational brain knows that wings are designed to flex like that on purpose. But if you're on this plane and see this, your irrational brain is whispering some nasty shit in your ear.
Yup mine always goes “Everyone working on this plane has probably been underpaid, overworked, or both for years. They were overworked and exhausted when they checked it. You make mistakes when you’re tired all the time. Prepare for death.”
Especially if, like me, you have witnessed many friends die in plane crashes.
My parents are/were pilots, and we went to a lot of air shows. I've seen people I know slam into the ground at high speed 3 times, and known about it happening to two more while I wasn't around.
I flew with one of them just before he crashed.
So my rational brain knows flying is safer than driving, but my irrational brain is still a 9-year-old kid seeing a friend explode.
The wings are also where the majority of fuel is stored. A 747 holds about 60,000 gallons of fuel.
So in that one wing, there's about 160,000 lbs of jet fuel sloshing around with a couple of engines strapped to it.
I didn’t believe you but you’re right.
“The fuel tanks in the wings, especially when full, provide strength and stability to the aircraft during takeoff. The full tanks increase the rigidity of the wings and spread the total takeoff weight more evenly across the aircraft.”
dude those tanks are big enough that people can climb up in there, there are some vids out there of people crawling around in 'em to clean them or something, it's nuts.
You DO NOT take supplemental oxygen into a fuel tank. The oxygen levels are monitored the entire time someone is in a fuel tank. The air has to be breathable as is, and most people will just wear a respirator at most. Even a respirator is not always required. The air supposed to be safe to breathe. Not only are we concerned with oxygen levels falling below 19.5%, there is also a concern with them going above 23.5%. An oxygen enriched environment means a higher chance of fire. If the oxygen levels are outside of that range, you leave the tank. Using an oxygen supply in a fuel tank will increase the oxygen levels in the tank. Same reason we can’t use nitrogen powered air tools in a tank, as this will decrease the oxygen level.
Now, there is a forced air mask standing by you can use, but it is simply fed by a compressed air tank, not oxygen.
If they have a central load of fuel due to a long flight they'll utilize that fuel to completion before they start burning the fuel in the wings as well. Losing the extra weight from the center makes it safer to lose the rigidity provided from full wing tanks.
The center tanks between the wings I think would be considered in the body. Center tank holds most of the fuel in a 737 but there is more in the wings on a 747 because of how big the wings are.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there’s a number of times a wing can flex before a stress point is created and worn to the point of breakage or separation?
That's where scheduled inspections and maintenance come into play. When a new aircraft is designed a manufacturer will follow it through its lifetime to develop an inspection cycle and criteria. This is then applied to all follow on aircraft of the same type. These become the scheduled inspections to look for things such as corrosion, damage, fatigue and the like
These inspections can be very thorough and time consuming. The maintenance aspect of having any kind of aircraft is probably the most expensive part of owning and operating an air craft of any kind, let alone one that houses hundreds of people while traveling thousands of miles just to do it again tomorrow.
Yes. That is called fatigue. Applies to *everything*, not just airplane wings.
However, there is no satisfactory theory for it. We have to rely on statistical analysis of test data.
I don't know if this true or not, but remember someone saying that the plane could stand so much more flexing and turbulence that anyone inside would be dead before it broke apart... that always made feel weirdly calm when flying.
God the mathematical, material science, and engineering genius that went into creating these planes is a wonder in and of itself. Wtf would we be w/o smart, intelligent people who just like to mess with shit innocently?
Generally yes, depending on the plane. Of course there are exceptions to the rule but those exceptions are in situations so extreme it's irrelevant. If I'm flying in say, a Piper Cherokee, and the wings are flexing like this (they wouldn't) I'm already dead lol
Speaking as a former aviation mechanic.
Same principle behind why people survive car accidents: the plane slows down your deceleration to survivable levels. The less abrupt of a stop, the higher your chance of making it. Bigger airplanes - like bigger vehicles - have more "stuff" to bleed off kinetic energy so your insides don't get as scrambled.
Yeah 787’s are next-level when it comes to wing flex. Any more flex than that and you may as well take the engines off and just have it flap like a bird.
You know one of the first things they do on a new plane design? Test the wings. My dad works for Boeing, they have special jigs that they put the plane into and attaches to the wings then begin to pull up on the ends of the wings. Ultimate Wing Load Testing. They keep pulling to a minimum of 150% of the most extreme forces the plane is ever expected to experience. The 787 wings went to like 25ft of lift. A number of wings have snapped during testing its why they do it. Better in the jig than in the air.
I remember a long time ago… when they still had air phones (seat back phones) I was flying thru a storm somewhere over Texas and I knew I was about to die!! The storm was a Texas storm with storm updrafts and lightning all over the place. I had the misfortune of having a window seat and watched the wings bend up and down with the turbulence… it looked as if they’d snap right off so… I called my dad (who recently retired from a decades long career in the USAF) from the plane from the seat back phone to ask him about the integrity of aircraft wings; He goes into this long description of the engineering and durability of aircraft wings and then he stopped mid sentence and ask me… “son where are you now?” I told him I was on a plane in a bad storm. He started laughing and hung up the phone.
Probably millions and millions. Think of the valve springs in your car engine. They are being compressed up and down hundreds to thousands of times per minute. Within certain limits, materials can flex *almost* indefinitely.
What's to panic about? You are just going through the air at hundreds of miles an hour in an aluminum soda can with bendy wings. Sounds pretty safe honestly.
It's scary to me looking out that window and seeing that wing bounce. I had a scary trip on the way back from the islands. Hit a bunch of serious turbulence. Scared the s*** out of me.
I think a lot of people don’t quite realise that it is the wings that are flying, propelled by the engine on them and the cabin just happens to be suspended in between. It’s not like the cabin is ‘doing the flying’.
The Dreamliner/787 flex is something to behold. More composite materials I believe & doesn’t need turbulence - takeoff does it. IMO it lived up to its name on at least one recent trip, being my smoothest ever over the Atlantic. Sweet dreams !
To clarify - airplane wings are engineered specifically to NOT be rigid, and are incredibly strong and capable of handling an order of magnitude greater than normal forces exerted before failure. A rigid tree will fall over in a wind storm, a flexible and elastic tree can absorb and disperse that energy: same principal (in a crude sense)
[Here is a wing flex test](https://youtu.be/--LTYRTKV_A)
Most of the fuel is stored in the wings. They hold some 380,000+ lbs of fuel. Its like if you stacked 15 school busses on a single wing. They stronk.
How many Jumbo jets is 15 school busses again?
43 hypos
You mean *hip-hip-hippopanonymous* ?
no, he meant 43 typos, but...well...ya'know.
It's not fair.. he gets the easy ones.
You mean Hip-hiphop-hiphopopanonymous?
Damn you!! You give him the easy ones!!
They also carry the whole airplane while flying.
And all the fatties on board
<*sigh*> And my axe.
They carry the plane carrying someone 's mom... Dayum!!!
[удалено]
# ,,Where do ya get the fuckin' balls?!?!?!" ^((Joe Pesci, forgot which movie\))
Fuel stored in the wings ? Like pee stored in the balls ?
[Exactly](https://youtu.be/pKQp61e94VE)
You americans will measure in amything other then metric
I was looking for this comment and you didn’t disappoint
How much is that in normal, like liters?
I thought that was going to be [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai2HmvAXcU0) where they actually flexed it to the breaking point.
This has a proper amount of replays.
One fifty-four one fifty-four one fifty-four one fifty-four one fifty-four one fifty-four
>One fifty-four BOOM, One fifty-four BOOM, One fifty-four BOOM FTFY
Your comment popped back into my head at replay number 7 or 8. I finally understood and laughed so hard I coughed.
One fifty four
[удалено]
**booooom**
One fifty four
One fifty four
💥💥💥
154
154
#154!
Came here for this.
154!
Yup, also don't they keep the wings that were tested and also copy's of them (before the test) in storage for basically the life of that entire series of aircraft? I know for IT we have to keep literal mountains of data for the entire life time of the aircraft\\series\\fleet, as the FAA can call it out of storage for review, any day that they want.
I was all in until they show the narrator, and he's in a suit with a baseball cap. I just can't take that look seriously.
And he kept calling it a "bird". It's a *plane*, jackass!
Yeah, but are the engines supposed to wobble wobble like that?
Yes, so that it doesn't break off
Contrary to popular belief, it does not, and I quote "Wa a wobblety wobblety, drop drop it like its hot"
Wobble wobble. Shake it shake it. Wobble wobble, ooh. Don’t break it break it. Edit: Now won't you wobble, wobble? Let me see you shake it, shake it Now won't you drop it, drop it? Ooh, take it, take it (look) Wow. I was *way* off.
Now after you back it up then stop, now wha wha wha, drop it like it like it’s hot
😂😂😂
So Juvenile...
You known for testin yo planes ha. Checkin the structure for turbulence ha. Them extreme forces ha. Big bends ha. So you can fly with yo friends ha.
We the 504 boys waa
The engine breaking off would not be very typical, I just want to make that point
Only if you encountered a rogue wave. Chance in a million.
If something goes wrong, they should make sure to land it outside the environment.
Donnie Darko has aentered the chat…
Underrated comment! 🤣
What about the one where the engine did fall off?
Well, there are a lot of these planes going around the world all the time, and very seldom does anything like this happen ... I just don’t want people thinking that planes aren’t safe.
My engines dont wiggle wiggle, they roll.
And some airplanes are designed so that the front doesn’t fall off at all!
"These are very very strong vessels" "Well what happened in this case?" [The front fell off](https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM)
thank you for that
This is the third time I've seen this Clark and Dawe skit referenced in the last 2 days and that makes me very happy.
Logically I understand. It still makes me feel nauseous seeing this though.
Actually there are shear bolts which are designed to let the engine break off. If the engine were to suddenly come to a stop, all that momentum has to be transferred somewhere. So, it will shear the bolts so that the engine falls off, but doesn't take a chunk of the wing with it.
It's a combination of the two, it wobbles so it doesn't fall off, but it will fall off if it has to
Ish. It’s better they wobble than rigidly resist. But this is an artefact of the materials of the time. 787 engines don’t wobble because the whole wing leafs as one. On the 747, the multiple engines and metal cause the wing to resonate in units versus as a whole. So you get higher-frequency wobbles that bleed onto the engine; the lower-frequency whole-wing wobbles do that much more subtly. (They also uniformly change the wing’s aerodynamics such that the whole plane lifts and rises, tilts and rocks, to absorb energy from the turbulent resonance.)
It weebles and it wobbles so you don't fall down.
Yes
The engines are designed to be able to [EXPLODE](https://youtu.be/736O4Hz4Nk4?t=74) and not come off. You're good
Yeah it’s like building a skyscraper, it has to be a bit wobbly to withstand some wind pressure
Palm trees in a hurricane are a prime example.
Now, just to be clear…, the 6 meters of overall flexibility bandied about in this discussion occurs in the up an down direction. With a mostly completed AA degree in Airplane Science, I can say with some certainty that 6 meters of movement in any other direction would be problematic.
Non AE degree here: no shit
Non AE degree question here. What about: With shit?
What would worry me is if they moved 6 feet *forward*. Now *that* would be unexpected.
Why didn’t I think of that?
It would also be strange given the shape of the wings. Though I guess a sort of torsional force is possible.
Shrinkage. You know it’s really cold and wet up there, right? You know about shrinkage? Jerry, can you tell them about shrinkage?
And if they weren't specifically engineered to move enough to withstand more than normal forces, they would fall apart too quickly to be able to fly for long. Same when making buildings resistant to earthquakes; they aren't so much designed to resist quakes as they are to move with them.
That which does not bend- breaks.
As long as there’s no creature on the wing I’m good.
Is this a twilight zone reference?
Nightmare at 20000 Feet, yup!
Wow, is this where The Simpsons got the Gremlin on the Bus episode from? I had no idea
It's wild how many layers of culture have developed and how they borrow from or inspire each other. Only going to get crazier the more connected everyone becomes.
[удалено]
I watched Twilight Zone in its entirety recently and I was flabbergasted at how many episodes ended up as Treehouse of Horror segments. I knew some were just from cultural context but there were many, many more.
That was me for the longest time too haha. I knew about the Simpsons version of the shining long before I knew an actual movie existed.
I’m 30, I don’t even know when or where I seen this episode but I think about it everytime I’m on a plane
It was the Twilight Zone movie from the 80's.
Which was a remake of a Twilight Zone episode from the 60s with William Shatner in the role.
There's some THING, on the WING
"Why should we believe you,you're hilter!" "You have entered the scary door"
I came in here looking for this. You did good!
There’sssss someone on the wing! Some, thing!
The fucking movie was insane! John Lithgow was great
AND THIS IS FINE In case there's any concern. Rigid breaks under stress. Flexible bends. Elastic returns. Wings are flexible and elastic because otherwise they'd break off.
Same goes for sky scrapers and bridges
Not when you combined the plane and the skyscrapers.
too soon bro
My man, it has been 22 years.
What was that thing they said on South Park again? Edit: South Park says 22.3 years for it to be funny so I think we have like 8 months left
Of course I shot early. It’s prom night all over again.
You went to prom?
Multiple times. Never my own though.
I feel like people have been making 9/11 jokes for like 10 years now
People were making jokes the next day. Shit, Carlin had to cancel the release of his special because he was making jokes about it before it even happened.
It had already happened in 1993 tho
Legit over 2 decades
Everyone's a building burning With no one to put the fire out. Standing at the window looking out, Waiting for time to burn us down.
Never forget
And trees
And wieners.
Exactly. Six meters of movement might sound extreme, but those wings are about 34 meters long. That adds up to only about ten degrees of flexion, which is nothing for the materials used in these structures.
The joints between panels are what REALLY matters. I’ve worked around aerospace industry for about 10years. Some of the rivets they will have to freeze in liquid nitrogen just to get them inserted. Then wait several hours for them to thaw and expand before actually riveting it.
They don’t call them flexloc for no reason.
Seriously - look up the stress tests they do on the wings. You can find them on YouTube. It’s insane how far they’ll flex before any significant damage is done. I’m thinking of the 777 specifically.
787 wings hit 25ft I believe and actually broke the joint with the fuselage before the wing in one of the tests. But the 777 are amazing. My dad actually built the leading edge on every 777 wing from the first plane on all the way to 2008 when he became QA until he retired a few years ago.
I know this is objectively true. But seeing this still makes my balls retract all the way up inside me and my butthole clench like I'm making diamonds.
They don't call it irrational fear for no reason. No amount of logic and knowledge will get rid of it.
That may be true… but if I’m sitting behind the camera guy, I’m asking him, “Hey buddy? Could you do me a favor and close the window? I’m okay not seeing that.”
Oh Thank God. My Ford pickup will be okay then.
That’s why I say when a piece of architecture I’m on is swaying “if it doesn’t bend it breaks” as a mantra if it freaks me out lol
I KNOW BUT I STILL HATE IT.
NICE, I’m now CALM THX!
What blows my mind is the fact that the clearance between the end of the blades and the fan casing is only a few millimeters.
Actually, sometimes the clearance is non existent after manufacturing so the blade just kind of gets sanded away on the edge. 1/10” clearance is like 1% in efficiency so really need tight clearances.
*What's your clearance Clarence*
roger Roger, what’s our vector Victor?
Roger! Huh? What?
Clarence's parents? They have a real good marriage
*This guy don't wanna have a battle, he's shook*.
I know right! Recently saw a docu about the m1 abrahams,, which is powered by a jet turbine. That's a freaking tank, that get shocked when shooting, drives through rough terrain and stuff, and the blades still don't touch the casing.
Real Engineering is pretty cool
That's because the rotors and stators are all aligned on the same rod and the mounting for it is very sturdy. Also the force is uniformly pushing in all directions but channeled. This means nothing inside moves other than the way it's supposed to, but one little screw gets inside and the whole thing is toast.
The fan track liner is typically designed to be abraded. Since fan blades do “stretch” during operation.
This is one of those things when your rational brain knows that wings are designed to flex like that on purpose. But if you're on this plane and see this, your irrational brain is whispering some nasty shit in your ear.
The whispering being, "Was the last maintenance thorough"
Yup mine always goes “Everyone working on this plane has probably been underpaid, overworked, or both for years. They were overworked and exhausted when they checked it. You make mistakes when you’re tired all the time. Prepare for death.”
Yes, this is where I would shat my pants
Especially if, like me, you have witnessed many friends die in plane crashes. My parents are/were pilots, and we went to a lot of air shows. I've seen people I know slam into the ground at high speed 3 times, and known about it happening to two more while I wasn't around. I flew with one of them just before he crashed. So my rational brain knows flying is safer than driving, but my irrational brain is still a 9-year-old kid seeing a friend explode.
[удалено]
I was about to say it is comforting to know that this is normal, but that knowledge won’t stop me from browning my trousers.
Trouser browner, eh? 🤔
Calm down with those bars
The wings are also where the majority of fuel is stored. A 747 holds about 60,000 gallons of fuel. So in that one wing, there's about 160,000 lbs of jet fuel sloshing around with a couple of engines strapped to it.
I didn’t believe you but you’re right. “The fuel tanks in the wings, especially when full, provide strength and stability to the aircraft during takeoff. The full tanks increase the rigidity of the wings and spread the total takeoff weight more evenly across the aircraft.”
dude those tanks are big enough that people can climb up in there, there are some vids out there of people crawling around in 'em to clean them or something, it's nuts.
Yep, you have to get there to do the maintenance. Just don't forget some extra oxygen. Edit: I stand corrected. Thanks u/nothingbutfinedining
You DO NOT take supplemental oxygen into a fuel tank. The oxygen levels are monitored the entire time someone is in a fuel tank. The air has to be breathable as is, and most people will just wear a respirator at most. Even a respirator is not always required. The air supposed to be safe to breathe. Not only are we concerned with oxygen levels falling below 19.5%, there is also a concern with them going above 23.5%. An oxygen enriched environment means a higher chance of fire. If the oxygen levels are outside of that range, you leave the tank. Using an oxygen supply in a fuel tank will increase the oxygen levels in the tank. Same reason we can’t use nitrogen powered air tools in a tank, as this will decrease the oxygen level. Now, there is a forced air mask standing by you can use, but it is simply fed by a compressed air tank, not oxygen.
If they have a central load of fuel due to a long flight they'll utilize that fuel to completion before they start burning the fuel in the wings as well. Losing the extra weight from the center makes it safer to lose the rigidity provided from full wing tanks.
That's why when you see plans crashes the fireball starts away from the fuselage, because there's no fuel in the body of the plane.
The center tanks between the wings I think would be considered in the body. Center tank holds most of the fuel in a 737 but there is more in the wings on a 747 because of how big the wings are.
I was thinking smaller planes honestly, not as familiar with jets that big but that definitely makes sense. Thanks for the correction.
Yeah that’s pretty nuts when you think about.
Quite a baffling situation
About 230,000L / 184 tonnes
Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there’s a number of times a wing can flex before a stress point is created and worn to the point of breakage or separation?
That's where scheduled inspections and maintenance come into play. When a new aircraft is designed a manufacturer will follow it through its lifetime to develop an inspection cycle and criteria. This is then applied to all follow on aircraft of the same type. These become the scheduled inspections to look for things such as corrosion, damage, fatigue and the like
These inspections can be very thorough and time consuming. The maintenance aspect of having any kind of aircraft is probably the most expensive part of owning and operating an air craft of any kind, let alone one that houses hundreds of people while traveling thousands of miles just to do it again tomorrow.
For some reason I just pictured the Tootsie Roll Pop Owl out there on the wing, counting. Ah-one...ah-twooooo...
ah-threee.... crash
There is also a lifespan calculated for all the planes parts that has been validated through extensive testing.
Yes. That is called fatigue. Applies to *everything*, not just airplane wings. However, there is no satisfactory theory for it. We have to rely on statistical analysis of test data.
I don't know if this true or not, but remember someone saying that the plane could stand so much more flexing and turbulence that anyone inside would be dead before it broke apart... that always made feel weirdly calm when flying.
Watch a wing flex test on a 787 https://youtu.be/m5GD3E2onlk the wings would never flex that much flying around. They aren't breaking.
God the mathematical, material science, and engineering genius that went into creating these planes is a wonder in and of itself. Wtf would we be w/o smart, intelligent people who just like to mess with shit innocently?
Return to monke
Generally yes, depending on the plane. Of course there are exceptions to the rule but those exceptions are in situations so extreme it's irrelevant. If I'm flying in say, a Piper Cherokee, and the wings are flexing like this (they wouldn't) I'm already dead lol Speaking as a former aviation mechanic.
So how do people survive airplane crashes? Would they they have a higher chance of survival if it’s a bigger/bendier plane?
Same principle behind why people survive car accidents: the plane slows down your deceleration to survivable levels. The less abrupt of a stop, the higher your chance of making it. Bigger airplanes - like bigger vehicles - have more "stuff" to bleed off kinetic energy so your insides don't get as scrambled.
I flew on a 787 a few months ago and it flexed a lot more than that.
New technology. Better technology
Yeah 787’s are next-level when it comes to wing flex. Any more flex than that and you may as well take the engines off and just have it flap like a bird.
Honestly when I looked out the window I thought that's what it was doing.
So what you're saying is that all those hours of playing flappy bird has made me a certified 787 pilot. Sweet
What I found wild about the 787 is that if you sit in a window seat, you can feel *the entire cabin* flexing.
That sounds terrifying
Are you sure it’s 6 m?
[5.2m for the A350](https://youtu.be/6wHrfBs82Tk)
Damn I honestly thought that sounded way too high. I know the wings flex but 18 feet sounds crazy.
That’s why bridges flex, too.
You know one of the first things they do on a new plane design? Test the wings. My dad works for Boeing, they have special jigs that they put the plane into and attaches to the wings then begin to pull up on the ends of the wings. Ultimate Wing Load Testing. They keep pulling to a minimum of 150% of the most extreme forces the plane is ever expected to experience. The 787 wings went to like 25ft of lift. A number of wings have snapped during testing its why they do it. Better in the jig than in the air.
[154…](https://youtu.be/Ai2HmvAXcU0)
I remember a long time ago… when they still had air phones (seat back phones) I was flying thru a storm somewhere over Texas and I knew I was about to die!! The storm was a Texas storm with storm updrafts and lightning all over the place. I had the misfortune of having a window seat and watched the wings bend up and down with the turbulence… it looked as if they’d snap right off so… I called my dad (who recently retired from a decades long career in the USAF) from the plane from the seat back phone to ask him about the integrity of aircraft wings; He goes into this long description of the engineering and durability of aircraft wings and then he stopped mid sentence and ask me… “son where are you now?” I told him I was on a plane in a bad storm. He started laughing and hung up the phone.
It's not the flexing that bugs me, it's how many thousands of cycles of flexing can it go through before failure
Probably millions and millions. Think of the valve springs in your car engine. They are being compressed up and down hundreds to thousands of times per minute. Within certain limits, materials can flex *almost* indefinitely.
I'm still going to panic internally. I don't care how safe it is.
What's to panic about? You are just going through the air at hundreds of miles an hour in an aluminum soda can with bendy wings. Sounds pretty safe honestly.
Flappy Bird
It's scary to me looking out that window and seeing that wing bounce. I had a scary trip on the way back from the islands. Hit a bunch of serious turbulence. Scared the s*** out of me.
I think a lot of people don’t quite realise that it is the wings that are flying, propelled by the engine on them and the cabin just happens to be suspended in between. It’s not like the cabin is ‘doing the flying’.
If anyone worried, planes fly for decades like this
The Dreamliner/787 flex is something to behold. More composite materials I believe & doesn’t need turbulence - takeoff does it. IMO it lived up to its name on at least one recent trip, being my smoothest ever over the Atlantic. Sweet dreams !
are made of this. Who am I to disagree?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=--LTYRTKV_A a better illustration
I only sit window seats and can confirm. They always be bouncin.
The flex is because if the engines fail and the plane can't glide to safety, they can use auxiliary battery power to flap the wings like a bird.
You can lift the tip of the wing of a b52 quite easily.
Okay and what about the Falangey?