The Insane Nuclear Powered Flying Tug - Pulls C-5s Across The Atlantic
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 06. 2021
- The first 1000 people to use this link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership:
skl.sh/foundandexplained05211
Thanks, Skillshare for believing in me!
This aircraft design was so powerful, it could drag two fully loaded c-5 galaxy aircraft around the world. It would allow unmatched military transportation and thanks to its nuclear reactor, would make jet fuel obsolete. This was the Lockheed Nuclear Tug and it planned to change aviation forever - but it was never built and today, all we know are rumors.
The US military had a problem in the late 70s. They needed to keep their many overseas bases supplied, and needed rapid deployment of home-based soldiers. They used a world-spanning network of aircraft and ships, but this was rather inefficient and cost billions to operate. So thinkers got to work on a new solution and stumbled upon the idea of using a system of tugs to move heavy cargo in the air.
While research done at the time showed no improvement to aircraft design with a tug and glider model - essentially it made more sense to just put engines on the glider, turn it into a plane, and do normal flights instead, BUT there were advantages in other ways.
namely, a tug and mission plane system would extend the capability of an existing aircraft fleet, at less cost than acquiring a new type of aircraft. the plan of using a tug, and dragging an existing aircraft over the ocean, would be cheaper than finding new ways to extend the range of existing aircraft. The air force could keep its bombers and transport planes, with the range extended by a cheaper-to-build single tug.
And what if this tug was to use a fuel source that made it have... infinite range. Such, as Nuclear power.
The ATOM, the wonderful power source of the last century was back, and this time to be used with the tug-and-plane model. With a reactor, the tug would have almost unlimited range and endurance, running out of food and water for the crew before it would run out of fuel. It would have little application in commercial civil operations but would pay dividends in the military. It would allow increased transport of military supplies around the world, and could even be retrofitted to carry and perhaps launch ICBM missiles - much like the later nuclear ICBM 747 project that we have featured on the channel already right here.
The other huge advantage of a nuclear tug, instead of putting a nuclear reactor in a plane like the C-5, was the problem of take-off power. By making the nuclear aircraft the tug instead of the mission aircraft, it would free up the C-5 Galaxy mission aircraft to carry only fuel for its take-off, climb, descent, and landing - plus a little for reserve.
The nuclear-tug design shown here has a gross weight of 2 million pounds or 900,000 KG; of which, 40 percent would be the reactor. The plane would be a seaplane, giving it the flexibility to land at any port in the world, and would fly only over water. If it were to fly over land, the design would have to include protection for the reactor in the event of a crash, entailing a heavier weight penalty. By being a seaplane, the reactor shell could be much thinner.
Once up in the air, the tug would be able to drag two Lockheed C-5 Galaxies over any ocean at cruise speeds. It would connect to them via long cable that would allow the C-5s to glide outside of the wake of the plane - something that would require complex wind tunnel studies, and tap into the power supply of the plane. Once arriving at the destination, the tug would disconnect and return home, with the C-5 galaxies full of fuel and ready to move onwards.
There was also a study into civil applications of this technology, to see if passengers would use the concept to cross between new york and London. In this case, it made economical sense for the tug to not land at either and simply drag the commercial planes, in this case, 747s, over the north Atlantic tracks two at a time, as long as crew replacement requirements would permit. The study concludes that while 747s would be good, a new aircraft would be required to truly take advantage of this concept.
Alas, there are a few good reasons why this aircraft was never built.
For one, the nuclear technology was nowhere near ready for such an application. Nuclear reactors at the time were heavy and there were concerns about a fission plane crashing or having a malfuncion and polluting half the world's ocean.
Lastly, Any nuclear reactor would have a marginal advantage over a more fuel efficient plane developed in the future and in the end it seems that the military went with just better plane engine technology. Like all things, the endless march of time makes the vision of the future obsulte before it even got its chance.
BUSINESS INQUIRES: Jared@foundandexplained.com
the nuclear tug literally looks like what happens if a giant ekranoplan merged with a antonov 225
i thought it was an ekranoplan from the thumbnail
Well i wouldn't recommend russian tech and nuclear power
@@user-gu1sz9vi9e Antonov 225 is a Ukrainian transport aircraft, completely developed in Ukraine from the chassis and engines to the fuselage! And as far as I know to this day, the only transport equipped with a gantry crane, which facilitates and accelerates the loading of any transported goods, without the involvement of auxiliary mechanisms and special equipment. What does Russia have to do with it ?!
@@user-oj3rw1bw5e you wrote a literal essay lol
@@user-oj3rw1bw5e I get it makes you feel better but we all saw what Ukraine is without Russia. Antonov was a genius but the company still exists today thanks to Russian technology developped during the soviet time. I mean after WWII your country wasn't even one.
"i could do this, i could make a channel called ketchup"
mhm, because the counterpart already exists >->
Somebody's already done a channel called 'Ranch Dressing'? Damn, I was just too slow!
And then using the F&E sound and cloud intro.. lol that made me ha-ha real loud
Mustard is so good though
@William Marten I'm more a Bbq sauce type of guy
2:22 that Mustard reference.
cute to see you guys actually do a collab as Mustard and Ketchup.
I don't know if he loves or hates Mustard, but the mention is always funny.
The good ole days when nuclear power seemed like a good solution to almost any problem.
There’s many safer ways to deal with nuclear power the world needs to invent in
Nuclear power is still a viable solution,
especially, for aircraft.
This is awesome
@@OhFuckItsOlkv until there is a containment breach or crash. 👀
We allow nuclear powered vehicles on and in the sea;
so, why do we exclude the airborne ones?
2:24 Mustard is happy he now has a condiment friend
With micronuclear coming out, it could just have been ahead of its time.
This and drone technology. It could be like an escalator for planes
@@piisfun think of scary thing, it's like that except scarier!!!!
@@mattweger437 it's funny Elon is against space-based beamed solar power, but that's another alternative. Everything is slow to phased array.
If you built enough of them you could run them in trains, they could act like satellites themselves, just another part of the Starlink network.
@@jtjames79 beamed power is way to easy to weaponize
@@justicar5 there's no such thing as an unweaponized spacecraft. You always got the torch at the back.
It's inevitable. Best thing to do is learn how to use the tools of creation properly.
As I was watching this, I found myself wondering how the planes would connect to allow themselves to be towed. In the WWII example, they were connected on the ground, but this obviously isn't feasible when one plane takes off from the water and the others from land. Then I realized perhaps you could use a system similar to the probe and drogue refueling system. After takeoff, the towing aircraft would trail the tow line with a drogue with heavy-duty locking mechanisms at the end for stability, and the aircraft being towed would fly into formation and plug into the drogue with a probe on their nose. Some reengineering would be necessary, but it seems like a workable solution!
>Sea Transport Infrastructure
>Inefficient
Isn't it always amusing when the Air Force tries so hard to justify its own existence?
9:30 airbus flying in v formation? man i would love to see that if possible, especially from the passenger POV
Imagine if they see a target down below and all do a coordinated roll dive down.
Target spotted TALLY HO!
The Molten Salt reactor was invented for this job. It was quickly realised the necessary shielding is too heavy but the ultra simplicity of molten salt made the engineering easy to deliver.
The molten salt reactor has been resurrected by the likes of Moltex and Elysium who have fast spectrum reactors that burn irradiated “waste” neckwear fuel. 99% of the energy is extracted against just 4% in before the fuel was taken into storage. That cuts the existing 30,000 years half-life to just 30 years.
That's the most soviet looking plane ever.
Imagine if we never had all the nuclear scares and we actually had nuclear planes. That would be awesome
Nuclear scares were not what gave nuclear a bad name. That was activists. Many early green groups outright lied about nuclear and took advantage of the publicity and media presence. It still continues to this day with many lying mostly without knowing they are as they are just parroting other organizations and things they heard in the past. Then top that off with a small number of scares and all the sudden a safe when treated with respect power source is seen as infinitely more dangerous then it actually is.
Now some of the green groups had a arguably good reason for the lies. Many really did think if we gave up nuclear entirely no one would ever build another nuclear weapon. Completely illogical yes but remember most activist groups especially early on are more emotional then logical so it makes sense. Not saying I would cry if nuclear weapons disappeared for good but nuclear has been a force for good overall and has the potential to do even more.
Is your skillshare sponsor spot ketchup joke a reference to mustard?
Pretty much
Bro mustard upload really quality content bro he upload once or twice a month but this guy has comparable quality and even then also he upload so fast like the last video just came a day back
@@AnkitKumar-fo2iz I don't care to compare the two channels. Mustard seldom releases videos but are always gems. This channel might have a little less quality but more than makes up for it from the variety and quantity of content. I enjoy both channels equally.
@@AnkitKumar-fo2iz Mustard post some of their work exclusively on Nebula
Hence it looks drought compare to this channel
I swear it's secretly the same person
“It was never built”
USA:” yes that’s right never built”
Snorts a line of coke, watches an episode of Thunderbirds and goes to a drawing board
The problem: the plane was designed around old-style pressurized uranium nuclear reactors. New Generation IV nuclear reactor technology that won't require a lot of expensive radiation shielding may actually make the whole idea viable again.
I'm sure they could pull it off if they really wanted to. Kind of wish they did lol
I noticed a big mistake in the video's information. 8:40 You said the engine technology was only lightly investigated and would take a decade to make feasible .
This simply isn't true as the us army created the NEPA program (Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft) all the way back in 1946 to study and create such engines.
They produced a nuclear powered propeller based plane (NB-36H) and started on both closed and open loop jet engines.
In 1961 project Pluto was started that created 2 nuclear powered ramjet cruise missiles . There was also the ws-125 nuclear bomber that had two nuclear engines built and tested in 1961.
If this design is from the 70's (which i doubt) then prior to it the army had already created at least 3 types of engines, reactors and started work on nuclear rocket engines.
if your nuclear jet engine requires the reactor to be "close to melt-down" you might wanna rethink this whole nuclear jet engine thing, lol.
this one was designed for cancelled SLAM missile
C-5 is pronounced like C5,no need for “dash” in the middle.
I think C 'dash' 5 is the official way of saying the name. But the name C5 is easier to say
@@vietoo5056 no, it’s officially pronunciations. You could find many clips when usaf generals addressed to congress . Just like many military terms,F-16 is F16 not F dash 16 or A-10 is A10 not A dash 10.
@@icy2527 No I mean the official technical terms, of course MP's and crews will prefer to call them F16 or A10. But engineers and blueprints usually acknowledge the 'dash' in the name, because it can sometimes cause ambiguity
@@vietoo5056 In the documentary like this no need for dash, that’s my
point. And I never heard my mechanic friends refer to their F-16 as F dash 16.(edit:typo)
@@icy2527 I think he means engineers in terms of vehicle identification, for instance there's an American heavy tank called T34 but then there's the infamous Russian T-34. Another instance is the American T28 super heavy tank and the Russian medium tank T-28, but you're right saying C "dash" 5 isn't necessary
Honestly I think a flock of a320s and 50s with a 380 mother goose at the lead might rival the tug on cool factor...
How about the nuclear aircraft being designed to produce more turbulence that the following aircraft can use for flight aid? The reactor has the power, time to put it to use
"Think about all those fish," shows a whale...
We are 17 hours away from the premiere and there are already people commenting that this is fine I guess
there are people already giving thumbs down :(
Unfortunately
@@FoundAndExplained we can use them as test subjects for nuclear reactor development....
@@captainpoptarts sounds interesting
@@captainpoptarts
I hear you
2:27 I see what you did there.
Cant wait, your videos always brighten my day!
Glad you like them!
BEAUTIFUL AS ALWAYS
I'm loving these new videos! Although I must admit I did giggle a little when you said "Cee-dash-five". :)
The USAF developed functioning nuclear turbojet engine prototypes. They were still a few years from being flightworthy, but far closer than you imply.
For sure. I did more research this morning and I think I’ll do a whole video on nuke planes
Crazy era when lobbyists convinced politicians that an aircraft might possibly carry a ‘safe’ nuclear reactor aloft. Nevertheless, multi-millions were contracted out to investigate and eventually eliminate this dangerous proposition.
This was a great video! Imagine these behemoths flying non stop around the oceans it baffles the mind in today’s health & safety conscious world…great offer on skillshare too I signed up! I hope this helps you carry on making great videos thank you 💯
A nuclear tug to tow cargo aircraft seems like a rather pointless and expensive exercise when in-flight refueling is an option. Granted in-flight refuelling planes might have range restrictions just like the cargo planes but taking the Black Buck missions from the Falkland's War as an example a fleet of several in-flight refueling aircraft can be used to get an aircraft to a destination well beyond it's regular range. I'm somewhat confident that since no extra development would be needed the expense of a fleet of many hundred in flight refueling aircraft would be much cheaper (at the very least over the short to medium term) than developing and building a fleet of dozens of nuclear tug aircraft.
What is it with Lockheed and nuclear power?
They had a nuclear power fetish
Wow your making these videos fast!
i heard you wanted something to watch :)
Why was I drinking milk when you mentioned "ketchup".
I think they will have to fucos on a flying saucer that can travel in a lightning speed and can change its course In any direction just like a billiard ball. It's a 💯 percent game changer.
I’m gonna make a train channel and name it Virgin Olive oil
The upload frequency is awesome
Wonder if there is one on trains?
He should make a video on trains and ships and other unusual vehicles
I came here to learn about a nuclear tug. I instead learned about the douglas F4D skyray. 0:50 i had no idea the navy operated a carrier capable delta wing aircraft
7:52 says fish,shows whale...lol.Great vid anyway!
i'll take it!
I love the 3d graphics on this show, are they 'drawn' from scratch or imported from other sources? if home-made what software is used?
Blender! its free and I encourage anyone to use it!
The US government already toyed with a nuclear aircraft. The finding was that the insulation needed to prevent the pilot obtaining radiation sickness was so heavy it prevents the aircraft from taking off. Even with a radiation suit, radiation levels in the cockpit were too high for the suit to be sustainable for any real length of time. The second issue also being if the aircraft were to crash there would be no way to contain any and all radiation that may spread over the crash site. Unlike a nuclear bomb the radiation spilled from the reactor has a significantly longer half life. So any crash site which may or may not be densely populated would become a radioactive hot spot from many centuries to several millions of years.
To me, an aviation expert, with an electrical engineer father, the scariest thing I can think of is a nuclear powered airplane~
Why
what about nuclear armed?
It would work if you use thorium molten salt reactor
didn’t make the premiere, but enjoyed anyways!
Congrats on getting sponsorship!
A nuclear powered blimp I could stay at the edge of the atmosphere forever it'll be the ultimate safe House well in like an apocalypse where people didn't have planes no more
nuclear aircraft carriers would probably be safe because they don't have a potential to drop from the sky. and they have unlimited water supply thanks to on board reverse osmosis filters.
@@xxxBradTxxx but what about food supplies?
@@freeze1625 hydroponics?
I love your vd i will stay here for 15 hours
so it's very wonderful
What is the song played before the video starts?
Man you are on fire! 🔥🔥 You'll get to 100k subs and you deserve a lot more! Please consider a video about the YB-49
1 min left mate
there is even a sneak peak of the flying wing in this video haha! so basically the video is completed and im going through the music/soundeffects stages, so pretty much done.
Can you do something on never built airships?
Lmaoooo that ketchup joke tho, almost didn't catch it. @mustard
Wow the line is extremely durable
I wonder what would happen if the pilots died. If it was on autopilot wouldn't it just fly around the world until its reactor ran out?
The autopilot would likely be written so to require human input every few hours or so, and a list of pre-loaded landing locations so it doesn't try to land in a lake or near a terrorist camp
@@toddkes5890 ok that makes sense
Another superplane with the potential to've been an Airborne Aircraft Carrier, very cool
Also is the footnote basically the planes becoming a dormant super-highway where they could enter/exit the formation at their origin/destination respectively?
I wonder if in the future we’ll get a nuclear powered aircraft, and it would be powered by nuclear fusion rather than nuclear fission.
closest thing we have right now is a solor powered plane
Thumbnail gives me Antonov AN-225 Myria vibes
Love his shots at mustard 😂 brilliant
There was a proposal for long-range nuclear-powered cargo planes. They would be BIG though - ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19710028801 . As an example, the small design was 900 tons (compared to a fully-loaded 747 of just over 400 tons, or the AN-225 of ~630 tons)
Casually throwing shade at Mustard. . .
Ahah no it’s an in joke
Where do you get the 3D models for your videos from?
make them
How would the land-based C5As hook up to the sea-based Tug?
Love the Mustard reference 😂😂
SOUND WOULD MAKE EFFECTIVE LANDING COVER FOR TROOPS
That's a lot of nuclear hate...
Anybody that is dismissing of nuclear has zero credibility for speaking on green energy
Pls make one video about the Antonov An 218 and 318
Thath "ketchup channel" joke was utterly funny.
“I could make a channel called Ketchup”
Yeah there’s totally no other condiment such as mustard named science channel
condiment, thats the word jeez i took 20 minutes writing my comment trying to remember that word, oh well my stupidity still managed to get F&E to heart my comment
Do the video of the other tug
I must say it would've been a site to be hold for passengers on 747 airline jets being pulled by this air tug.
Murcia says lol to the AN-225....hold my beer
Imagine if the impostor sabotages the reactor of the aircraft and the crew fixing it!
😳imposter sussy😳
Aircraft designers in the 60s: Nuclear power was always the answer
Have we really forgot about Cat Gose Fishing guys?
I had never heard of this project before this moment. I can understand why it was so interesting, however I can also see why no one was willing to risk money building it either, lol. Too bad an aircraft builder in the SpaceX model hasn't come around yet (speaking to people not afraid to "build it and they will come" model, etc.)
ketchup vs mustard: the holy wars
No!
Mustard and Ketchup are the Best of pals on my hotdog.✌️👍 Yum yum!
For the propulsion why not use the nuclear reactor on a closed system electrical generator and then drive propellers with electric motors or ducted fans?
There’s was actually a concept on a nuclear powered bomber back in the 50s and 60s
heck there were nuclear powered *CARS* in that era. :D
Chuck Norris once stood on the wingtips of 2 C5's with several people standing on top of him while he did the splits.
Tug life
I like it
"C dash 5"?
Tic tac powers the future
He attacc
He protecc
But most importantly,
He upload fastt
Love for nepal
hope to visit one day!
A channel like yours called Mustard you say...oh naughty naughty lol
"Stupid fishes, amirite?"
::shows mammal::
Was the channel named ketchup a reference to Mustard? Lol
By 1978, both the United States and the Soviet Union had tried (and failed) to build a nuclear plane. The American nuclear plane never flew, because the the radiation shielding was too heavy, and lighter materials wouldn't provide adequate protection. The Soviet plane flew, but they never managed to properly protect the crew from the radiation, since adequate shielding would be too heavy, so they too abandoned the concept. Whomever proposed this project knew full well that it was a pointless money sink. And there really was no need. 1:51 makes it seem as if a C-5 couldn't cross the Atlantic, except the Azores are well within range, and can be used to stop for refuelling. Furthermore, there is an American air base on Newfoundland, from where they could reach Ireland. The whole thing was a scam by men who where desperately pretending their continued employment was not a pointless burden on the military.
What 4:30 AM Well I will not be able to see this video premiere.
I might be the first one to comment here.
Vaporware story for the day.
This is definitely at the top of the list of most underrated CZcams channels
thank you very kind words! i hope that i can get a little more views, but thats youtube life haha. i want to get to 100k subs, that would be my dream :)
@@FoundAndExplained I hope you can get there!
Great vid! However, just say “C 5”.... you don’t need to say: C “dash” 5....😩
The DASH, man.
You can't leave out the DASH.
The DASH is what separates it.
@@OhFuckItsOlkv.... C-5.....you SPELL it with the dash, but you don’t SAY “dash”....
but the DASH makes it funner.
@@OhFuckItsOlkv.... that is a good point.....ok, the “dash” must stay!!!!👍👍✅✅
DASH
As we New Yorkers often say... Forget About It!
08:24...... “sproon”? 🤔 do you mean “strewn”? Remember, google is your friend!👍👍
Civil airliners flying in close formation is a terrible idea. Airbus is out of their minds.
6:35 i think you messed up the cable there
What the hell... The skillshare plug... Ketchup 🤣.
Srsly doe.. you & mustard should collab. Especially to unfold mysterious army project that also turns into commercial planes. (Since mustard's tone is suitable for army themed aircraft)
It wouldn't have INFINITE range, the reactor would have to be small, but still a very large improvement for range
there was another nuclear jet like this but it was to be the spear head of a war by being an aircraft carrier to a trupe transport