Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

As air flows around iced wings ✈️🧊 Using NASA’s LAVA framework, engineers created this simulation of air flowing around ice buildup on a Common Research Model wing, helping predict how ice formation could impact aircraft performance.

61,119 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Merry Christmas Eve‼️ The biennial ICEX returns in 2026, where submarines come to play at the North Pole ‼️ 🧊 Operation Ice Camp 2026 (ICEX 2026). Here's what we know so far: 🧊 Dates: February 19, 2026 – March 25, 2026 🧊 Location: A drifting ice floe in the Arctic Ocean, approximately 100 to 225 nautical miles north of Deadhorse (Prudhoe Bay), Alaska. 🧊 Ice Camp Name: Not yet announced. The Navy typically names the camp after a historical submarine shortly before the operation begins. 🧊 Recent names: 🐟 Ice Camp Whale (2024) 🐟 Ice Camp Queenfish (2022) 🐟 Ice Camp Seadragon (2020) 🐟 Ice Camp Skate (2018) 🐟 Ice Camp Sargo (2016) 🐟 Ice Camp Nautilus (2014) 🧊 Expeditionary Logistics: Camp construction consists of building a temporary command center AKA "The Village" on a floating ice pan. This includes heated tents, a command hut, and a runway for fixed-wing aircraft. The camp must maintain a runway capable of supporting daily supply flights from Deadhorse, AK. 🧊 Submarine Operations: Under-Ice Navigation and testing the ability of US and Allied submarines to transit and communicate under the ice canopy. Surfacing to include several breakthrough events where submarines surface through the ice near the camp. Torpedo Exercises to include firing non-warshot training torpedoes under the ice to be recovered by divers. 🧊 Research & Development: Acoustics testing of how sound propagates under the ice, which is critical for sonar performance in the Arctic environment. Vertical Array Sensing where hydrophone arrays are deployed through holes in the ice to track submarines. Environmental data collection of ice thickness, water salinity, and temperature data to update Arctic models. 📹 A look at how it's done

🇺🇸𝗢𝗹𝗱 𝗦𝘂𝗯𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗿⚓️

86,026 views • 6 months ago

The difference between de-icing and anti-icing ❄️✈️ Pilots are required to ensure that the wings and all control surfaces are clear of any form of frozen contamination. Even small amounts of ice on the wing can significantly reduce its lift capability as well as the stalling angle of attack. De-icing fluid is used when the aircraft is contaminated with snow or ice which needs to be removed, but no further freezing precipitation is expected before departure. This can be accompanied by spraying heated fluid onto the aircraft to remove the contamination. If protection from further frozen contamination buildup is required, such as when it’s snowing, we then spray a second fluid over the clean wing, which adheres to the wing and prevents the buildup for a period of time. This time of protection is called the ‘holdover time’ Pilots calculate the holdover time for the fluid used by using tables and entering the fluid type, concentration, type of precipitation and temperature. As a general rule, the higher the number of the fluid used, the longer the holdover time. Eg Type 2 fluid offers a shorter holdover time than Type 4. The fluids can also be diluted to offer varying levels of protection. Eg 75/25 - This means that the mixture being used consists of 75% de-icing fluid and 25% water. The longest holdover time is achieved by using 100% fluid but this can be less environmentally friendly and very expensive. So if we can achieve the desired holdover time with a lower dilution, we can enhance the efficiency of the operation. 📸 by ig/airlinepilotperformance , iarild

aircraftmaintenancengineer

72,064 views • 7 months ago

Ancient Ice in Scorching Sands: How Persians Built Desert Freezers at least 2,500 Years Ago! While Romans were mastering grain storage, Persian engineers were doing something that sounds impossible, making ice in 40 degrees Celsius desert heat, without electricity, without refrigeration, without any modern technology. They built massive dome structures called yakhchals that could store 5,000 tons of ice through scorching summers lasting six months. These weren’t just holes in the ground, they were precision engineered thermal machines that defied physics. Here’s how they worked. In winter, Persians would flood shallow pools at night when desert temperatures plummeted below freezing. By morning, they’d harvest sheets of ice and rush them into the Yakhchal before sunrise. But storing ice isn’t the hard part. Keeping it frozen through summer is. The genius was in the architecture. The domes stood 60 feet tall, with walls 6 feet thick, made of a special mortar called saruj, a mix of sand, clay, egg whites, lime, goat hair, and ash. This created an ancient form of insulation that blocked heat transfer. But insulation alone wasn’t enough. They built massive walls called bodgears, wind catchers, on the north side. These caught cold night winds and funneled them down into underground channels that ran beneath the ice storage. The wind naturally cooled before entering the chamber. The dome shape was critical. Hot air rose to the top and escaped through a vent at the peak, while the ice sat in the coolest layer at the bottom. convection created constant airflow without any mechanical system. Some yakhchals were connected to kanats, underground aqueducts that brought mountain water. The flowing water added evaporative cooling, dropping the temperature even further. The result? Ice cream and frozen desserts in the middle of the Persian desert 400 BCE. Wealthy merchants would pay fortunes for a single cup of ice. Many of these structures still stand in Iran today, 2,000 years later, a testament to engineering that worked with nature instead of against it. Here are some more informative videos about yakhchals (ancient Persian ice houses) These explain the history, engineering, and how they worked in the desert heat: 1The Genius Design of the Ancient Persian Yakhchal | 2500 Year Old Freezers in the Deserts of Iran – Covers the structure, cooling system, and historical use in Iran. Watch here: 2Ancient Ice House Invented In 400 BCE? Yakhchals In Iran– Details the invention around 400 BCE, architecture in cities like Yazd, and restoration efforts. Watch here: 3Ancient Ice-Making Machines - The Yakhchāl in Persian Desert – A short overview of the evaporative cooling and dome design from 400 BC. 3 Watch here: 4The Yakhchāl: Ancient Ice-Making Machines in the Desert – Focuses on the “ice pit” technology and subterranean storage. Watch here:

GP Q

23,958 views • 4 months ago

👀 Filmed by me outside on our balcony. This is why LED light is dangerous to our mitochondria. First, let’s understand what we are seeing. Here it is -19°C = -2.2°F . Very different from the coast. The countryside is colder, darker, and holds ice in the air. What we’re seeing is artificial light from street lamps reflecting off ice crystals suspended in very cold air. At around -19°C (from my outdoor thermometer), the air can hold flat, plate-shaped ice crystals that float and slowly fall, almost like microscopic mirrors. 🤔 So why does the light go straight up? Because these ice crystals orient themselves horizontally as they fall. When light from a streetlamp hits them, it reflects vertically, creating straight columns that look like beams shooting into the sky. Our brains expect light to scatter. They are not designed to see perfectly straight columns of light at night. Cold air + ice crystals + modern LED streetlights (highly directional, extremely bright) creates an effect most of us never experienced historically. Older sodium lamps produced soft, diffuse glows. Modern LEDs produce sharp, aggressive pillars, especially in extreme cold. This combination produces light pillars regularly in winter. And this means something worse: Blue light is now being scattered above us and reflected back down, contaminating the night sky from every direction. That is why I call Norway a blue hell zone in winter. Cold should heal mitochondria. Darkness should protect them. LEDs destroy both.

Light Me Away ☀️

50,928 views • 6 months ago

Spoiler warning on why regulations are written in blood - the checklist debacle that caused one of Canada´s worst aircrashes was OTD, 56 years ago July 6 1970: Air Canada 621, a DC-8, crashes in Toronto (Canada), and all 109 aboard die. After a hard landing, the #4 engine and part of the wing fell. The crew was attempting a go-around when the jet exploded. The investigation pointed out issues with SOP related to the deployment of ground spoilers. More details on this accident below, which is a textbook example on “why” not to invent regarding SOP, in this case regarding lift spoilers, a device which is activated on landing to reduce lift and slow the aircraft. The crew of Air Canada 621 (Captain Hamilton and First Officer Rowland) had an informal arrangement to handle spoilers differently depending on who was flying, deviating from standard procedure. The landing flare reduces descent just before touchdown, and if spoilers are armed, they deploy automatically upon landing. Instead of arming them during the pre-landing checklist as required, the captain favored deploying them only after touchdown, while the co-pilot preferred doing so during the landing flare. Both procedures were unauthorized. During this flight, the captain was landing and asked for spoilers during the flare, which was unusual. The first officer mistakenly deployed them, instead of arming them, causing a sudden loss of lift. The aircraft hit the runway hard, damaging an engine and the wing, but managed to take off again for a go-around. However, fuel leaks ignited, leading to multiple explosions that destroyed the right wing. The aircraft went into an irrecoverable dive and impacted a field, killing all aboard instantly. As expected, the enquiry focused on crew actions. Eight recommendations were made, including redesigning the spoiler activation lever so it cannot be used during flight, strengthening the DC-8’s wings and fuel tanks, and updating Air Canada’s training and operating manuals to clearly define proper spoiler arming and deployment procedures. Video is an extract from the Disaster Breakdown excellent video on the occurrence, titled “Did This Small Mistake Kill Everyone?” (don´t forget to go see it and drop them a like and subscribe)

Francisco Cunha

29,127 views • 11 days ago

✈️ AvGeek jackpot yesterday! That beauty cruising just 2,000ft above us is a Cargolux Airlines Boeing 747-8F – the freighter version of the Queen’s final evolution. 👑 👉 Quick nerd stats: •Max payload? A thumping 137 tonnes of cargo (that’s about 10 fully grown elephants or… 30 million sausage rolls, depending on your priorities). •Range? Around 8,130 km with a full load – so your Amazon order could literally come halfway round the world in one go. •It’s the longest commercial aircraft ever built. Longer than a football pitch if you line it up just right. Then we hit the cool bit, the contrails. ☁️ Contrails = “condensation trails.” Warm, moist exhaust from the engines meets super-cold air up high → water vapour freezes into ice crystals → BOOM, sky scribbles. 💡 NOT “chemtrails.” Unless you believe airlines are spending billions secretly crop-dusting… clouds? (Mate, if there’s a secret conspiracy, it’s how airport coffee costs £4.50.) And wait for it … that funky mist curling over the wings? That’s condensation in the wingtip vortices. Air pressure drops over the wing, moisture condenses, and the vortex twists it into those ghostly little spirals. Aviation physics = free in-flight entertainment. Now, confession: my love affair with the 747 is deep. I’ve filmed two documentaries on these legends, and my book on the 747 drops in early 2026. Because this isn’t just an aircraft—it’s the machine that changed the world. Prove me wrong. 😉 #Boeing747 #AvGeek #AirBoss #QueenOfTheSkies #Cargolux #7478F #Contrails #NotChemtrails #AviationDaily #FlyingFacts #AirplaneMode #WingVortex #PlaneSpotting #AviationLovers #PilotLife #JetPorn #AviationHistory

Scott Bateman MBE

23,779 views • 10 months ago

This is another relatively well known USAAF B-17 interception by a Luftwaffe fighter that is worth looking at in some detail. There are no archival descriptions that I can find identifying personnel, date or location involved but much can be gleaned from the footage itself. The bomber being targeted lacks the chin turret that was specifically installed on the G model of the B-17 to counter this sort of frontal attack, identifying it as an F model. Tracers from the attacking aircraft come from both sides of the frame suggesting that the gun camera is mounted in the nose of a twin-engined aircraft, such as a Messerschmitt Bf 110 or Me 410 It is often speculated that the Luftwaffe fighter here is attacking through its own flak but it is more likely that the explosions visible are the result of the Werfer-Granate 21 rocket launcher being employed. Flak bursts usually had a distinctive shape and ground fire would typically cease when friendly fighters were attacking. The rockets were set to detonate after traveling a fixed distance of around 600 meters and while the chances of scoring a direct hit were low, their 40 kg blast-fragmentation warheads were effective in breaking up the "combat box" formation and therefore making individual bombers more vulnerable to attack. In this case however, it appears the attacking aircraft have misjudged their timing and the rockets are detonating behind the formation. This was one of the disadvantages of attacking frontally as approach speeds made targeting more of a challenge, however it was also a way of avoiding the majority of the bomber's defensive firepower. Another consideration often ignored is the effect that a head-on attack would have on projectile effectiveness. At full speed a B-17 would be traveling at around 125 meters per second, if it had to simply fly into a stationary 20mm armor piercing shell weighing 115 grams the impact energy would be 900 joules. This is significantly greater than most .45 ACP pistol rounds fired at point blank range, only from the motion of the aircraft. The speed of the attacking aircraft at the moment the projectile is fired can also be added to the muzzle velocity making for an even more devastating impact. This was of course a double-edged sword as it meant defensive fire would be similarly more effective on the attacking aircraft, and it also gave the pilot a smaller time window during which he could fire and a more complex firing solution to calculate, not to mention the increased risk of a mid-air collision. As a general rule, Luftwaffe pilots were instructed not to waste time setting up an attack from a particular angle, rather they should attack the bomber formation from whatever position it would be encountered. In this particular incident, most of the impacts are around the number 3 and 4 engines on the B-17. While air-cooled radials were more damage-resistant than liquid-cooled engines, from this angle they would not have been protected by the aircraft structure. While there is no immediate fire visible, it's likely they would both have been put out of action. Armor piercing shells would typically represent around a third of the ammunition loadout and for the MG 151/20 cannon such projectiles could penetrate almost an inch of armor at 100 meters, therefore punching through a cylinder or crankcase would not be an issue. There is also one particular projectile that appears to strike the cockpit followed by an explosion near the horizontal tail. It almost seems like a shell entered the windshield then detonated inside, however I believe this is an optical illusion and they are in fact two separate impacts. The damage inflicted would likely have prevented the bomber from returning to base although there is nothing in the clip that would allow the aircraft to be identified. One interesting detail is that other Flying Fortresses in the formation appear to be fitted with chin turrets which would date the footage to between late 1943 to early 1944.

hw97karbine

128,425 views • 8 months ago