The secret about biplanes | The reason why they don't fly anymore

Excellent video! As an aerobatic pilot and former biplane owner, I mildly object to your statement that biplanes are inefficient. Efficient compared to what mission for the plane? In Aerobatics, the high drag is helpful when you need to slow down quickly for an upcoming maneuver, and with the top wing set up to stall at a different rate from the bottom wing, it is much easier to control the break, as when performing a spin or a snap (flick) roll. Having said that, for the vast majority of flying purposes, you are indeed correct.

Practicality must sometimes give way to style. ;)

If it was a question of getting enough extra lift, but losing one wing, did anyone experiment with delta wings? They would have more area and generate more lift right?

too much drag?

When I did a presentation in junior high school about biplanes, I was asked why we stopped using them, I made up a reason on the spot which was similar to what was presented in this video without the science.

YOU DID A SUBERB JOB ON THIS VIDEO. I AWAYS WONDERED WHY THE UPPER WING ON THE BIPLANE WAS SHIFTED A LITTLE FORWARD. I FIGURED IT WAS BECAUSE OF DRAG.

I wonder could you build a biplane with wings rigid enough so it doesn't need the supports?

Biplanes are cool.

Cropdusters: ima ruin this mans whole video

In my opinion, what really cracked it for the Wright brothers was that they grasped the vital point about the engine; it was not the absolute power produced by the engine, but the power to weight ratio - and that was why they chose a petrol (gasoline) engine. This point was missed by a highly experienced chartered engineer, who decided to prove once and for all that heavier than air flying machines were a physical impossibility. He wrote and published an academic paper, detailing the sources of all his data, and all his calculations. His conclusion demonstrated that heavier than air flight was indeed impossible - except for one error. He had ignored the petrol engine as a power source - and it was, admittedly, pretty primitive, poorly understood, and far from reliable. So he'd based all his work on the assumption that the only practical engine for an aircraft was a steam engine. Both petrol and steam engines required a tank of fuel, but even though a steam engine can be powered by a very light 'flash boiler', it would also need a tank of water - and that unavoidable extra weight was the killer.
It's ironic that, just as the engineer published his paper, the news came through that the Wright Flyer had achieved what he honestly believed to be impossible.

Fokker Dr.1: "3 wings. Take it or leave it."

Good. Short and to the point. Thanks

Did someone change the laws of physics ?

I thought biplanes were planes that identified themselves as two planes 🤪🤣🤣

But An-2 produced and now in CPR but name like Y-5 .
It ideal plane if you have anyone airfield ol normal road.
Jokes
An-2 it 50 for 100.
Why?
50 km 100 l fuel.

A 7 minute video just to tell us what we all knew. Gee, thanks.

The top wing pressurizes the top of the bottom wing just like how a WIG craft builds a pressure below the wing. This opposes the lift on the bottom wing. It was always a bad idea because this part of lift was not well understood.

Title implies they can't fly anymore.

There are several that still fly atound my area, so your title is clickbait.

I disliked not because the video content but too much intro and hassle before content. Thanks