I agree, modern British sounds mumbled

И никаких негров и арабов с английским паспортом 😂😂😂

@@errorsofmodernism7331”yo wagwan man’s P2Trappy still braaaap“ 😂

С него, наверное, Ил-62 копировали ❤❤❤

​@@user-xx3fx2kn8qbut the IL62 looked better

Yes, Especially with the later gold-speedbird livery

No those rear mounted dual engines always look weird the 707 and 747 DC-8 are perfect looking in my book 4 engine swept wing design

@Meh K beauty is always in the eye of the beholder

What does that mean?

I concur. Just beautiful British design.

Angeelo Gov And the stench of cigarette smoke filled the entire cabin.

No browns, or black people on board... We've come a long way...

My Mum went to London from Sydney in 1964 , over $2000 back then.imagine paying 30 to 40 thousand for an economy class seat .

@@PARABOLA1966 why do you say that because there was a black man on the BOAC Boeing 707 plane.

@@beagle7622 $17613 in 2021 basically emirates first class

There used to be a lot of high quality capital locked up in the airline system 50 years ago. But, TPTB planned out how to strip out everything and leave just enough to move the cattle about. The balance of the stolen capital was sent to Wall Street, City of London, and the usual suspects.

Flying today is a right pig. Security and the wasted hours before boarding the bus really sets the mood. A chore to be sullenly endured.

@@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc A "right"? If it was a right, there would be NONE of this social engineering to make us accustomed to being treated like prisoners or cattle. We have NO RIGHTS. They exist as privileges which appear as rights until you do something they don't like. All the security and wasted hours exists purely to show dominance. Plus, so much propaganda and political capital is locked up in the terrorist narrative that TPTB cannot back out from it. Give the American slaves some of their freedom back and the Sheeple will demand more freedoms to be restored. TPTB have spend decades getting us accustomed to this degraded and degenerate state and they are not about to give our freedoms and status back. .................. not until wholesale summary executions of our ruling and financial elites takes place.

@@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc Very succintly put and in a very erudite way.

Relaxed? Nah, it was still very formal & only upper & middle classes flew then as it was still a luxury & out of the pocket for Fred Smith. In the 1970s I flew on the RAF Vicky's being in the Army & my very first flying was 1971 Brize Norton in a VC10. I flew my first easyJet & it was awful, terrible landings & take offs & more room on a town bus.

yes, I remember the VC10 at Ohare parked on the tarmac

Today's economy class should be put in travel cages before loading them onboard. The higher classes are potty trained (usually) and don't need to be in cages.

Because the price of Economy back then was equivalent to today’s Business Class. If you want that same experience today, you know what to do…

..and the L10-11 Tristar.. and the DC-10 ( MD-11 )

VC is still the fastest jet airliner in the world.

composed and conducted by Johnny Dankworth

+John Eddy Thanks!

Fair call. That mod stopped many stacked airplanes. I think Boeing paid for the retrofit; dutch roll was the culprit?

I enjoyed my time in beautiful Fiji . ⛱️😎

And flying with wild animals seated next to you.

And the Nimrod had FOUR Speys. And yes, they were very load.

AMSTRONG VICKERS VC10 4 RollsRoyce conway 9.400kg empty x4 707 4pratt&whitnney jd-3 =6.500kg emty IL62M 4 PAVEL SOLOVYEV 11.000kg empty x4

I think trident also used APU on take off

Old school. Sadly they don't make them like that anymore.

77Nevill

A private VC10 is at Brooklands and a RAF tanker at Dunsfold

They (VC10) flew with the RAF untill only a few years ago, around 40yrs... That is a testimonial to British engineering!

low bypass turbofan I might add, loud and gas guzzling at the same time ,American rivals were ahead of R-R in high bypass turbofan.

@@barracuda7018 The Conway was the first bypass jet to be used on an airliner. As has been said, it was a low bypass engine. The Pratt and Whitney JT3D used on most 707s and DC-8s were also low bypass.

@@EricIrl Yes but I was referring to high bypass turbofan engines. Both GE and Pratt&Whitney developed one before Rolls Royce..

@@barracuda7018 That was a later generation. GE and PW developed their high bypass turbofans as part of the bid for the USAF large military transport - which became the C5 Galaxy. Rolls Royce didn't have the luxury of a large military contract to help fund their development of large high bypass turbofans so they were operating on a slower time line. They also hampered themselves by trying to use carbon fibre for the fan blades, which nearly put them under. However, their engine, the RB211 eventually turned out to be an excellent engine and both Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed all offered the RB211 as an engine option on their wide bodies. The Conway was used on the VC-10, 707, DC-8, Nimrod and Victor so it was a successful and good engine in its own right. However, its roots dated back to the late 1940s so was a very early jet which, by the mid 1960s, was being outperformed by later designs.

Via Beirut, Delhi, Bankok?

I flew in a Gulf Air VC10 from London to Beirut in 1975. Great airliner, great days back then.

Not only that but it appears cocktails, lunch and afternoon tea were all going to be served on the LHR-FRA sector!

What you probably don't know -no offence to you meant- is that both the VC10, the Trident and the BAC 1-11 were exceedingly quiet INSIDE. Which really did matter to passengers and made a world of difference, esp. when flying long distance. Yes, granted, they were super noisy outside, but so were ALL jets back then. The B707, however classy and gracious, was not only noisy outside, but also inside!!..ohh, those rattly Boeing panels... anyone remembers those?? British built jets felt so solid and rattle free instead...

I flew the VC-10. Was not louder than any newer aircraft.

samibar5555 Outside the cabin in was louder than 707 or DC-8..

Dakfab VC-10, Trident and BAC-111 all failed in global markets...

I flew on one in 1972 from new York to London and I don't recall it being loud. I find Boeing 777s loud.

+Stratus 262J Wrong - it was the DH Trident, can't remember the year but I suspect it was earlier than 1969

No think that was the Trident, the first aircraft to use auto landing via ILS.

Trident, yes! British aviation when it was something to be proud of.

Cheap flights gives you a cheap standard. Ive flew easyJet Edinburgh - Bristol for £44 return, but 55mins was too long in cramped seating. Can't imagine doing 3 hours or more.

​@@seltaeb9691Take a bus? It's cheaper and less cramped😂😂

because of you or the plane????

I didn't hear a thing!

Marcos Estevan Haha, i am in that club also on a 707 in 1989, while flying from San Francisco to Chicago with my girlfriend we just had to do it. We were both 18 just one day after my birthday. lol

Photos on sale here lol.

sure, all tail-engined planes are noisy near the engines, mainly because of the gears inside, whose vibrations transmit right into the cabin.

Better times when we enjoyed more freedoms.

Cigarettes were still healthy back then.

Cigarette smoking was bad for the health then, it still is an unhealthy habit.

That was the “water injection” I believe

I was 14 on my first 707-138 flight. Point of interest was the Pratt decal on the nacelle “Dependable Aircraft Engines” under the eagle. And the blue fug of ciggy haze down the cabin. And Qantas service way, way back in the day. Attractive stewardesses loving their job.

Wow, when I was a child, me too. But the plane was an Electra II from Varig... huge props

​@@waya2378They tended to disintegrate in mid flight!!😢😢

@@waynehentley4332 not here in Brazil. The electras was a sucess plane over 32 years until 1992.

@@waya2378 Go to Google and you will see!

That was a 747, Japan Airlines Flight 123.JAL never operated the 707 aircraft.

Jasper Van Der Blint It was a BOAC flight 911. The James Bond film crew missed that flight because they wanted to see some Ninja fight or something else. It crashed on the fifth of March 1966. It was registered G-APFE The 747 crashed in the 90s if my memory serves me right.

Peter Bradshaw Yes Peter, you are correct, I stand corrected.

Jasper Van Der Blint You are quite a gentleman. I had better recheck my facts. Talking off the top of my head is a dangerous activity:)

Peter Bradshaw Never get on a flight if the # 911 is involved.

That VC 10 was a beauty

well it says Johnny Dankworth in the titles at the beginning so i would guess yes

Orchestral Jazz, Jazz-Pop

The VC10 harmed itself. It had an excellent short field performance because when it was specified, BOAC slated it for use at hot and high airports on their African routes. Some of those airports had fairly short runways so the VC10 was designed to be able to get in and out of those airports. What BOAC and Vickers didn't expect was that those airports would be modified to accept the more "normal" performing 707s and DC-8s so all that extra performance was not really needed. And the great take off performance came at a cost in economics of operation.

Also Convair 440 was fast

@@user-ky6vw5up9m actually the convair 990 was

kubla777 : yes APFE was the registration of the 707, that crashed in 1966 on Fuji.

I think the viscount holds some record for sales. It had enormous passenger windows.

@@user-ky6vw5up9m It is the best selling British built airliner - 444 made.

They also loaded an elephant at 5:15-25! (The crate looked very small but you can't have an elephant moving and shifting weight in cargo. Hope they restrained the crate well. -- Also hope it wasn't too long a flight for that elephant!

why not call it what it really is: steerage class for the modern age.

The term most often used when I was flying frequently was COACH. Even so, it was not like today. Depending on the airlines, you could compare it to first class today, and you were never treated badly. Food was good, things like a soda was free, as was carry-on. Though back then most people just carried the small airline branded, carryall bag, or a grip for men and an overnight bag for ladies.

+Bobby Paluga One of the worst experiences ever was a trip to HNL on a western DC-10. Both the airline and plane were worthless. Being crammed into a flying cattle truck with 400 other souls is not a good time.

+Stratus 262J ah the Death Cruiser 10

+Bobby Paluga I flew an IL-62 Heathrow to Moscow in Feb/Mar 1990 and I was excited like a little boy in his batmobile. The overhead bins were made of steel and painted. The food was really bad, but I flew in the Il 62

and you got Babushkas for stewardesses.

Bobby Paluga

The problem with the VC-10 was not that it was obsolete. In fact, it's performance exceeded the 707 and DC-8 in many areas. However, the great performance meant its seat per mile costs were higher, making it less attractive commercially. Technically, it was very advanced for its time.

@@EricIrl cost per mile was a fallacy. BA Chairman was interviewed decade's later and admitted that the VC 10 was more cost efficient.

You are obviously miss informed, or should I say.. Talking shit. The VC (after concorde) was the fasted Airliner in the world and far ahead of its time. It was still flying with the Royal airforce until around 2010.

colonel kurtz That's music, not noise.

The VC-10 had a serious range problem in addition to the incredible fuel usage. It was an excellent aircraft for trips to the commonwealth countries in Africa. It could use non concrete/asphalt runways, it was fine for some African hot and high airports, but it didn't sell very well because it wasn't as large as it's competition (DC-8, 707) and in many cases it was considered underpowered. Later on the three engine aircraft had superior range and fuel economy, like the L-1011 and DC-10. It was indeed LOUD, and that appeals to aviation nuts like myself, the roar sounds cool to me.

Bobby Paluga As you say, the VC-10 was designed primarily with one customer in mind (BOAC,) to fulfill their order to fly from hot and high airports. I don't think it was underpowered; the problem was it was was too thirsty. By the time it was delivered, many of the airports that it was designed specially for (typically in Africa) had further developed their airports and having "hot and high" specialized aircraft was redundant when the B707 and DC-8 could now operate without restrictions thanks to longer and improved runways, etc. Unlike the B707, the VC-10 was limited in the improvements that could be made to the airframe and engines, and without sales, of course, further development meant improvements required resources that Vickers didn't have. BUT...by all accounts, the VC-10 was a passenger-friendly and comfortable airliner, if nothing else because of the engines being at the tail. My father flew a VC-10 from Manchester to New York/JFK as late as 1977, certainly toward the end of the VC-10 in their BOAC/British Airways career. He has fond memories of that experience! Certainly there are not many aircraft as elegant as the VC-10, but unfortunately those qualities didn't equate to sales.

+Bobby Paluga, Vickers would later build the Super VC-10 for BOAC's trans-Atlantic network.

I 've also heard that their engines were fixed near the tail so they used to develop cracks, is that correct ??

Hahaha, of course..

Must have been pretty sturdy though, tolerating several crashes, haha! :-D

John Texas well kind of

Easy Sounds :)

Cl4rendon (*-*)