The Insanely Bigger Faster American Concorde Failures

No video

The Insanely Bigger Faster American Concorde Failures

Рет қаралды 311,164

Күн бұрын

Go to nordvpn.com/da... to get 73% off a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months free... that's only $3.18 per month! Thanks to NordVPN for sponsoring this video.
________
In 1962, the British and French governments announced the world's first supersonic aircraft: the Concorde.
To compete with the most advanced civilian plane in the world, President John F. Kennedy issued a request for proposal to build the first American supersonic transport.
Mired in political turmoil, spiraling costs, and environmental protests, the selected design, Boeing 2707, became one of the most ambitious aircraft projects in history.
---
Join Dark Skies as we explore the world of aviation with cinematic short documentaries featuring the biggest and fastest airplanes ever built, top-secret military projects, and classified missions with hidden untold true stories. Including US, German, and Soviet warplanes, along with aircraft developments that took place during World War I, World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War, and special operations mission in between.
As images and footage of actual events are not always available, Dark Skies sometimes utilizes similar historical images and footage for dramatic effect and soundtracks for emotional impact. We do our best to keep it as visually accurate as possible.
All content on Dark Skies is researched, produced, and presented in historical context for educational purposes. We are history enthusiasts and are not always experts in some areas, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with corrections, additional information, or new ideas.

Пікірлер: 1 100

@johnlafferty5032 2 жыл бұрын

Maybe the French, UK and USA could have joined in a group called FUKUS

@philstuddert6853 2 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣Made my day!!

@alexander1485 2 жыл бұрын

USFUK you mean

@tompiper9276 2 жыл бұрын

😆😅

@cliffhooper3558 2 жыл бұрын

They did. But that's a whole different agenda than a plane...

@user-hu6yr9ro4q 2 жыл бұрын

FALUS

@edwardryan716 2 жыл бұрын

I was playing golf one Saturday when we were fortunately lucky enough to see three Concordes fly over in sequence, one a French Concorde, two BA Concorde, o e flew the 43 miles to Edinburgh to advertise a new BA service from Edinburgh, definitely a highlight for us in Glasgow that day

@awatt 2 жыл бұрын

Concord was amazing. Whenever it came over London everyone stopped and watched it fly past. I remember every minute of every flight that I took on Concord.

@jawjaw9148 2 жыл бұрын

What was it like breaking the sound barrier

@awatt 2 жыл бұрын

@@jawjaw9148 Unremarkable. You wouldn't know unless the pilot told you. The note of the engines changed a bit as the afterburner were turned off and that was about all.

@jimdavis8391 2 жыл бұрын

Yet you cannot spell it's name correctly.

@awatt 2 жыл бұрын

@@jimdavis8391 The French one had a on the end.

@Cat-y4w 2 жыл бұрын

Insane plane, id love seeing one someday in a museum.

@hectormonclova7563 2 жыл бұрын

The day before my twelfth birthday I saw the Concorde for the first time in my life. The Leaders of the Western Powers reunited in Puerto Rico (one of them was Italian Prime Minister, Aldo Moro who would be assasinated by urban guerrillas some time later), and British Prime Minister by that time, James Callaghan was to arrive in the Concorde. I live in a landing route, so I can see planes relatively close, and all that day I had a blast seen all those planes whose arrival was covered by the press. Air Force One, Alitalia, Air Canada, Japan Airlanes, Lufthansa, and then that majestic bird, that caused in me something very primal, a marriage between fascination and the feeling of being in the presence of a terrific beast.

@hectormonclova7563 2 жыл бұрын

It was the 2nd G7 meeting, and was a month after my 12th Birthday. Sorry...

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

It’s just Concorde not the Concorde. Great story btw.

@jkcarroll 2 жыл бұрын

I loved the line about the Soviet SST running into "insurmountable problems." Here's the story I got from some people in the know: This was during the Cold War, and the Kremlin had ordered that the USSR produce the first commercial SST, no matter what. This lead to the KGB working to put its moles into the design process. The pressure was so great, that the moles got sloppy and were found out. Rather than being fired, etc., the Concorde designers created a set of blueprints that were almost exact copies of the Concorde with one important exception: the center of balance for the craft was put about 10 feet to the rear of where it should have been. This change would have not been noticeable during normal operation, but produced a lot of instability when trying to land. These blueprints were left laying around where the moles could find and copy them. Fast forward to the 1973 Paris Airshow, where the Soviet Tupolev 144 was being presented as the first available commercial SST. The flight showing it off was going fine, until the plane aborted a landing approach, shook itself apart, and crashed. The Tupolev 144 was used only internally by the USSR, since they couldn't figure out why it was so unstable coming in for landings. It was eventually removed from passenger service, used only for cargo, and finally retired in 1978.

@zbdot73 2 жыл бұрын

Where did you find this information?

@FishFind3000 2 жыл бұрын

Lol nice

@jkcarroll 2 жыл бұрын

@@zbdot73 I have had friends who worked in the aerospace industry, in projects where Soviet espionage was a real concern. This is one of a number of stories I heard late some nights, over beers, when talking about what today is called "disinformation". (The term didn't exist then, although the concept has been around for ages.) No one involved will ever come forth to say this is in fact what happened, especially since children were killed. (Check out the Tu-144 Paris Crash, where they had some kids as passengers on what was essentially a test flight.) But the aviation engineers I've told this to have all confirmed that moving the center of balance back would result in just this type of instability.

@zbdot73 2 жыл бұрын

@@jkcarroll Cheers thanks for the info, I've also read the rubber compound for the tires were an issue for the Russians also.

@EdOeuna 2 жыл бұрын

@@zbdot73 - I heard that the Soviets tried bribing the ground staff at airports the Concorde was being tested at to get rubber from the runway so that they could determine what was in it.

@tonyhill5047 2 жыл бұрын

My memories include the incredible noise as it flew over my house (in central London) most evenings. Unlike other aircraft, you could hear it a couple of minutes before it appeared. Another memory was, when I was hired by British Airways, and doing my orientation at Heathrow, we got to walk around the BA hangers and I saw a Concord parked at a right angle to a Lockheed L-1011, with the nose of the Concord under the body of the Tristar. I was told that, due to its narrowness, the stewardesses, as they were known then, had to serve food and drinks while facing up the aisle as if they turned towards the passenger, the passenger on the opposite side would get an arse in the face! I also remember that I thought that I would be okay with that :)

@michaeldebellis4202 2 жыл бұрын

If it’s flying faster than the speed of sound, how could you hear it before you see it?

@No_Way_NO_WAY 2 жыл бұрын

@@michaeldebellis4202 because it wasnt allowed to fly over land at mach speed. it only accelerated to those speeds over the ocean. Just imagine such a big plane flying over a city at mach speeds would shatter most windows in an instant. killing pedestrians in inner cities from falling glass "blades".

@michaeldebellis4202 2 жыл бұрын

@@No_Way_NO_WAY Thanks. That makes perfect sense. BTW, I realize my comment may have come off as I didn't believe the statement, but that wasn't it, I was just genuinely curious.

@ant_mk3596 2 жыл бұрын

@@michaeldebellis4202 that was one of thr issues for concorde, it was really inefficient at below mach 1, it used a lot of fuel and could just about keep itself in the air, things got a lot better at mach 1 or above, the faster it went the better the olympus engines worked and the more stable it became. I recall reading somewhere that landing a concorde wasn't a landing in the traditional sense, it was more a controlled fall

@animalanimal7939 2 жыл бұрын

Got to see one take off by chance at Charles Degaul. It was raw power

@sqeeye3102 2 жыл бұрын

0:05 "In 1962 the British and French governments announced the worlds first supersonic aircraft: the Concorde" Starting off the video nice and strong with a huge and obvious error. Top tier script proof-reading there, yet again.

@johnmoan366 2 жыл бұрын

"World's First Supersonic Aircraft" Started right off with a wrong statement....

@bigal1863 2 жыл бұрын

pretty much par for the course

@michaelhart7569 2 жыл бұрын

Yup. It was also never dubbed "The Concorde" in British (or French, to my knowledge). It was simply "Concorde", sometime with the e, sometimes without. Even Wikipedia takes the trouble to comment on this.

@Cat-y4w 2 жыл бұрын

Didnt even notice that mistake, what was the first supersonic aircraft though im curious

@stashaszezlenko9601 2 жыл бұрын

@@Cat-y4w In level flight, the Bell X-1.

@mitchd949 2 жыл бұрын

Exactly what I thought. Not even 10 seconds in and we have a major gaffe!

@donaldbadowski290 2 жыл бұрын

The Lockheed double delta wing design was not inferior to the Boeing design. On the contrary, when Boeing couldn't make the swing wing work, they switched to a double delta design as well, and Lockheed screamed bloody murder that Boeing should continue to be the contract winner when they pretty much lifted the Lockheed design right off the drawing boards.

@JBofBrisbane 2 жыл бұрын

The 2707-300 was a tailed delta design, not a tailless double-delta like the L-2000.

@donaldbadowski290 2 жыл бұрын

@@JBofBrisbane , oh, I know that very well. But I take a more cynical look at that. If Boeing went with a tailless design at the same time they killed the swingwing and went to the double delta, then no one could pretend it wasn't a farce. Now, we all know the stability and maneuverability advantages of having a horizontal stabilizer separate from the wing, so I'm not going to fault Boeing for continuing with that.

@deborahwilliams6419 2 жыл бұрын

I saw Concorde at DFW when it first appeared. I was struck by how small the cabin was and how awesomely loud it sounded. It didn’t last long in Dallas because of noise issues, but it was an experience I will never forget!

@fugguhber4699 2 жыл бұрын

The famous billboard: "Will the last person leaving Seattle, please turn out the lights" was a real billboard........... and I remember it as a kid. It was on I-90 just leaving Seattle. Dark times in Seattle, as you can imagine, when you suddenly have a MASSIVE unemployment spike in city of 1 million + ( yah, surrounding area included ).

@xbob3000 2 жыл бұрын

The Bell P-39 Aircobra unless already done. Suppose I should have searched for it.

@ginacalabrese3869 2 жыл бұрын

There is an airport, KTNT, west of Miami that was to serve as a hub for the 2707. It was going to be 5 times the size of JFK airport. One runway was built by the tjme the project was canceled and it was instead used as a jet transition training airport for a few airlines. It's still there and can be landed at with prior permission I believe although there are no services available and it is just an interesting part of aviation history.

@kennyr5906 2 жыл бұрын

Correct, I have trained a few times out of there and there's literally nothing expect for, water, alligators and one guy that drives around the perimeter in a truck, definitely not a place you want to get stranded at.

@generalmarkmilleyisbenedic8895 2 жыл бұрын

Thx for sharing this, ive lived here my whole life never knew KTNT and such existed

@glenstuart7823 2 жыл бұрын

Yes it was called Dade-collier I flew there a few times training

@tommissouri4871 2 жыл бұрын

"West of Miami " is an understatement. It is about halfway across the state. I guess someone thought it was a good idea. Probably going to bring you in supersonic, then put you on a commuter to go into Miami. Of course, that transfer time would have eaten up the time advantages of being supersonic.

@generalmarkmilleyisbenedic8895 2 жыл бұрын

@@tommissouri4871 eh its not that wide. Once youve done it enough going horizontally across the state is easy.

@matthewcaughey8898 2 жыл бұрын

The 747 simply proved that stuffing a plane to the maximum capacity was more economical

@NLTimmy 2 жыл бұрын

Yet the 380 proved a flop, sadly

@keithmoore5306 2 жыл бұрын

only when the fuel price went up!!!

@V8_screw_electric_cars 2 жыл бұрын

It's over now people will never fly like before thanks to the scamdemic so small planes are the future.

@DefinitelyNotEmma 2 жыл бұрын

@@NLTimmy I'm still saying it should be turned into a flying cruise missile and ballistic missile carrier

@DefinitelyNotEmma 2 жыл бұрын

@@V8_screw_electric_cars good, globalization isn't desirable anyway, not to mention the environmental impact.

@mattwright2964 2 жыл бұрын

I've flown on a Concorde. Amazing, the sense of power was incredible. Very narrow fuselage but lovely comfy leather seats.

@jetaddicted 2 жыл бұрын

To think that, 60 years later, there still are no aircrafts capable of a three hours long cruise at Mach 2+ all the while carrying 110 pax tells a lot about the might of French and British engineers then. Remember this was all done with pen and paper, no software assistance.

@adobotachibana732 2 жыл бұрын

It's not really an engineering problem, we could probably build a better supersonic civilian aircraft again. The problem is an economic one; there really is no demand to justify such a high cost plane.

@jamesoliver6625 2 жыл бұрын

@@adobotachibana732 Precisely. A better title for the video would be "More Fools Who at Least Had the Brains to Cut Their Losses Rather Than Build a Plane That Couldn't Pay It's Own Way"

@jamesoliver6625 2 жыл бұрын

They were all chasing Kelly Johnson's wake by ten years or so.

@robertpatrick3350 2 жыл бұрын

Whilst Johnson cribbed from all those before him

@winternow2242 2 жыл бұрын

There are no "aircrafts" because nobody wants them, not even the countries that actually put them into service. And as for that part about pen, paper and slide rules? You left out the part about hundreds of millions of dollars in Francs or GBP spent developing the plane.

@Dragonblaster1 2 жыл бұрын

Another aspect was that Concorde was limited to Mach 2.25 not because it couldn't go any faster, but because aerodynamic heating would also be limited, allowing the aircraft to be made out of aluminium. The faster 2707 would have to use large amounts of titanium, a metal very hard to work with at that time.

@christopherrobinson7541 2 жыл бұрын

Also most came from Russia.

@JBofBrisbane 2 жыл бұрын

@@christopherrobinson7541 if that were true, the MiG-25 would be made completely of titanium, instead of from steel with titanium leading edges.

@jamiepursall Жыл бұрын

@JBofBrisbane no he's right. They acquired alot of the titanium for f117 from Russia, but had to create psudo companies so the Russians didn't suspect anything.

@spongebobskate 2 жыл бұрын

"...an american built supersonic airliner will finally take to the skies, but this time no european rival in it's way" Did I miss the part where the concord was preventing an american supersonic airliner?

@thundercactus 2 жыл бұрын

The concorde and Tu-144 were, in part, to blame for the demise of the american SST. Not because they were successful, but particularly because they *weren't* By the time the concorde flew, it became very apparent that SSTs absolutely could not compete with turbofan airliners financially, and there just wasn't enough passenger demand to justify the significantly higher cost associated.

@sidefx996 2 жыл бұрын

No you didn't. While fun to watch these videos are overfilled with errors and overdramatization.

@markfuller3948 2 жыл бұрын

@@thundercactus Partly because when the US realised that they couldn't build an SST, they neutered Concorde by effectively banning SST flight in the US. How much more demand there would there have been if JFK to LA or SF had been allowed ??

@my3dprintedlife 2 жыл бұрын

The 2707 never flew, but the Seattle Supersonics, who got their name from the project, did alright.

@skaldlouiscyphre2453 2 жыл бұрын

I was always hoping they were named after a certain hedgehog when he goes super saiyan.

@Justanotherconsumer 2 жыл бұрын

They moved to… Oklahoma, I think? Seattle is getting an NHL team, though.

@actact21 2 жыл бұрын

Jack.Sikma, Dennis Johnson, downtown Freddy Brown...1979 NBA Champs !!

@washingtonforensicsservice5495 2 жыл бұрын

@@actact21 R.I.P. Bob Blackburn

@bobbieratclif9519 2 жыл бұрын

Another fantastic show! As a heavy flyer, and an avid aviation fanatic, your show continues to teach me new things each and every time I watch it. This show really blew my mind.

@rodcurrieclassics8102 2 жыл бұрын

I used to drive out of London each evening and see the Washington Concorde flight coming in about 1800. I never tired of seeing that lovely aircraft..in my opinion Concorde was mankind's most beautiful creation. Shame on our politicians for allowing it to be grounded for economic reasons . Some things are worth paying for.

@eriktreon8191 2 жыл бұрын

I got to see her at my grandma's house, on long island. She was departing at about 5'000 ft, in and out of the clouds. It was like a heavenly figure!

@rodcurrieclassics8102 2 жыл бұрын

Hi Erik. It's just my opinion, but no nation, no corporation has yet made anything quite like Concorde. A financial flop, but a staggering aesthetic and engineering tour de force that 50 years on has yet to be equalled much less bettered. We were privileged to see it.

@eriktreon8191 2 жыл бұрын

Agreed!

@HappyBeezerStudios 2 жыл бұрын

For when you have a meeting in NY at 9 and one in Paris at 12. It's financially just not viable to do anything past mach 0.8-0.9 for passenger transport. To catch the flight cost, tickets would be too much for the average tourist. Having some for business reasons or medical emergencies would be possible, tho. We should build a new one. Maybe even a bit smaller, since demand will be low.

@nixl3518 2 жыл бұрын

What a silly comment! It’s like saying if it wasn’t for space not having air, that we could breathe in space! Air travel is not publicly supported through taxes! It has to be paid for, so if no one will pay the fare it can’t travel! It may have been a beautiful craft but it was exceedingly inelegant in its ability to fly. Two governments spent enormous amounts based on national pride to create this white elephant that was supported until it crashed. It was a lovely dream that in affect became a nightmare. We learned from it and some people died from it so that we could move on.

@tommynikon2283 2 жыл бұрын

@5:35....The engineers DIDN'T- as you say/quote: "add canards behind the nose to increase weight". Wtf? Canards are for PITCH control, doing the same thing as an Elevator at the rear of a conventional a/c. Jeez- Get the BASICS right. That's Aeronautics 101.

@Incadazant01 2 жыл бұрын

I mean, they might've added them for weight. Canards aren't weightless just because they're a control surface. If you need weight, add weight. Make it DO something if you can.

@alext8828 2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, that's ridiculous. You can move weight to change CG, but you don't just add weight. Maybe they used canards instead of elevators for some reason. Is that logical?

@alext8828 2 жыл бұрын

@RileyFingeredMyDog Yeah, I know what they're for. My point is that maybe they preferred to use canards for some sane reason and that's why they used them. Not to "add weight".

@alext8828 2 жыл бұрын

@RileyFingeredMyDog That wasn't a question. It was a polite way of suggesting that canards have a function (other than weight) and perhaps the designers preferred using them for reasons of their own. My question was "Is that logical?" I know, sometimes it's difficult to sort thru the thinking when texting. Things seem to come out differently to the reader than they were intended by the writer. I think we're all on the same page. It seems the narrator is saying that weight was moved from the tail to the canard in an effort to better balance the entire plane. What ever. Good job of dissecting all of this. Cheerio.

@BlackMasterRoshi 2 жыл бұрын

Congratulations, you've fallen into the Dark Skies algorithm trap.

@BlueTrane2028 2 жыл бұрын

The Concorde was most certainly not the first supersonic aircraft, heck it wasn't even the first supersonic airliner. Just had to say, the opening statement bugged me...

@kelvinfoote9897 2 жыл бұрын

Me too.

@roycsinclair 2 жыл бұрын

It was the first to be announced, the USSR rushed theirs in order to be first to fly passengers in service.

@bcshelby4926 2 жыл бұрын

...if I recall he first airliner to break the sound barrier was a DC-8 during a shallow dive.

@roycsinclair 2 жыл бұрын

@@bcshelby4926 And a few propeller driven airplanes went supersonic before the Bell X-1 but almost invariably that was a fatal mistake. I think it's safe to say that the "barrier" was intact as those planes who breached it earlier were simply lucky if they survived. It was figuring out how to maintain control in the supersonic realm and continue to fly there that constitutes a genuine "breach".

@BlueTrane2028 2 жыл бұрын

@@roycsinclair I hesitate to say that any prop planes have been supersonic in a dive, but there were certainly planes that found themselves in the transonic region just under the speed of sound, which rarely went well for the pilot.

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

Sad fact is there is even less need for speed today. Business travelers now do Zoom calls. Tourists want cheap fares and no fights over masks...😷

@JohnJohansen2 2 жыл бұрын

Have you heard about the Boom Supersonic Passenger Airplane project?

@davidhoffman1278 2 жыл бұрын

Sometimes there is no substitute for up close person to person oversight of a project on another continent.

@superskullmaster 2 жыл бұрын

@@JohnJohansen2 who hasn’t? Doesn’t change anything he said.

@JohnJohansen2 2 жыл бұрын

@@superskullmaster Yes it does!

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

@@JohnJohansen2 Nope..... The market has spoken. Concorde was a fiscal fail.like AMTRAK.

@mmcalifornia8600 2 жыл бұрын

It just doesn't make sense anymore. Business would be the main reason for fast travel and with virtual meetings it's even less necessary to physically be there. I would say a large comfortable air ship like a blimp would be more viable today. It would consume less fuel and be comfortable. Imagine traveling in a comfortable airplane that has sleeping berths and a restaurant or bar...

@davidhoffman1278 2 жыл бұрын

Airships are great, right up to the point that you cannot outrun the thunderstorms.

@emptypromises2962 2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, it's called Business Class. 😄

@Cat-y4w 2 жыл бұрын

Airship? I hope you dont mean like a zeppelin, like some kind of huge helicopter? Would be loud but it might be cool.

@davidhoffman1278 2 жыл бұрын

@@Cat-y4w , No, the reference was to non-rigid blimp or rigid airship zeppelin.

@moshunit96 2 жыл бұрын

Nobody wants to spend half their vacation sitting on an airship or waiting for weather to be good enough to even depart. Where are you going put an airship when not in use? They're huge and very susceptible to high winds and would need huge hangers. You're right that supersonic air travel isn't a necessity but its never been about what people need. Its about what they want.

@insideoutsideupsidedown2218 2 жыл бұрын

Super sonic flight costs more than they could make to operate the planes; not enough people on a large scale would pay $3100 for a one way ticket from NY to LA

@superskullmaster 2 жыл бұрын

You also aren’t going to see coast to coast supersonic flights anyway, I don’t care what kind of Low Boom tech they are working on. It will always be trans ocean.

@abergethirty 2 жыл бұрын

The Concord fleet was built with government subsidies. When it came time to replace the fleet, the airline couldn't afford it. It never was a viable enterprise it was all about prestige. Boeing crunched the numbers and knew it wouldn't be profitable without government funding.

@anthonyjames7483 2 жыл бұрын

I'm not surprised it cost more when they had the refill the thing in flight to get across the Atlantic

@michaelhart7569 2 жыл бұрын

@@anthonyjames7483 Excuse me. When did that happen? Concorde was probably largely done-in by the soaring oil prices, and misplaced anti-sound complaints whipped up by not-made-in-America sentiments in the media, vigorously encouraged by Boeing and other American aerospace interests. Sound at 60,000 feet is greatly attenuated by the time it reaches the ground. Yes, the original development costs were government funded, but those are sunk costs (and the European Governments went ahead developing Airbus, which probably caused Boeing more harm in the long run). There are plenty of people around who can and will pay for supersonic transport. Private corporations are revisiting the concept. Like nuclear power, it was essentially stopped in its tracks by a combination of largely political considerations. Both technologies could be so much further advanced today if this hadn't happened.

@georgebarnes8163 2 жыл бұрын

@@anthonyjames7483 where did you get that misinformation from?

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

I flew on Concorde a couple of times. 1430mph. Fantastic

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

I’ve been supersonic for 7 hours.

@boomschool Жыл бұрын

@@mickyday2008 i have been subsonic all my life!

@keithpanzer3099 2 жыл бұрын

As another viewer posted, the Concord is amazing to see. I was on an American Airlines flight, Miami, 1980's, as we taxied for takeoff. We passed a Concord loading up. That's the closest for me to see one. Awesome! With all the available technologies available I'm glad the U.S. is getting a second chance. Love the videos, keep up the good work.

@derekcollins7883 2 жыл бұрын

Chances are that the US restrictions on sst flights were less about the environment and more about hurting Concorde.

@geoffdeath2590 2 жыл бұрын

Sonic booms can cause physical damage to building and would be a real nuisance to people living on flight paths so the US restrictions was going to happen world wide anyway.

@davidhoffman1278 2 жыл бұрын

Many nations tbat had no aerospace industry placed similar restrictions on Concorde overflights. The supersonic bang was a problem all over the Earth.

@moshunit96 2 жыл бұрын

It was about noise actually. This why they are building prototypes that test the feasibility of decreasing or nearly eliminating the sonic boom.

@3800TURBO 2 жыл бұрын

North American Aviation had already built the XB-70 in 64, they should have called North American to build/ re-design it as it was already a successful delta wing plane capable of 3300kmph with 6900km range. Would have been a huge head start.

@mthury4532 2 жыл бұрын

A book on th XB70 has drawings of an airliner configuration. It’s named Valkyrie

@3800TURBO 2 жыл бұрын

@@mthury4532 was under the impression Valkyrie was always the Xb-70's name.

@winternow2242 2 жыл бұрын

NAA was 1 of 3 contenders for the American SST, and their NAC-60 trailed the competitors in passenger capacity, and also both those planes, Concorde and the Tu-144 in terms of range. Airliners and bombers are completely different.

@silverwolf4504 2 жыл бұрын

love the dude just casually walking on the wing and watching it bounce under his weight with him not having a single care in the world XD 5:01

@mingming9604 2 жыл бұрын

that's the allowed walking area in the center. he didn't step on the ailerons or flap or the periphery of the wing

@vanringo 2 жыл бұрын

I have walked on many wings and when you bounce on them, they will move. Definitely want to stay away from many of the key points.

@cpt.awesome7281 2 жыл бұрын

4:44 I don't know where you got your timestamp from.

@silverwolf4504 2 жыл бұрын

@@cpt.awesome7281 huh your right must have been tired and misread the time or had that number stuck in my head

@bBersZ 2 жыл бұрын

yeah I cant believe that guy. Anyone who swaggers across a wing designed to lift 60,000lbs with prolly around a max g load of 3.5 that in essence could withstand up too around abouts 200,000lbs in certain instances needs his noodle checked cause that right there b nucken futts

@ClevyTR6 2 жыл бұрын

I researched this before but forget. I think I seen this mockup in Tallahassee, FL late 70,s, early 80s ? I do remember a website saying it was a wooden mockup in FL, but I remember a metal aircraft. Even as a child, I remember looking at the way the fuselage pieces went together. I got to walk the entire plane and the cockpit was bare. Long time ago, memories change unfortunately.

@johnryder1713 2 жыл бұрын

Concorde has to be one of the few times you need to go to a museum to see the future

@Wooargh 2 жыл бұрын

Or a gulag.

@johnryder1713 2 жыл бұрын

@@Wooargh You'd see some awfully surprising things there, or maybe just awful

@russetwolf13 2 жыл бұрын

You wanna see the future, go to an American Rail museum and look for passenger cars. America is realizing it had the future in it's hands and we threw it away.

@mrrolandlawrence 2 жыл бұрын

I recall a boeing engineer saying that once Kennedy put the spec at match 2.7...he knew it was the end. Concorde was limited to 2.02m as that's the speed limit for aluminium. Any faster and it looses strength. The boeing engineer knew this and knew they would have to go to exotic materials causing delays and increase in costs and weights. Kennedy wanted to out do the brits as he blamed then for the needless death of his cousin during ww2. Today "boom" looks like a 3 engine concorde, so they did actually get it right 😉 boeing 2707... Not so much. The jumbo is what saved boeing. Irony was it was low priority compared to the SST.

@olsonspeed 2 жыл бұрын

Ticket cost dictates the design of commercial aircraft. When confronted with fares double or triple normal cost the vast majority of travelers will opt for subsonic flight.

@anthonyjames7483 2 жыл бұрын

I don't suppose there too keen on having to refuel inflight either

@gogrape9716 2 жыл бұрын

Are there enough Elites travelling who can pay for this ??

@MeBallerman 2 жыл бұрын

@@gogrape9716 Yes, after the Concorde's initial economical failure, they changed it to be a special luxurious experience for the wealthy. That proved very successfull. The Concorde was earning money in this adaption. But then came the crash, and today the technology is of course seriously outdated.

@olsonspeed 2 жыл бұрын

@@gogrape9716 I doubt it would be a money maker for the airlines. Jumbo Jets made air travel affordable, it proved most passengers have more time than money.

@ironcito1101 2 жыл бұрын

Especially given that a lot of time is spent traveling to and from the airport, boarding, going through security, taxiing, in a holding pattern around the airport waiting to land, and whatnot. If you double the aircraft's speed, it probably cuts the overall travel time by 20% or something like that, depending on the distance. Not worth a much higher price. If you're going to pay more, you're better off buying business or first class on a normal plane.

@takashitamagawa5881 2 жыл бұрын

Back in the 1960's no one imagined the added time caused by security screenings and airport congestion. Crossing the Atlantic in three hours sounds great, but the time to get from home and into the airplane cabin can be just as long.

@markhillary7402 2 жыл бұрын

“World’s first supersonic aircraft” - wasn’t that the Bell X-1?

@Probably_tryna_sleep 2 жыл бұрын

I assume he meant airliner, but said aircraft

@zeitgeist2720 2 жыл бұрын

Noticed that too he meant airliner ^

@samwiebaux2788 2 жыл бұрын

I saw the BOEING SST pop out of a BOEING HANGAR down in TACOMA, near the HYATT! The BOEING HANGAR was VERY NEAR THE AIRPORT and marked TOP SECRET all over the place. There was NO PARKING on the highway and a 35 mph speed limit, which I failed to achieve when I saw the MASSIVE DOORS swing out and the BOEING SST was pushed out of the HANGAR and then JUST AS QUICKLY returned inside and the doors QUICKLY SHUT!

@burningb2439 2 жыл бұрын

I remember back in the 70's at school out in the Playground watching Concorde flying overhead with me and my friends and every other kid looking in Awe as this sleek thing with Black strips painted on its underside Thundered over us , she was doing Tests out of Prestwick ..it was a Wonder to see .

@truthseeker8483 2 жыл бұрын

The future was yesterday......now we are heading toward living naked under a tree eating bugs....because it is "good for the environment".....and working is "not good for our safety from Corona"

@burningb2439 2 жыл бұрын

@@truthseeker8483 Yes the Future of Yesterday was a good time ( as a kid ), its not a good future now , Thanks for your well put view .

@tompiper9276 2 жыл бұрын

@@burningb2439 Yeah... Bring back yesterday's future...

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

Very lucky

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

Stunning plane

@sd906238 2 жыл бұрын

The 747 was a backup plan if the 2707 didn't work out. The 747 had a upper deck and a front loading door for unobstructed loading of cargo just in case that carrying passengers thing didn't work out.

@christopherrobinson7541 2 жыл бұрын

It was the other way around. The 747 was aimed at the cargo airliner competition that the C5 Galaxy won; the passenger airline was the runner up prize.

@RMilheim90 2 жыл бұрын

Can you do the AH64 Apache? I leave for flight training soon and would love to see a dark skies video on it

@benjaminriches9736 2 жыл бұрын

Apache flight training?

@ibbylancaster8981 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your service and good luck with your training. Prayers for your safety and success. 🇺🇸🇺🇸

@heavenst.murgatroyd3128 2 жыл бұрын

It's heavy, underpowered, and hates sand, rain, dust, snow, dryness, sunshine, high altitude, and every other meteorological condition known to man! Ask your IP if it's too late to get -47's. 😉

@uberkloden 2 жыл бұрын

Russian choppers for the win.

@RMilheim90 2 жыл бұрын

@Benjamin yes, for the Army Warrant Officer program. @Ibby thank you! Much appreciated. @Heavens.... "shit"hooks??? Those things fly on duct tape, bubble gum, and a prayer. Apache is where it's at and I would love to support the boots on the ground when the fit hits the shan

@sixstringedthing 2 жыл бұрын

I enjoy the "Dark" channel videos, but they really need to hire someone with a bit of technical knowledge to proofread the scripts. Or replace whoever is doing it now. There are small but frustrating errors in practically every video. Other aviation and short doc channels are growing at a rapid rate thanks to a focus on attention to detail and accuracy, some going as far as taking videos down and then reuploading with corrections. But it seems like these guys just don't care anymore since they get plenty of views anyway. Too big to fail?

@oldsmobileman1403 2 жыл бұрын

I remember when the Concorde landed at Battle Creek Airport as at the time British Airways pilots and WMU had a joint training program at the time. Seeing and hearing that aircraft was a treat.

@bryanlawson683 2 жыл бұрын

"In 1962, the British and French governments introduced the world's first supersonic aircraft." I believe that honor goes to the American Bell X-1 in 1947.

@Dragonblaster1 2 жыл бұрын

I was just about to post the same.

@derekambler 2 жыл бұрын

@@Dragonblaster1 All at the help given by the UK

@ralphe5842 2 жыл бұрын

He was taking about transport aircraft

@Dragonblaster1 2 жыл бұрын

@Paulo Definitely. Also, the bullet shape of the fuselage. The M52 was patterned on a .303 bullet, and the X-1 was patterned on a .50 calibre bullet.

@2point7182818284590 2 жыл бұрын

@@ralphe5842 The first SST was the TU-144

@saltyroe3179 2 жыл бұрын

At the time the SST was proposed there was a mantra that 1st you developed a fighter, then a bomber and then an airliner. This was what proponents said happened with jets. The idea was the military made the development investment and then the airliner would be built on proven an reliable bomber technology. The flaw was that supersonic bombers were not a success. The B58 Hustler had a very short life with the USAF. The B1A was a disaster and the B1B was only marginally successful. None of these would make a useful basis for an airliner. It would be a surprise to those at Boeing working on the SST that the B52 would still be flying and that the B1 and B21 would be sub sonic.

@Phrancis5 2 жыл бұрын

In the end the bigger slower 747 was an amazing economic success, while the quick beautiful Concord (and TU-144) were failures.

@RidinDirtyRollinBurnouts 2 жыл бұрын

The thing was the Concord was actually profitable to operate. The problem lied with the fact the Concorde effectively pulled first class customers away from the other planes on the same route, meaning those planes operated with less profit in the same airline. It wasn't worth it to the airline to offer Concorde flights if it meant their other flights made less money as a result.

@satagaming9144 2 жыл бұрын

i'm not entirely sure lack of economic success (of the plane itself, USSR is different story) did the TU-144 in

@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 2 жыл бұрын

So Boeing could be on top.

@ingurlund9657 2 жыл бұрын

The Americans used noise pollution as an excuse to bar Concorde from most routes so the 747 never had to compete with it.

@donaldbadowski290 2 жыл бұрын

The Concorde was never economically viable, with or without an exclusive first class criteria. The fuel consumption and maintenance on the bird was just too great. Both the British and French airlines knew they were operating it at a consistent loss, but national pride kept it flying.

@p47thunderbolt68 2 жыл бұрын

I'd like to see something about the Japanese Zero fighter that was found abandoned and in good enough condition for the USA to repair and find out it's flight characteristics.

@Otokichi786 2 жыл бұрын

Knowing "dark skies," they would say that it was a BF-109 that crashed in Mexico, piloted by a Bulgarian. (Yes, The Bulgarians stole the "Graf Zeppelin" aircraft carrier and were on their way to attack the Panama Canal. A slight navigational error doomed the mission.)

@pgosi197 2 жыл бұрын

I think there is one by Mark Felton

@micodyerski1621 2 жыл бұрын

Dude, that zero has been done many times. I've seen 4 different long docs and many short docs on it. Its well known.

@keithmoore5306 2 жыл бұрын

Mark Felton has one on the Acutan zero if you want to look it up!!! this guy is lucky to hit 80% right on most vids where Mark is a professional historian!!!

@keithmoore5306 2 жыл бұрын

@@pgosi197 yeah about six maybe 8 months back!

@pseudotasuki 2 жыл бұрын

Wow, an incredibly obvious error in the very first sentence! You're getting better at this.

@davonmulder8458 2 жыл бұрын

Yeah XD

@Christopher-po8pt 2 жыл бұрын

you got your channel up yet ?

@mattsiede443 2 жыл бұрын

I would absolutely love if you did a video on the B-26 Marauder! My grandpa flew that plane in World War II.

@alexjenkin4216 2 жыл бұрын

There are b 26 documentarys on youtube

@davidchamberlin9632 2 жыл бұрын

The mockup of this airplane was stored inside a fenced area along side a road in Merritt Island, Florida. I used to drive by it every day to and from work. She was beautiful! (Except that it was stored outside and allowed deteriorate due to the harsh conditions of Florida's heat and moisture.) Eventually it was sold for scrap.

@bad_pilot13official 2 жыл бұрын

Aw man, I would've loved to see it. I live in Florida myself

@usgator 2 жыл бұрын

I live near Merritt Island. Where was this kept? You work at The Cape?

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

Criminal to let it fade away

@sidefx996 2 жыл бұрын

Not true, the forward fuselage still survives. Look it up.

@johnc.bojemski1757 2 жыл бұрын

Saw CONCORD fly nust once. Was parked my car at JFK Airport (NYC) walking to the BRITISH AIRWAYS Terminal, CONCORD passed directly overhead, "beak" down for landing. It really looked like a giant bird! Magnificent.

@scienceistruth1924 2 жыл бұрын

Glad you liked it, I used to see it fly over everyday at 11.15am out of Heathrow and never tired of it. It was a sad day for the UK when they were taken out of service. It gave this small Island a real sense of pride.

@JBofBrisbane 2 жыл бұрын

*Concorde.

@goldgeologist5320 2 жыл бұрын

I flew on the Concorde a few times. As I recall it was very warm, and cramped. But it was fast! Very fast!

@moshunit96 2 жыл бұрын

Sure you did.....lol.

@christopherandersch1299 2 жыл бұрын

The boeing mock up carried on as a tourist attraction at a so called " site museum" in Orlando, Florida. It was inside a large hangar with a lot of sad looking warbirds. I saw it twice in the 1980's, it was tired looking then, but the museum closed and the building was turned into a church with services being held under its wing. For years they tried to give it away, but the draw of a one winged wooden mockup was zero, and I believe it was finally scrapped in the 90's

@jefflemieux5941 Жыл бұрын

It sits in the Museum of Flight in Seattle, if I’m not mistaken

@GrumpyOldMan9 2 жыл бұрын

Why does he sound as if the KGB is about to break into his apartment at any moment?

@PapiDoesIt 2 жыл бұрын

I was fishing in NYC when a Concorde flew overhead. It had just taken off and it flew directly over us. The noise was almost unbearable, even though it was probably 3K feet up. I can't imagine having them fly cross country every day.

@mopododo 2 жыл бұрын

That's a expensive effin daily coffee.

@urdooinitrong7753 2 жыл бұрын

Love the content as always.Hard to just ask for one. Could you please do a video with the Spitfire? Would also love to see a Dehaviland Beaver vid! Great job guys!

@SuperDiablo101 2 жыл бұрын

This design was also very similar to one of the XB-70s prototypes

@winternow2242 2 жыл бұрын

What resemblance do you see? Looks completely different to me.

@SuperDiablo101 2 жыл бұрын

@@winternow2242 I've read a book about the XB-70 and how if it worked the Valkyrie would be the first of many many large supersonic aircraft with both military bomber's and supersonic transports for civilian use. There was alot of prototypes one of them being similar to the featured aircraft

@winternow2242 2 жыл бұрын

@@SuperDiablo101 the problem with Valkyrie was that the design didn't translate well to airliners. North American was 1 of several companies submitting SST designs, and there's trailed those of Boeing and Lockheed in terms of range and passengers.

@SPak-rt2gb 2 жыл бұрын

I remember having a plastic model kit of the Boeing design it came with two airplanes one with the wings extended and one swept back I think it was a Revell kit but I'm not sure

@ferdiflap 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for another great video! I would like to request a video about the H-3 Ramjet helicopter. Designed and produced in The Netherlands, the helicopter had Ramjets mounted on the rotortips, resulting in a ring of fire flying at night! Amazing story. Again, thanks for the great video and narrating work so far.

@PuppyPalWilly 2 жыл бұрын

Though technically a rocket, the Bell X-1 was the first supersonic aircraft, not the Concorde. Even before the Coñcorde were several supersonic military jet aircraft such as the F-104 Starfighter.

@bcshelby4926 2 жыл бұрын

...as was rest of the "Century" series.

@menguardingtheirownwallets6791 2 жыл бұрын

Early on in the project, Boeing realized that only the ultra-rich were going to be able to afford tickets, and that's why they never went past the mockup stage, you never saw Boeing make any flying test aircraft for that design. They knew it was a dead end.

@anthonyjames7483 2 жыл бұрын

Seems they couldn't get the thing to fly across the Atlantic without in flight refuelling🤣 an issue of technological application?

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

Well, volume beat speed. Boeing was making the 737 and 747 at the same time.

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

@RileyFingeredMyDog commercial success is the measure. This is not a research project

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

@RileyFingeredMyDog Boeing and Lockheed laughed all the way to the bank. Their projects such as the 747, 737 and the L1011 made more money than the Concord ever did.

@NickiesAdventureChannel 2 жыл бұрын

As a Englishman I have to say, this is what I love about America ! They go for it !!!! Win loose or draw they are in it and never give up … love that can do attitude

@patrickhorvath2684 2 жыл бұрын

I believe that " Can do" attitude began in 1776..lol

@macjim 2 жыл бұрын

You forgot to mention Boom, the future supersonic airliners that is currently in development.

@keithmoore5306 2 жыл бұрын

that's more executive than passenger size wise!!

@stevenv2190 2 жыл бұрын

@@keithmoore5306 yep, just looked at the site - all business class. At least the legroom looks good

@cammando2363 2 жыл бұрын

It’s been 50 years since the last supersonic passenger jet was made, there have been a lot of technical and mechanical innovations. Surely we can make a affordable aircraft.

@jamesharris9816 2 жыл бұрын

Nope. There's actually no real business case for it other than luxury private jet travel for billionaires. Airlines don't want it as it cannibalizes business class travel in subsonic aircraft which is why airfares are so cheap in economy.

@jtsnowman66 2 жыл бұрын

Don’t lead your videos with incorrect information. Concorde was far from the first supersonic plane and wasn’t even the first supersonic airliner. Get the facts right if you want to be taken seriously as a documentary channel

@richardhill2643 2 жыл бұрын

The Prototype Tu144 beat the prototype Concorde into the air by a month. The Tu144 never really made it into regular passenger service and was taken out of passenger service after only 50 or so flights, unlike the fleet of 14 Concordes which flew for nearly 30 years in passenger service.

@jtsnowman66 2 жыл бұрын

@@richardhill2643 But concorde wasn't the first supersonic plane or airliner designed, built or flown. So since I already knew this what exactly are you trying to tell me? Tu144 still flew as an airliner, even if it was briefly. So what is the point of your reply?

@fredrickmillstead2804 2 жыл бұрын

Saw a Concorde leave LaGuardia once. The noise and fury of the powerplants was awesome.

@skuzlebut82 2 жыл бұрын

Not to be a materialistic weasel but it wasn't called, "The Concorde." It was always just, "Concorde." I'm also a big nerd and that's why I know that. Most American's call it, "The Concorde."

@mercoid 2 жыл бұрын

I don’t see what’s so “materialistic” about pointing out the historically proper name of reference of this aircraft. You seem proud to be a “nerd”. Well then…, be a proper Nerd by using the right words. People now declare themselves “nerds”. Which is has become a socially acceptable way of saying, “I am smart”. Problem is, most people think they’re smart. Stop calling yourself a nerd and just go about your business as best you can. If you’re so GD smart, something will come of it for people to see. Great engineers like the ones who design the aircraft we see on this channel, didn’t go about announcing that they were “nerds”. Prove yourself in life!

@richardhill2643 2 жыл бұрын

Yes, "The Concorde" implies that there was only one, where there were actually 14 operational and several prototypes.

@skuzlebut82 2 жыл бұрын

@@mercoid First off, it's from a movie. Second, I am proud of being a nerd and apparently your definition of nerd is different than mine. I wasn't implying that my intelligence is superior to everyone else's by saying I am a nerd. I was implying that I have an excessive attention to detail regarding a technical subject. Third, you're telling me to do something with my life yet you're the one acting like someone pissed in your cheerios. I assure you, I've done a whole hell of a lot with my life.

@davidsirett5560 2 жыл бұрын

i remember back in the 1980s standing with my uncle Brian in my grandparents garden in Kent watching a Spitfire and Hurricane circling around by Brands Hatch race track. my uncle thought they were waiting for the Lancaster but instead a Concorde flew in and the Spitfire and Hurricane formed up either side and they all flew off in the direction of Biggin Hill air field. that was my first sight of one of the most iconic aircraft ever to fly.

@XLA-zg1nn 2 жыл бұрын

I still remember when the Concord came to Perth WA, the only thing that Ive seen fly here that was louder was B1b 'Lancer'

@generalmarkmilleyisbenedic8895 2 жыл бұрын

If youve heard an f-104, how does it compare?

@mickyday2008 2 жыл бұрын

Concorde not the Concorde. Yes

@philgooddr.7850 2 жыл бұрын

the Concord made the first A300 Airbus a pretty good plane, new alloys and machining, vented insulation, lighter seats, higher pressure hydraulics, tail tanks, etc..better than Tristars , DC-10 and MD11...HS also used the Concord cab. diameter and fixtures to build the HS146 but supersonic aluminium planes were at the time too heavy and were flying too low and too slow thus increase drag and friction heat excessively. Today a composite airframe and better thermal cycles with H2 maybe can reduce the supersonic gal/mile to a competitive level by flying much higher and facing much less drag..

@alanpattinson6211 2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if the Americans would have banned supersonic flights over land if Boeing had not been a failure. Boeing had 120 orders for its aircraft presumably mainly from US airlines. However it is interesting to note only two airlines flew Concorde so what happened to the American interest that prevailed during the Boeing project but vapourised on the Concorde.

@truthseeker8483 2 жыл бұрын

America should have chosen Lockheed

@winternow2242 2 жыл бұрын

American interest didn't prevail during Boeing development. That's why it was cancelled. Also, people commenting on this video seem to think that America was the only country that banned supersonic overland flight.

@lundsweden 2 жыл бұрын

I think the Americans started a bit late in the SST race, also the goals of a bigger and faster plane in hindsight were too ambitious. Concorde was the only flying, practical design. Even Concorde was heavily subsidised by the British Government, it would'nt have made economic sense as a purely private endevour. This is why we have seen no supersonic aircraft since Concorde, it just does'nt make economic sense. But Concorde was a terrific piece of engineering and a beautiful aircraft, so graceful!

@Alexis2andsoOn 2 жыл бұрын

They later re-used the efforts of the SST to form the SSH (Super Sonic Hedgehog) to create a supersonic rodent, but was later also dismissed. It is said they sold the echnology to japan.

@markplott4820 2 жыл бұрын

meanwhile England tried to develop a Super Sonic Vole.

@bcshelby4926 2 жыл бұрын

@@markplott4820 ..I guess that would be better than a giant wooden badger.

@soggysadboi 2 жыл бұрын

I got to see the B2707 mockup's remnants at the Seattle Air Museum's restoration hangar. Such a shame it was never built.

@bobbyvee9950 2 жыл бұрын

Really Everett isn't it? You can visit the SST mockup at the Museum of Flight Restoration Center at Paine Field.

@abergethirty 2 жыл бұрын

It's a shame they didn't waste tax payers money on an unprofitable enterprise. Government shouldn't fund commercial ventures.

@markplott4820 2 жыл бұрын

Supersonic AIR transport is UNSUSTAINABLE.

@pigeonpoo1823 2 жыл бұрын

So did the FAA effectively ban supersonic flights due to spite?

@Getpojke 2 жыл бұрын

That was pretty much the theory here in Europe, a bad case of sour grapes on the Americans part.

@pigeonpoo1823 2 жыл бұрын

@@Getpojke thanks

@Getpojke 2 жыл бұрын

@@pigeonpoo1823 YMW.

@gregparrott 2 жыл бұрын

Misstatement at 0:09 The Corncorde was NOT the world's first supersonic aircraft It should have said "the world's first COMMERCIAL supersonic aircraft.

@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 2 жыл бұрын

I would have loved a fast flight, providing two rows with enough space instead of today's flights while with smaller seats making you pay for another seat if your plus size, overcharging for luggage, and therefore, body shaming you while you starve while you hearing rude passengers scream at flight attendants so their unruly kids can run wild up and down the aisles and drunk passengers trying to open the door during or throwing passengers off flights due to overbooking yeah

@mdlclassguymdlclassguy6488 2 жыл бұрын

You could always try dieting

@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 2 жыл бұрын

@@mdlclassguymdlclassguy6488, why not this the airlines being less greedy and more friendly

@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 2 жыл бұрын

@@mdlclassguymdlclassguy6488 I would like to add some more nice things, a big thank you to Dan "D.B ." Cooper for making sure no one can open the door during mid-flight now, and that's a good thing .and to Carlos the jackal and the others who makes a major pain to travel now I really "love being felt up during a body search and you can't defend yourself if you do you're banned from flying.

@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 2 жыл бұрын

@@mdlclassguymdlclassguy6488 even with camera footage showing it's still their word against yours.

@mdlclassguymdlclassguy6488 2 жыл бұрын

@@cornbreadfedkirkpatrick9647 - life is tuff I suppose if you only look for the bad

@davidharrell9902 2 жыл бұрын

I really like your work and ask for some content on what the competition planes looked like. This will show why decisions are made to single out the one with the best chances for production and safety.

@Bob_Burton 2 жыл бұрын

0:05 "In 1962 the British and French governments announced the World's first supersonic aircraft" How wrong can you be ?

@WALTERBROADDUS 2 жыл бұрын

How? He left out the modifier commercial. Yet, clearly is talking transports planes.

@gvjet1 2 жыл бұрын

I remember being on vacation driving fromMiami to Orlando in 1980 when we came across a place which had the mock-up of the SST. It was an unusual hangar more like a barn but inside had the the aircraft, engines and other various components laying around. Except for the engines everything was made from wood. Quiet an experience as I was an engineer employed at Laker Airways. Does anyone know where it all ended up ?

@mcaardvark42 2 жыл бұрын

The reason CONCORDE failed was basically because the US government (paid for by the AIRCRAFT LOBBY) wanted it to fail as they couldn't make the SST work.

@pierrepy2931 2 жыл бұрын

...and the FIA banned Concorde from flying overland ... just to be sure !

@gregmiller7123 2 жыл бұрын

I grew up in Oklahoma City and in the early 60's the FAA coordinated with Tinker AFB and they did sonic boom tests twice daily over the city to see the effects. You flinched every time you heard one, the dogs went crazy and they even had a phone number to call if you had a broken window because of a boom and they would send someone out to replace it. After about a year they stopped the tests and determined it was too disruptive and that's where the ban on supersonic flying over the US by commercial aircraft came from originally.

@gregmiller7123 2 жыл бұрын

@@pierrepy2931 I think you mean the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). The FIA controls motor racing and I've seen some fast F1 cars but I don't think they broke the sound barrier! Just messing with you! Cheers

@21stcenturyfossil7 2 жыл бұрын

@@gregmiller7123 There were similar sonic boom tests in Chicago, though on a much smaller scale than the Oklahoma City tests. The claims for sonic boom damage were proportionally higher in Chicago, as expected in an area of higher population density. It's my understanding that the FAA would accept damage claims but the procedure was heavily bureaucratic and the FAA would use any excuse to deny a claim.

@scottmurphy650 2 жыл бұрын

I remember seeing a billboard after the SST cancellation that said "will the last person out of Seattle please turn out the lights?"

@joeross6523 2 жыл бұрын

"the world's first supersonic aircraft"? Hardly.

@DefinitelyNotEmma 2 жыл бұрын

He meant Passenger aircraft

@J-old 2 жыл бұрын

Is wierd that my previd ad was for the dyson hairdryer.... the SUPERSONIC

@nickjimbob2776 2 жыл бұрын

How do you post so many videos, you gotta like record so 90 a day... who edits, a team of 90 people who... GEEZ

@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245 2 жыл бұрын

Bots

@jamessagstetter3269 2 жыл бұрын

This is likely a collaboration of a team, one person finds relevant royalty-free (or at least a licensing fee within their budget) B-Roll, one person researches all this information and creates a detailed historical timeline, one person converts that timeline into a script, one person records that script with their voice, one person arranges the b-roll and edits the voiceover together

@tedwojtasik8781 2 жыл бұрын

The Concorde was an excellent aircraft that never suffered an actual crash caused by equipment failure. It was not the Concordes fault debris was left on the runway but it was a convenient excuse to get rid of the plane as it was very noisy and polluted like a mofo.

@sidefx996 2 жыл бұрын

You need to do just a little more reading on the subject instead of trying to oversimplify things. Had there not been other issues with the aircraft (overloaded, misaligned landing gear, uneven fuel load) and it had lifted off where it normally would/should have, it would have never struck the debris on the runway... The NTSB had previously investigated the Concorde and it's tire incidents. Throughout it's life Concorde had over 70 tire and wheel related incidents, 7 of which caused serious damage to the aircraft and were described as potentially catastrophic with damaged fuel tanks and engines. It was amazing it was ever built, but there was a reason the United States pulled the plug on theirs. Aircraft like the B-58, B-70, and SR-71 were all flying years before the Concorde. Yes I understand the challenges of building a passenger vs. a military aircraft... Concorde was "cool" and was a huge source of national pride but it was never a money maker even prior to 9/11 and that's the reason it was finally withdrawn from service.

@samclark8468 2 жыл бұрын

@@sidefx996 "even prior to 9/11" Relevance?

@sidefx996 2 жыл бұрын

@@samclark8468 Airline travel as a whole went in the shitter after 9/11. It's one of several contributing factors why Concorde was retired.

@The_Dudester 2 жыл бұрын

The 1960's was a turbulent decade of change and there were missed opportunities. One of the items that should have been invested in was a national high speed rail system that served only major cities. California and Texas received that memo recently but work has been slow on the projects. With that said... In 1980 I was among those that opposed a rail line from downtown San Diego to Tijuana. It turned out to be a huge success. After WW2, Chrysler, Ford and GM sent reps across the country, convincing cities that rail was a 19th century transportation mode and horribly outdated and most cities bought that BS, destroying their trolley systems. Imagine the scenario. You want to travel Los Angeles to New York. You get to the train station, check in, then board your train. You reserved a sleeper car, so you snooze while your train travels in excess of 200 mph to your destination. You get up in the morning, shower, shave, then dress and viola!! You have arrived at your destination. Compare it to the alternative, hustling to the airport. Being searched by security, crowded into an aluminum tube where you sit, crushed between two people. You arrive at your destination, but have the hassle of recovering your bags, then probably being far from your needed location as the train station is probably closer. But, that's just my opinion.

@davidhoffman1278 2 жыл бұрын

Nice dream. Making it happen has been very difficult.

@snowdog03 2 жыл бұрын

They carried few passengers, had sky high fares and were only allowed to go supersonic over the ocean. Surprised they flew as many years as they did.

@camerontyler1386 2 жыл бұрын

Love these videos and the knowledge gained from a view throughout the history of aviation. Thanks Dark Skies for all the work you do :)

@tibzig1 2 жыл бұрын

The narrator must be paid by the number of words he can exhale per minute! LOL!

@SPak-rt2gb 2 жыл бұрын

How bout doing one on the Martin Mercator and the secret missions it flew

@bearlemley 2 жыл бұрын

I remember back as a young test pilot I thought i was near top of the world at 41000' off the coast of Florida, when Miami center called to give me traffic off my left descending out of 55000'. I looked off to the left and saw the concord which looked like a shinny needle coming back from space against the dark blue sky. What a day

@dingo8babym20 2 жыл бұрын

the power needed to push an object through a fluid increases as the cube of the velocity. That is all.

@takashitamagawa5881 2 жыл бұрын

Once you get to the speed of sound, a transition occurs and you have to push a shock wave along with you, thus the sonic boom and the drastically increased full consumption per passenger mile.

@nocofaig 2 жыл бұрын

The Tu-144 made its final flight on 26 June 1999 - it only stopped passenger service after 55 flights, it performed cargo flights and non commercial operations including being used by the Soviet space program to train pilots of the Buran spacecraft, and by NASA for supersonic research until 1999 The TU-144 was the first and fastest commercial supersonic jet and spanned 30 years from it's first flight. It was too noisy for passenger comfort I read and also got off to a bad start with the Paris crash. However, it is often dismissed by many without looking at the underlying facts which include the fact that the cost of operating supersonic aircraft was done at a loss by all operators. The irony being that the failure of the US supersonic program may have ultimately saved operators from a costly loss making aircraft.

@123supporter 2 жыл бұрын

Concorde was hardly "the worlds 1st supersonic aircraft"

@sirjames26 2 жыл бұрын

But it was the worlds first supersonic airliner.

@2point7182818284590 2 жыл бұрын

@@sirjames26 No, the TU-144 was the first supersonic airliner.

@Daekar3 2 жыл бұрын

Best ad for Nord I have seen anywhere. 😊

@eddietorres1000 2 жыл бұрын

The XB 70 Valkyrie it Kinda Looked the Concorde and if Flew Mach 3+

@randybentley2633 2 жыл бұрын

Honestly, the reason that the American SST program failed is that the wrong company was chosen in the end to build the plane. At the time that the contract was initiated North American's XB-70 was already doing Mach 3+ speed runs so it was shown that an airliner-sized aircraft could attain those speeds without having to resort to heavy and complex for the time swing-wing gearboxes. It wouldn't have taken too much reconfiguring of the Valkyrie's airframe to turn her into a world-class people mover.