Bit of a mouthful though.

They did it for the meme value before memes were even officially a thing.

Nice.

Handley Page built the HP 115 low speed test bed for the Concorde programe , a 75 degree delta.

@@leerogers6423 yes, it is on display at the Fleet Air Arm museum at Yeovilton.

You seem to be confusing Shorts efforts with those of the HP115 which was a low speed delta for Concorde and also Bristol's 188 stainless steel research aircraft.

Totally agree. The opposite of pointless. There was a reason for the Gemini space program as an (other) example. Confidence in engineering. If there are the resources and time , why wouldn't you test the concepts and practicalities as much as possible. Finding the limits is pointless ? *meh*

@@possumpete I have a sneaking suspicion that IH put that remark in to stimulate just such a discussion - kudos if so. And yes, you even put it better than I did. If I wasn't so busy (ie, lazy) it might be worthwhile to list all the times (and there are surely many) when one person's screw-up was another's flash of inspiration.

@@unclenogbad1509 I suspect Kudos are indeed to be awarded. Yep, one persons miss is often the doorway for another "journey". More often than not it's the first time that "door" has been seen. Now all face the nearest screen and bow toward the Algorithm Deity .

@@possumpete Well put. And yes, I bow.

Yes, and all the information we developed about how the flying tail was the secrete to braking the sound barrier found its way over to America according to an interview I saw by Eric "Winkle" Brown. Funny how that happened.....

​@@joewalker2152 Try secret instead of secrete and breaking instead of braking. But yes, the US has a habit of appropriating knowledge gained by others and then claiming it was their idea and taking all the credit. Pointing this out to Americans, even with associated evidence, often provokes hostile responses. 😁

@@joewalker2152 They sold it in exchange for promises

Citation needed.

@@OneMoreDesu Do your own research, there has been enough published.

​@@OneMoreDesu I'm sure your Google-Fu is advanced enough to find that information.

Hitchens's razor: That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Mirage IV did it

Wonderful tale, thank you! Slight correction though; it's Mach 1, and Mach 2. Mk1 is short for "Mark 1" ie: the first version of (whatever) etc. Mach numbers are dimensionless numbers which relate how fast the vehicle is moving with regard to the local speed of sound, which varies with both altitude and temperature. It's named after Ernst Mach, An Austrian physicist that did a lot of work on shock waves.

Similar story and JC exclamations, from USAF pilots training on F-15s with Buccaneers on low level intercepts, they could not get low enough to intercept!

I would love to see a video about Shorts latest aircraft design.. Oops! Never mind.

Unfortunately few other customers bought it. Even traditional Commonwealth customers of British war planes didn't want it. eg- Australia and later South Africa going for the Mirage III. A development of the Fairy Delta II into a multi role service aircraft would probably have resulted in more exports and survival of an independent industry.

​@@binaway Hindsight is a wonderful thing to have, and it's accuracy is spot on. Foresight on the other hand, has much lower success. But the P1 proved a useful aircraft, everyone learned lessons from it's development, and those facts justified it's development. They certainly weren't the last aviation company to mis-predict the future.

If by "she" you mean the EE Lightning. Then yes, if by "short legged" you mean - only carried enough fuel to climb to altitude and then descend back to the airfield, and by "under armed" you mean - carried a missile so short ranged that I only just outranged the gun it would sometimes be equipped with. Then, yes, I can agree with that.

Or maybe the Zhuchenko vertoplan?

Per the Cutout .. Also called a Dogs Tooth (I think). I suspect the intent is to create a "cyclonic fence" to slow the outward , lateral flow of air along the wing. This is also used on the current Super Hornet and has been used on many transonic aircraft. The objectives include reduced parasitic drag from the wingtips and better stall behaviours. Swept wings at lower speeds also can produce a nasty condition when in ground effect called "Sabre Dance" *perhaps* these notches were there to study that effect and how to mitigate the thing. This may have been a study of such things and higher Angle Of Attack performance. The Soviets (Mig especially) built actual fences to achieve _similar_ objectives. I have no idea really but those notches are no accident :)

@@possumpete I thought the “dogs tooth” was only used on the leading edge of the wing.

@@briancavanagh7048 Correct on 'dog's tooth' - the answer you are looking for is: There is no 'cut out' on the trailing edge of the mainplane of the Lightning. The wings are swept and that creates the impression it is a delta wing with a section removed - but it is in fact a true sweep. So it is the same for the low set tailplane which is a mini of the main plane. Look at the three alternative SB5 wings the 50deg and 69deg remove the illusion of a cut-out. .

The man's name was Frederick Handley-Page. His TITLE was "Sir" Handley-Page.

@@another3997his title surely was “Sir”.?

Frederick Page and Frederick Handley-Page are two different people.

Giggity

... pause for effect... nice

I think you will find the USA wanted the miles cancelled as they were afraid uk would beat them to supersonic speeds. The Bell x1 also gained the tail plain as fitted to the miles allowing them to break the sound barrier.

@@paulgibson490 I'll take Frank whittle word over some jellouse red coats Regardless I dont believe the miles would have reached mach 1 but now we will never know

@thomascooley2749 Redcoats have nothing to do with it the USA has always put the spanner in it when they want there own way. The tsr2 was cancelled when the USA told our government it needed to buy f 111s luckily we never bought that heap of junk but did buy the excellent C 130 Hercules.

There is no singular British Government, they change all the time. Not only can different political parties control the Government at times, but individual MPs and ministers come and go frequently from within any particular government. There are also the Civil Servants who run day to day operations and guide ministers, who may have limited knowledge and experience in a particular field. But many UK governments have backed new and untested, often groundbreaking ideas. You don't have to look too hard to see that.

@@another3997 They've also helped to kill those projects.... like TSR2 and one of Shorts aircraft (which sadly lead to the end of the company).

Pre-1997 the type of people making the 'actual' decisions were pretty similar sort of people regardless of the government's colour.

And those living in other parts of the UK too. We English folk aren't the only ones. And I think many of us pronounce it as "Farnborah".

@another3997 Yes, it had occurred to me that both pronunciations are used, as opposed to 'farn-burrow'. ;)