The Insanely Bigger Faster American Concorde Failures
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 09. 2021
- Go to nordvpn.com/darkskies 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. - Auta a dopravní prostředky
Maybe the French, UK and USA could have joined in a group called FUKUS
🤣🤣🤣Made my day!!
USFUK you mean
😆😅
They did. But that's a whole different agenda than a plane...
FALUS
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
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.
What was it like breaking the sound barrier
@@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.
Yet you cannot spell it's name correctly.
@@jimdavis8391
The French one had a on the end.
Insane plane, id love seeing one someday in a museum.
"World's First Supersonic Aircraft" Started right off with a wrong statement....
pretty much par for the course
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.
Didnt even notice that mistake, what was the first supersonic aircraft though im curious
@@helicoptersauce In level flight, the Bell X-1.
Exactly what I thought. Not even 10 seconds in and we have a major gaffe!
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.
It was the 2nd G7 meeting, and was a month after my 12th Birthday. Sorry...
It’s just Concorde not the Concorde. Great story btw.
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 .
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"
@@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 .
@@burningb2439 Yeah... Bring back yesterday's future...
Very lucky
Stunning plane
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.
The 747 simply proved that stuffing a plane to the maximum capacity was more economical
Yet the 380 proved a flop, sadly
only when the fuel price went up!!!
It's over now people will never fly like before thanks to the scamdemic so small planes are the future.
@@NLTimmy I'm still saying it should be turned into a flying cruise missile and ballistic missile carrier
@@V8_screw_electric_cars good, globalization isn't desirable anyway, not to mention the environmental impact.
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 :)
If it’s flying faster than the speed of sound, how could you hear it before you see it?
@@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".
@@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.
@@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
Got to see one take off by chance at Charles Degaul. It was raw power
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.
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.
Thx for sharing this, ive lived here my whole life never knew KTNT and such existed
Yes it was called Dade-collier I flew there a few times training
"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.
@@tommissouri4871 eh its not that wide. Once youve done it enough going horizontally across the state is easy.
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!
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.
Where did you find this information?
Lol nice
@@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.
@@jkcarroll Cheers thanks for the info, I've also read the rubber compound for the tires were an issue for the Russians also.
@@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.
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 ).
The Bell P-39 Aircobra unless already done. Suppose I should have searched for it.
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.
The 2707-300 was a tailed delta design, not a tailless double-delta like the L-2000.
@@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.
I've flown on a Concorde. Amazing, the sense of power was incredible. Very narrow fuselage but lovely comfy leather seats.
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.
The 2707 never flew, but the Seattle Supersonics, who got their name from the project, did alright.
I was always hoping they were named after a certain hedgehog when he goes super saiyan.
They moved to… Oklahoma, I think?
Seattle is getting an NHL team, though.
Jack.Sikma, Dennis Johnson, downtown Freddy Brown...1979 NBA Champs !!
@@actact21 R.I.P. Bob Blackburn
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.
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.
@@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"
They were all chasing Kelly Johnson's wake by ten years or so.
Whilst Johnson cribbed from all those before him
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.
Thanks for the vid sir.👍🏼👍🏼
Always enjoy yer vids, Amigo!
@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.
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.
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?
@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".
@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.
Congratulations, you've fallen into the Dark Skies algorithm trap.
Can you do the AH64 Apache? I leave for flight training soon and would love to see a dark skies video on it
Apache flight training?
Thank you for your service and good luck with your training. Prayers for your safety and success. 🇺🇸🇺🇸
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. 😉
Russian choppers for the win.
@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
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.
Great timing with Boom coming. Thx for the great video and footage as usual 😎
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...😷
Have you heard about the Boom Supersonic Passenger Airplane project?
Sometimes there is no substitute for up close person to person oversight of a project on another continent.
@@JohnJohansen2 who hasn’t? Doesn’t change anything he said.
@@superskullmaster Yes it does!
@@JohnJohansen2 Nope..... The market has spoken. Concorde was a fiscal fail.like AMTRAK.
I flew on Concorde a couple of times. 1430mph. Fantastic
I’ve been supersonic for 7 hours.
@@mickyday2008 i have been subsonic all my life!
Awesome narrative you make it sound dramatic, and worth listening too
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!
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!
“World’s first supersonic aircraft” - wasn’t that the Bell X-1?
I assume he meant airliner, but said aircraft
Noticed that too he meant airliner ^
Love this channels content 👌!
More please 🙏!
Longer videos when possible.
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...
Me too.
It was the first to be announced, the USSR rushed theirs in order to be first to fly passengers in service.
...if I recall he first airliner to break the sound barrier was a DC-8 during a shallow dive.
@@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".
@@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.
"...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?
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.
No you didn't. While fun to watch these videos are overfilled with errors and overdramatization.
@@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 ??
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.
Also most came from Russia.
@@christopherrobinson7541 if that were true, the MiG-25 would be made completely of titanium, instead of from steel with titanium leading edges.
@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.
I remember going through all this back in the day 😃.
Great video 👍
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Agreed!
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.
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.
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.
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
that's the allowed walking area in the center. he didn't step on the ailerons or flap or the periphery of the wing
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.
4:44 I don't know where you got your timestamp from.
@@cpt.awesome7281 huh your right must have been tired and misread the time or had that number stuck in my head
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
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
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.
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.
I'm not surprised it cost more when they had the refill the thing in flight to get across the Atlantic
@@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.
@@anthonyjames7483 where did you get that misinformation from?
Chances are that the US restrictions on sst flights were less about the environment and more about hurting Concorde.
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.
Many nations tbat had no aerospace industry placed similar restrictions on Concorde overflights. The supersonic bang was a problem all over the Earth.
It was about noise actually. This why they are building prototypes that test the feasibility of decreasing or nearly eliminating the sonic boom.
Saw a Concorde leave LaGuardia once. The noise and fury of the powerplants was awesome.
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.
Love these videos and the knowledge gained from a view throughout the history of aviation. Thanks Dark Skies for all the work you do :)
That's a expensive effin daily coffee.
Best ad for Nord I have seen anywhere. 😊
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.
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...
Airships are great, right up to the point that you cannot outrun the thunderstorms.
Yeah, it's called Business Class. 😄
Airship? I hope you dont mean like a zeppelin, like some kind of huge helicopter? Would be loud but it might be cool.
@@helicoptersauce ,
No, the reference was to non-rigid blimp or rigid airship zeppelin.
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.
I would absolutely love if you did a video on the B-26 Marauder! My grandpa flew that plane in World War II.
There are b 26 documentarys on youtube
F-14 Tomcat, honestly a little surprised when I couldn't find a video made by you already about it lol
Concorde has to be one of the few times you need to go to a museum to see the future
Or a gulag.
@@Wooargh You'd see some awfully surprising things there, or maybe just awful
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.
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.
A book on th XB70 has drawings of an airliner configuration. It’s named Valkyrie
@@mthury4532 was under the impression Valkyrie was always the Xb-70's name.
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.
Wow, an incredibly obvious error in the very first sentence! You're getting better at this.
Yeah XD
you got your channel up yet ?
The narrator must be paid by the number of words he can exhale per minute! LOL!
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.
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.
I don't suppose there too keen on having to refuel inflight either
Are there enough Elites travelling who can pay for this ??
@@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.
@@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.
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.
"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.
I was just about to post the same.
@@Dragonblaster1 All at the help given by the UK
He was taking about transport aircraft
@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.
@@ralphe5842 The first SST was the TU-144
Another wonderful doc !
@RileyFingeredMyDog And, your channel has no content. Therefore, zero input.
@RileyFingeredMyDog First, you finger a dog. Strike one. I'm a mechanic. Strike two. I'm an Electrician. Strike three. I buy Homes. You're out.
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.
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
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.
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.
Is wierd that my previd ad was for the dyson hairdryer.... the SUPERSONIC
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.
In the end the bigger slower 747 was an amazing economic success, while the quick beautiful Concord (and TU-144) were failures.
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.
i'm not entirely sure lack of economic success (of the plane itself, USSR is different story) did the TU-144 in
So Boeing could be on top.
The Americans used noise pollution as an excuse to bar Concorde from most routes so the 747 never had to compete with it.
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.
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.
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.)
I think there is one by Mark Felton
Dude, that zero has been done many times. I've seen 4 different long docs and many short docs on it. Its well known.
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!!!
@@pgosi197 yeah about six maybe 8 months back!
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.
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.
*Concorde.
I saw a Concorde abort a take-off at London's Heathrow airport on 25th January 1982. It taxied back to the terminal where I guess either the problem was fixed there and then or the aircraft was taken out of service and another Concorde used, as I saw one take off about an hour later. Very noisy on takeoff but quietened down once in the air.
I'd like to see a feature on the development of Martin-Baker Ejection seat and its derivatives, and the Russian versions. I read a book called "The Man in the Hot Seat" about it and it was a fascinating story.
Why does he sound as if the KGB is about to break into his apartment at any moment?
I flew on the Concorde a few times. As I recall it was very warm, and cramped. But it was fast! Very fast!
Sure you did.....lol.
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 ?
I would like to see a short doco on the Hughes H-1 racer or the Bugatti P-100. Those pre-war racers were instrumental in setting the foundation design of fighter aircraft of WW2.
This design was also very similar to one of the XB-70s prototypes
What resemblance do you see? Looks completely different to me.
@@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
@@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.
You forgot to mention Boom, the future supersonic airliners that is currently in development.
that's more executive than passenger size wise!!
@@keithmoore5306 yep, just looked at the site - all business class. At least the legroom looks good
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.
Very interesting Documentary
I still remember when the Concord came to Perth WA, the only thing that Ive seen fly here that was louder was B1b 'Lancer'
If youve heard an f-104, how does it compare?
Concorde not the Concorde. Yes
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?
I remember concorde doing trials flying over my home town which is the nearest place to Norway I was just a young lad at the time great thing to see never forget that
I’d like to see you do a video on the Air Force version and history of the MH-53J PAVELOW
Pavelow was best used in the belly of F-111. By the time it was deployed in the field better systems were finishing testing working much better.
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.
Aw man, I would've loved to see it. I live in Florida myself
I live near Merritt Island. Where was this kept? You work at The Cape?
Criminal to let it fade away
Not true, the forward fuselage still survives. Look it up.
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.
Seems they couldn't get the thing to fly across the Atlantic without in flight refuelling🤣 an issue of technological application?
Well, volume beat speed. Boeing was making the 737 and 747 at the same time.
@RileyFingeredMyDog commercial success is the measure. This is not a research project
@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.
Seen one in Miami back in the eighties .
Bad ass looking craft .
I remember seeing a billboard after the SST cancellation that said "will the last person out of Seattle please turn out the lights?"
"the world's first supersonic aircraft"? Hardly.
He meant Passenger aircraft
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.
meanwhile England tried to develop a Super Sonic Vole.
@@markplott4820 ..I guess that would be better than a giant wooden badger.
I saw the Concorde once on the tarmac at Zaventem airport. She was a beautiful plane. But I was amazed at how small it was.
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
It sits in the Museum of Flight in Seattle, if I’m not mistaken
I just love these video’s and the guys voice is perfect for this stuff.
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."
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!
Yes, "The Concorde" implies that there was only one, where there were actually 14 operational and several prototypes.
@@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.
I’d like to see you do a story on the Lockheed P-38 Lightening of World War 2. Especially with emphasis on the Reconn versions…
Have you done a video about the Short Sunderland and their work during WW2
Concorde was hardly "the worlds 1st supersonic aircraft"
But it was the worlds first supersonic airliner.
@@sirjames26 No, the TU-144 was the first supersonic airliner.
How bout doing one on the Martin Mercator and the secret missions it flew
In 1983 or 1984 the Banco Herrero a little but well managed bank from Asturias (provincia in the north of Spain) was the second or third more profitable spanish bank (just because it was one of the first in computerize all the process). To celebrate the Herrero family rented the Concorde to fly from the Asturias airport to París with the Board of the bank and their families.
A regular fly takes 1hour and 45 minutes and in the 80's the Asturias airport had not taxi way.
The father of a friend was one of the Bank's Vp. And i had the chance of been in the Concorde... not fly... but inside and touch it yes.
Inside was as a bus... i used to fly every year to México in Jumbo (Iberia, Lufthansa or Air France...) and the concorde looked for me (a child ten years old) more to a fighter jet... was graceful, beatiful.... i loved this plane but after that, many years ahead, when the Concorde crashed a piece of my hearth died with it.
(Excuse my english)
You do such a good job if these I would like to know what happened to the Avro Arrow
So did the FAA effectively ban supersonic flights due to spite?
That was pretty much the theory here in Europe, a bad case of sour grapes on the Americans part.
@@Getpojke thanks
@@pigeonpoo1823 YMW.
0:05 "In 1962 the British and French governments announced the World's first supersonic aircraft" How wrong can you be ?
How? He left out the modifier commercial. Yet, clearly is talking transports planes.
Yessssss !!! I was waiting!
Used to have a "working"( lights flashed, wings extended and retracted, wheels moved it and it turned port & starboard, and made jet sounds- when there were 4 good D batteries installed ) model of this back in late '60s. Dreamed of travelling the world in a real one.