F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible
@michaelfrench3396
Жыл бұрын
I wonder if they gave Ace awards to planes who took out five or more pilots? Have a great weekend everybody!
@DukeChameleon
Жыл бұрын
If they did, every bomber hunter should be an Ace by definition
@charliemilton5791
Жыл бұрын
Do they give ace status to defensive gunners? Always wondered
@michaelfrench3396
Жыл бұрын
@@charliemilton5791 good question
@ProvidenceNL
Жыл бұрын
@@charliemilton5791 Impossible to verify if you took a plane down with a lucky shot most of the time.
@madhukarjonathanminj2772
Жыл бұрын
@@charliemilton5791yes,they very much do infact there's a list in Wikipedia of non pilot aces
@LaraineBouguer
Жыл бұрын
The fact that the companies that regularly made large bombers took one look at the specifications and immediately said, "Peace out, b*****s!" should've been a massive red flag to Boulton and DeHavilland.
@alexsis1778
Жыл бұрын
Not just to them but the people writing the specifications too. If none of your experienced companies want to put in a tender on a potentially very lucrative project in their own specialty, especially when there really aren't any other projects going on, then you really should find out why none of them are interested.
@JohnSmith-yv6eq
Жыл бұрын
They didn't talk to one another... and each company was played off against the other by the devious rsoles at the Ministry. Had all 4 manufacturers insisted on a combined meeting and specification changes conference there might have been far better results. It took War to get that shit sorted...
@mikefed
Жыл бұрын
They probably should have made the upper engine a pusher design.
@kyle857
Жыл бұрын
Early pushers always seemed to have problems with cooling.
@dallesamllhals9161
Жыл бұрын
@@kyle857 Define "early"?
@chpet1655
Жыл бұрын
Don’t be ridiculous that actually makes sense 😏
@dallesamllhals9161
Жыл бұрын
@@chpet1655 No need for parachutes = less $€£ n' more "esprit de corps"es(tiny parts...)
@xgford94
Жыл бұрын
Get out of my head thats what i was thinking
@ghost307
Жыл бұрын
I can see another problem when the chart gets blown out of the cockpit and they co-pilot instinctively grabs for it...only to find that they suddenly had nothing to grab with.
@JohnSmith-yv6eq
Жыл бұрын
'Armless lad...completely 'armless...
@benholroyd5221
Жыл бұрын
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq tis but a flesh wound.
@bigblue6917
Жыл бұрын
The second pilots head was just 9 inches from the propeller. A slight mistake and there is a whole new meaning to a centre parting. Mention of the onboard toilets reminded me of some I read some years ago. During WW2 Australian bomber crews were in the habit of flushing their toilets while over the target. The Germans complained about this to the Red Cross, chemical warfare or something, so they were forced to stop doing that. I do get the feeling they were not the only ones doing this but they were the ones who got caught.
@Finnan189
Жыл бұрын
Ever heard of the Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.9? It was a 2 seat experimental reconnaissance aircraft that had a gunner/observer position in the front with the engine directly behind it. So not only could the poor chap in the "pulpit" could be decapitated by the propeller behind him he also faced being crushed by the engine if the plane crashed nose first. Only one was built in 1915.
@robertwilloughby8050
Жыл бұрын
The French had a member of the S.P.A.D family that had the same "Pulpit" design. It was not popular.
@stevetournay6103
Жыл бұрын
@@robertwilloughby8050 Yes, the A2. At first glance it looked fairly ordinary...until you saw where the prop was!
@legoeasycompany
Жыл бұрын
Ah yes the red headed step sibling of the B.E.2 Variants
@dennismason3740
Жыл бұрын
Bomb-Aimer. I love that designation. My dad was a bomb aimer on a B-29 in 1945. Captain - "you have the airplane" - my dad - "I have the airplane..." and he dumped the load and the plane hopped way up and my dad learned to drink like a proper alcoholic because he knew that 32,000 feet below people and dogs and cats and budgies were being disintegrated and burned to death. Bomb aimer probably has a story or two. My dad transited in 1996 (North Carolina?) - he left L.A. (and his wife and kids) in 1955. Ten-year anniversary of dropping incindiaries, I guess.
@BearfootBob
Жыл бұрын
Poor soul, let's hope he found some peace.
@AWMJoeyjoejoe
Жыл бұрын
I never really considered the psychological effect of dropping bombs on civilians, but now I think about it you'd have to be a psychopath to not be affected in some way. I hope your dad came to terms with it in the end.
@jakublulek3261
Жыл бұрын
Because you don't see it first-hand like an infantryman or a tanker, your mind has much more freedom to think about it and fill the blanks. Especially if you cannot rationalize to yourself, why are you doing it. My great-grandfather fought in WWII, and as a Polish legionary that lost his entire family in Holocaust and entire country to German and Soviet invasion, he didn't start to doubt himself until his 70s. And that was largely because he never forgave himself for what happened during the Malaya Emergency, which was when he left the British Army, in 1958. He was quite willing to share war stories from WWII and Korea, but he refused to say anything about his time fighting the MNLA.
@Hartley_Hare
Жыл бұрын
This was quite a sobering story. There's a Roald Dahl short story about a pilot who starts to go mad because he realises that with left or right pressure on the rudder he can kill a completely different group of people. While I have massive admiration for every pilot on WW2, of every plane and of every service, the bomber offensive gives me some pause for thought.
@Simon_Nonymous
Жыл бұрын
Five other people have said some very intelligent and thoughtful things already. But very grateful you took time to tell your story; my grandfather was RAF ground crew on Halifax IIIs and he never talked about his war, except to say he had an easy war. They both did their bit to bring down two horrific regimes, I raise my glass to your father.
@jfangm
Жыл бұрын
At least it wasn't Blackburn. Pilot decapitation would have been a feature, not a bug.
@kfcroc18
Жыл бұрын
The toilet was just a tube to the outside? Talk about bombs away!
@BrassLock
Жыл бұрын
No matter how carefully the tube exit was constructed, even after exhaustive wind-tunnel tests using appropriately coloured dyes (and possibly dog-pooh samples collected from the Airfield Guard Dogs), there's always gonna be a streak down the fuselage for the ground crew to clean up with a hot mop soaked in Dettol.
@jaws848
Жыл бұрын
"Look out below!!!"🤣🤣🤣
@kfcroc18
Жыл бұрын
@@PADOYLE I don't think the plane can fly fast enough to do that.
@sirflaps7619
Жыл бұрын
Chemical warfare
@BrassLock
Жыл бұрын
@@kfcroc18 _"Haemmoroidal vacuum"_ was created by prop-wash not merely airspeed.
@anlydaly5726
Жыл бұрын
It's really astonishing how far bombers, and really every kind of large body aircraft has come in the past 100 years. Also great video, keep up the good work.
@sergeipohkerova7211
Жыл бұрын
Imagine the engineers at Boulton Paul with their drafting paper and slide rules, chuckling as they draw the seats "LOL, glad I'm not going to be THIS loser..."
@JeansWithPockets541
Жыл бұрын
I think 'enthusiastically pushing Bristol Jupiter engines on BP' consisted of backing a lorry or two of the engines up to the BP plant.
@gerardlabelle9626
Жыл бұрын
Why wasn’t that 9” propeller clearance savagely rejected in the “rough sketch” design phase? It’s straight out criminal negligence.
@ThreenaddiesRexMegistus
Жыл бұрын
Boulton-Paul, best known for bird-like creations - turkeys and lame ducks!
@IntrospectorGeneral
Жыл бұрын
This was first recorded use of the line, "Get to the chopper!"
@BearfootBob
Жыл бұрын
"Dammit, Al has clogged up the tube again."
@manmonkee
Жыл бұрын
Wouldn't swapping the central engine for a Pusher be an obvious design choice? some major problems exchanged for some minor ones?
@kyle857
Жыл бұрын
Early pushers almost always had problems with cooling. It isn't always as great of a solution as it sounds.
@manmonkee
Жыл бұрын
@@kyle857 opposed to shearing off your co pilots head I think it's the lesser of 2 evils.
@444mopar
Жыл бұрын
I would bet the air ministry's specification was for 3 engines in tractor configuration and both companies were stuck with that
@manmonkee
Жыл бұрын
@@444mopar I wonder if Rex's Hanger could look into if the Specification was that Specific?
@killbot1974
Жыл бұрын
This is what happens when a pilot has extra-marital affairs with a designers wife.
@kevanhubbard9673
Жыл бұрын
Similar designs usually if you have two different designers due to convergent evolution and there's only so much you can do with a plane.
@TomPrickVixen
Жыл бұрын
How about instaling an engine in a "pusher" configuration?
@perrydowd9285
Жыл бұрын
I was just surprised that, post WWI experimentation being what it was, The air Ministry never gave headlights a try (so the pilots could see where they were going). I say, let's get them to put a horn on the steering wheel. I have one on the roller and its capital!
@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935
Жыл бұрын
You must have an eye on the Supermarine Otter, I’d keep my seat belt on in that plane especially with big waves. Servo tabs, really. Even giving the surfaces trim tabs would have been advanced for the day. Servo tabs automatically moving in opposition to the control surface deflection to provide aerodynamic power assistance to the pilot’s physical strength must have been almost unique then. The Boeing 707 airliner flew on servo tabs, spring linkages gave pilot feel and surface deflection assistance at lower airspeeds.
@anzaca1
Жыл бұрын
...why didn't they just make the central engine a pusher engine?
@wilsonj4705
Жыл бұрын
Wonder if making the upper engine a pusher would have been feasible?
@martindice5424
Жыл бұрын
To quote Edmund Blackadder - ‘Bloody red tape, eh?’
@toomanyhobbies2011
Жыл бұрын
That photo of the bombers and fighters arrayed on the field is a good example of the evolution of aircraft design. Very cool. Thank for your emphasis on government idiocy and bias that leads to so many failed implementations. Amazing how much more efficient things become during wartime, when survival is at stake.
@The_Modeling_Underdog
Жыл бұрын
He's sadly no longer with us, but, mate, what I'd give for a John Le Carré novel describing the Air Ministry shenanigans of the era. Out of touch with reality is an understatement.
@BigMoTheBlackDragon
Жыл бұрын
In a movie trailer announcer voice: The Bolton Paul P.32 -- this time the "P" stands for Personal. Cut to a group of P.32s gathered around them barrels of oil with rubber hoses inserted in the barrels, leading to their engines: "Pilots?! Wee don't need noo stinking Pilots!"
@gregmuon
Жыл бұрын
I wonder what brainiac came up with the specification for a three engine bomber that wasn't allowed to have an engine in the nose.
@jaws848
Жыл бұрын
How ironic how many of these specs that are dangerous for the crew have the word "SLASH" in them.lol🤣🤣🤣🤣
@eyo8766
Жыл бұрын
Whenever Boulton Paul does anything: "It's Boulton Paul-ing time"
@alexdemoya2119
Жыл бұрын
I suppose the pilot will never be the head of the airforce
@BrassLock
Жыл бұрын
😂😂😂
@ahseaton8353
Жыл бұрын
His head would be all over the airforce
@Del_S
Жыл бұрын
Pfft, any plane can decapitate the pilot, you just need to believe and try hard. Wait no.
@merafirewing6591
Жыл бұрын
Darwin Award.
@aabumble9954
Жыл бұрын
Could your next video maybe be about the IA-38, the Zhuchenko vertoplan or the lifting body aircraft?
@andrewrichardson582
11 ай бұрын
You should do a video on the side strand and overstrand!
@jamessquires7015
Жыл бұрын
I like how this one looks over the DH.
@50043211
Жыл бұрын
Nonsense, the propeller directly behind the pilot keeps them focused and motivated!
@zebop917
Жыл бұрын
It’s a bit ironic that whilst the DH72 looks like a dog, its fin shape is recognisably the same as on the Hornet which carries my vote for best-looking piston-powered aircraft of all time.
@Itsjustme-Justme
Жыл бұрын
Air ministry specification reads like: We don't want a bomber. When you don't have engines for a specific size of aircraft, you have to adjust the size of the aircraft. With 1930 technology, a three engined bomber with defensive capability to the front was impossible for obvious reasons. The solution is just as obvious: Scale it down to 2 engines or scale it up to 4 engines.
@kfcroc18
Жыл бұрын
Are you going to make more videos about airships?
@Allan_aka_RocKITEman
Жыл бұрын
As I commented in that other video: *_"THREE engines? How ODD."_* 😉
@edstoro3883
Жыл бұрын
Ha Ha Ha !
@brucebaxter6923
Жыл бұрын
I never can understand why cockpits look up from the top and nod down from the underside. The only danger is below you
@thegreat_I_am
Жыл бұрын
The answer to fulfilling the spec for a 3 engine bomber with a nose gunner would’ve been an asymmetrical design with two engines on one side and one on the other, with an off-set fuselage. That’s what Blohm und Voss would’ve built.
@drstevenrey
4 ай бұрын
Boulton Paul. You know, I feel a little foolish, as I only ever knew the Defiant from this company. I never realized any of their other products. This is enlightening to me.
@ruypavancardim7512
Жыл бұрын
The famous PBY Catalina had that special hability too.
@merafirewing6591
Жыл бұрын
They should've turned the third engine into a pusher.
@dennismason3740
Жыл бұрын
Ya got me with the title.
@calvingreene90
Жыл бұрын
When bad designer part of the specifications.
@gerardlabelle9626
Жыл бұрын
I have a mental image of a pilot’s long scarf getting entangled in in the propeller and strangling him, a la Isadora Duncan….
@Kroggnagch
9 ай бұрын
Anyone ever play the DoS game Red Barron that came with A-10 Tank Killer as well? I didn't discover the A-10 game that was on the same disc until a couple years after having been playing Red Barron. I was STOKED to suddenly have a "new" flying game. I loved those games so, so much. Anyone else who's roughly 40 remember this? Lol
@foreverpinkf.7603
Жыл бұрын
It is difficult to understand why companies were willing to submit proposals or prototypes in the first place, as the specifications were constantly changing.
@drstevenrey
4 ай бұрын
I would probably have used two engines each per side, one pusher, one tractor. Three just does not make sense when the nose needs to be free.
@grantpratt299
Жыл бұрын
You need to do an episode on the CURTISS CONDOR
@RemusKingOfRome
Жыл бұрын
These are the people who built the Defiant, Hero of Dunkirk, so watch your language ... :D
@stephenremington8448
Жыл бұрын
Deafening roar, or deathening roar! That's appalling they'd even think 9 inches clearance was ok, one wrong absentedminded shifting of position and the pilot is history.
@steveshoemaker6347
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video as always.... Shoe🇺🇸
@peterbrown6224
Жыл бұрын
Maybe he could have worn a crash helmet. A strong one.
@Ba_Yegu
Жыл бұрын
But then besides the Co-pilot still being decapitated the Propeller would get damage too, probably breaking and possibly taking down the whole plane.
@peterbrown6224
Жыл бұрын
@@Ba_Yegu You're right, and the fitters wouldn't be too happy either.. But it provides a compelling career incentive to seek promotion to first pilot, should you live that long.
@TheEndOfNether
Жыл бұрын
Interesting
@keithmoore5306
Жыл бұрын
it never occured to anyone to just go straight to a 4 engine design? a twin radial pusher/tractor on each side would have worked quite well on these two!!
@teslashark
Жыл бұрын
Boulton Paul, they don't have any good ideas when it's an entire plane.
@robertbalazslorincz8218
Жыл бұрын
Ohmy
@darkusblader
Жыл бұрын
They should have just deleted the overhead engine and given the bristol engine to the plane.
@donaldparlett7708
Жыл бұрын
Ahhh, nothing like early aircraft designs, crew be damned.
@167curly
Жыл бұрын
They were victims of Depression economies, bureaucratic mind-sets, and were obsolete even before completed.
@keithmoore5306
Жыл бұрын
wonder how close some of these companies came to saying you can get stuffed we quit because of all their meddling?
@sabrekai8706
Жыл бұрын
Guess it never occured to them to extend the nose and aft fuselage a couple of feet. I imaging the test pilots took one look at that spinning prop and immediately called for a new pair of shorts. And booked off sick for the next flight.
@TheDkeeler
Жыл бұрын
I wonder exactly what radio this aircraft used or would of used Are there any working examples that have survived today? I would imagine the vacuum tubes used were very delicate under the best of conditions.
@jamesengland7461
Жыл бұрын
So Top Gear WASN'T the ones who invented the 500 horsepower blender.
@SuperchargedSupercharged
Жыл бұрын
Still looking forward to the hour long format. :)
@Calligraphybooster
Жыл бұрын
I wonder why they bothered with the pilot’s seat instead of installing that engine in the pusher configuration.
@stevenborham1584
Жыл бұрын
A swapping of positions of third engine and nose turret would have solved this airplanes flaws. Field of fire would have dramatically increased, although the gunner is obviously confined to his lofty position for the flight, and a gun turret could have been placed at the trailing edge position to alleviate the tail gunner workload regards the dorsal position. Some sort of air-stair wing underside panel could have been designed to allow egress for the upper wing turret station in flight had they committed to such a direction, the gunner turret would have imposed no less drag and structural weight as the engine nacelle. Then the only danger is shooting out the front engine and not a partial pilot lobotomy.
@richardw64
Жыл бұрын
I guess they took it on because business was probably slow during the Great Depression. The Air Ministry probably had made up their mind , unknowingly to BP. A catch 22 situation.
@tombogan03884
Жыл бұрын
RAF needed to learn from the Navy, and HMS Captain.
@victorboucher675
Жыл бұрын
Oh Virginia ... as in the "proper" Vickers type ... might have been the way to go go ...
@jehoiakimelidoronila5450
Жыл бұрын
Name a worse thing to happen to a project caused by the military. I'll wait
@davidelliott5843
Жыл бұрын
DeHavilland seemed to learn from their experiences with stupid War office specifications. Boulton Paul seemed to suck them in. Think this one, the Defiant and the Roc.
@None-zc5vg
Жыл бұрын
(Wasn't the 'Roc' another Blackburn effort ?)
@davidjones332
Жыл бұрын
@@None-zc5vg Yes, a heavily-modified derivative of the Skua. You can't really blame the manufacturer, after all they're only trying to provide what the customer asks for. It's not their job to decide what the aircraft's combat requirements or capabilities should be.
@PaulMcKendrick
Жыл бұрын
Thanks
@davidelliott5843
Жыл бұрын
Why did it not have two engines on the top wing?
@petrossteadilious
Жыл бұрын
Where would Dick Dastardly put the giant anvil? 🤔
@deeemceetooisbaesgaem7211
Жыл бұрын
jeez, I'm early
@colonthree
Жыл бұрын
Everyone stating "pusher engine" clearly haven't heard of what some random dude called "Sickorskee" or something was doing...
@patrickcloutier6801
Жыл бұрын
Boulton Paul again, eh?
@CathodeRayNipplez
Жыл бұрын
Designed by a committee.
@garryferrington811
Жыл бұрын
Well, good aircraft didn't just happen. It took a lot of errors, time, expense, and pushing of envelopes. And along the way you had things like this.
@madsteve9
Жыл бұрын
Make you wonder how did Boulton Paul, keep getting contracts ? Do you think it was 1) Bribery 2) A Pool of High Class Female Escorts 3) A Pool of Gay Escorts
@bazza945
Жыл бұрын
British aircraft design at its finest. The crew factor? Nah.
@paulsmodels
Жыл бұрын
Those designers must have been doing to much snuff or they took mind altering drugs.
@JohnBeadling
Жыл бұрын
The propeller of a 172 is much closer to the pilot than this airplane's propeller. Clickbait? 🤔
@stevetournay6103
Жыл бұрын
In front. Enclosed cabin. So no.
@The_Modeling_Underdog
Жыл бұрын
Weird 172 you know. Was it pranged up on the nose, to have the prop 9 inches away from the pilot?
Пікірлер: 156