An overview of all types of odd-looking aircraft using photos and artwork including airplanes that actually took flight, and proposals that never left the drawing board. Were any of them ultimately successful?
Sad that when talking about tailless planes, you did not mention the flying wings of the Horten brothers. They developed a wing layout, with a "bell"-shaped lift distribution, that was stable, maneuvrable and VERY efficient. It ended up in the Horten Ho IX (also called Ho 229 an Gö 229) jet fighters, of which one prototype, the V-3, still survives in the US. Weird that their layout was apparently largely ignored by later designers of tailless aircraft. And regarding a load-carrying airship: In the late 90s there was the Cargolifter project in Germany, an airship that should be able to carry up to 350,000 pounds of cargo. The argument was that this would make it possible to transport large bulky assemblies in one piece point-to-point, which would be very hard or impossible to transport on the road or by train. But after the company had completed a giant 1,000 foot long assembly hall, it went broke. "Miraculously" the hall could be reused as holiday park.
What a fun watch Mike. There really were some odd balls. Speaking of the Northrup and the Flying Wing, I had a tour of SpaceX last night, located at the former "Northrup Field" Thanks to Mike for another fun and enjoyable watch.....
Another great presenation, Mike ! May I suggest one featuring all the diverse (and largely successful) aircraft designs by Burt Rutan and his Scaled Composites?
I enjoy watching aviation oddities. There are a few you missed though. 1) a DHC5 buffalo landing with an air cushion like a hovercraft 2) a twin engined Hercules designed for the COD role. 3) a flying boat version of the Hercules with engines above the wings aka the Orion, which as of 2022 is being considered as a massive twin float seaplane. 4) a British vtol jet airliner
@ Paul Niccoll , of the twin engined Hercules that You said you would like to see featured, Lockheed did propose making a smaller twin engined Hercules called the L400, but it was canceled before making it into production.. But there is a twin engine plane type that were made in fairly large numbers (214 planes) made by a company called Transall, and designated it, the C-160... It looks similar to a C-130, especially the empenage & dorsal fin...
I clicked the "Like" button and it gave me "666". I hope that's not a bad thing. I love the Oddities. I'm probably one myself. Thanks again for sharing.
GREAT VIDEO AS ALWAYS AS YOU NEVER DISAPPOINT US ,SIR I REMEMBER SOME OF THESE IN SYFY COMICS IN THE 60S. BE SAFE AND GOD BLESS . THE GLUE TROOPERS ARMY
I loved all these concepts. Back in the 80's, the artist rendering of the HIMAT looked awesome. Same for the Rockwell XFV12. Another of my favorites missing in the video is Vought's XF5U with its innovative wing design. Great video as usual, many thanks Mike.
Thank you Mike for another interesting video. The list of other oddities must be endless, reverse vee darts jets is one I would enjoy hearing more about. I saw the Ford tri-motor and recall that they stored baggage or cargo in the wings, must have been a trick to trim that beauty. Take care and peace out.
An interesting topic. Some are really odd and others did actually lead to other production aircraft. the designers and engineers just out their thoughts together to see what they could come up with and if it did not work, well back to the drawing board. Eventually they work things out and come yp with a successful aircraft. Thanks for posting this Mr. Machat.
Fantastic Video, I have only one comment, more details please, some of the aircraft really peaked my interest but you flew past them with out any detail! Keep up the good work though.
Hi Mike, & Crew. XC-47c on the hard, Wow... seen the aerial but never the gear down. Appreciate the access to concept art and photo's never seen by the public. Thanks.
Your videos remind me of building RC airplanes while hanging out with my dad in his hangar. He claims I first flew at 4 on instruments, since I couldn't see over the panel. A testament to his skills, I'm sure. ;) He flew the F-106 in the Florida Air National Guard. I think my dad misses the heady days when he got to play "grab ass" with Cuban fighters. I'd give anything to fly with him again.
Many interesting ideas....some better than others. Thanks for the video and showing one of my all time favorites, the Northrop C 125 Raider...too bad Revell never kitted the plane! Great video.
This was a very interesting episode... Great photos and artist concepts... That plane with the removable lower belly section was extremely interesting. The turn-around time in a rapidly moving cargo operation, with a design like that would have been amazing...
Mike, you keep topping your previous videos.... this one is greater than the last.... I found your depiction of the MD DC-10 with 2 engines an almost exact likeness of today's Airbus A-330 airliners.... perhaps too ahead of it's time.... all I can say is "Oh, what could've been!"....
My uncle Bill ( William ) went to work for Vault Airplane design and manufacture out of Dallas Tex. just after he musterd out of the Army in 1946- and retired from that job 35 years later - by then the company was called LTV Aeronautics - he was a designer involved with many airplanes ( like the A 8 Crusader ) and did windtunnel studies on many plane design models like the Delta Dart and Delta Dagger
Wow this channel is amazing! How am I just being recommended it today RU-vid? Having a video created and narrated by someone of Mike's talent, knowledge and experience is just mind blowing. That's truly the best thing about RU-vid. How often do you get to feel like you are sitting in the room with an aerospace engineering artist!
Well, these experimental planes were unable to take off on their own. Especially the first version. They needed a minimum speed before lighting up their scram jet engine.
I think My favorite airlift aerial oddity would have to be the Boeing YC-14 from the mid 1970s. I just love the way it looks with the two giant engine nacelles mounted above the wing and far forward. It was designed for the Advanced Medium STOL Transport program. It's such a great looking plane, Imo. What a great video showcasing some great artwork. Thanks Mr. Machat!
And the Soviets ended up actually putting a very similar aircraft into production in the An-72. About 200 were built and they're still in limited service today.
@@donaldstanfield8862 not sure. I think it was decided that the C-130 could do the same mission cheaper and they already had a bunch of those so why bother.
I don't understand why Mike apparently considers the airship with the palette hanging from it to be more outlandish than any of the other designs. It looks pretty much like airships looked back in the day. The load on the palette is optimistically large, but beyond that it looks pretty normal to me. Obviously, lighter than air designs have a lot of (probably prohibitive) problems, but it seems like a strange response. Am I missing something?
Unbelievable concept and test planes. I can just see it now: Commanding Officer announcing to group of test pilots”Gentlemen, who wants to die today??”
Used to see the XC-99 sitting out at Kelly AFB in all sorts of disreapair for years on my way to work before they took it apart and shipped it off to Wright Patterson for restoration.
The Thunder Schreech was an attempt at economy in a possible theory. It was an attempt to see if there could be a Mach One plus or more propeller driven airplane. The sonic vibrations coming from it during flight caused medical problems with everyone that was around when in operation including and worst of all for the pilots. 7:08/ It might have worked with extra controls on canards from the nose or pillons extended from the front of the wings. The P-32 Lihtning wasn't somewhat of an oddity? It was the production version of the F-82 double Mustang and was twice as good and twice as BADASS as a regular P-51 Mustang. Spam-load planes. Structurally, I don't think so.
You need to do more of these. I like seeing drawing board concepts and aircraft that just didn't make it or looked right. I'll throw in a few: Super Guppie Budd RB-1 Columbia XJL-1 XP-79 Flying Chainsaw Dornier DO-31
Great video! You might want to do one on hover crafts. You could include the one-man hovers that the army tried. They was something like out of a Johnny Quest cartoon. Anyway, great video.
What a great video. Fascinating subject. I had no idea some of these existed! As always a great presentation as only you can do. Love your channel. I'll have to do some research on these aircraft. As always God bless you and yours and thanks again for all you do! Take care always.
About the USN Macon and her fighters, the Curtis biplanes actually held the World's Speed Record for a short while since there was a few without landing gear. Therefor less drag and higher speed! (The short while was because it was ruled that since they didn't have landing gear, they couldn't hold the speed record.) (Hence that little notation on the Bell X-1 and other airplanes .vs. notations on airplanes that took off from the ground. Also, Yeager's team figuring out exactly how much fuel to put into the X-1 and have a take off and landing (from the ground) to beat the US Navy's Douglas (D-558-1 Skystreak's record.) (The D-558-2 was actually a totally different aircraft)
I love the BV-141. Actually the offset cockpit/nacelle played into the torque/thrust of the BMW 801 radial's 1500+ HP. Udet loved it. Goering hated it. I have a 1/72 kit of it somewhere in my stash.
@@garfieldsmith332 Yeah. I intended to give it a 2-tone Luftwaffe camo job. With the splinter pattern but in Brown/Sand rather than the Schwartzgrun/Dunkelgrun European scheme, and a White Axis Mediterranean fuselage band. And some extra guns for ground support. Not historically correct, but it would be a fun build. A Campini-Caproni CC2 jet would get a similar North African scheme, but with added 40mm wing guns.
@@HootOwl513 That would be swell. It would be a fun build. A bit different. I have seen on the internet conversion kits that put the observation pod at the end of the wingtip. Or added pontoons, and saw some other colour schemes. As Max says your model so build it your way.
I always enjoy your content born in 67 so model wise my age was the 70s and 80s and makers were Tamiya Revelll and Monogram. But kits like the ones you show decorated the shop and occasionally reprint editions of the kits but at times you got lucky at a shop or yard sale or a relatives attic. The kits of your age have a charm and attraction that is reflected in value of kits. They are also a fascinating study in manufacturing technology and materials and are a wonderful and informative look at a hobby I enjoy to this day. Thank you Sir
@@darkwood777 I was fortunate in that I took care of it and kept the box and just displayed it for decades. Then someone "had to have it" and the "ka-ching" of the cash register was deafening
@@billdurham8477 no, it was inscribed Wen-Mac, it used a flexible metal shaft you held to counteract counter-rotational forces, so you were 3 feet away from it tops. You could make a great drone out of it today with some work
I remember as a kid watching a Northrop YB-49 actually doing a series of "back-flips" (not loops) over the mountains north of Los Angeles, which ironically its designer Jack Northrop said was impossible for it to do.
I grew up in Fairfield, Ca which is close to Travis AFB. Seeing those flying warehouses called the C-5 war really something. I was once driving down Highway 12 when my car's engine started making a horrible screeching noise. I pulled over and shut off the engine but the screeching continued. I was very confused until the sun turned off and I realized it was a C-5 taking off out of Travis., Scared the hell out of me. I had no idea what was wrong with my car but it didn't sound like a cheep fix.
At the Sun-N-Fun in Lakeland Fl back around 1990 a company that did floatplane conversions in Alaska got a hold of a set of surplus floats for a C-47 and mounted a DC-3 on them. I can't describe just how monstrously huge it looked way up there on the floats. (That was also the year I got to ride in the co-pilot seat on an original Ford Tri-Motor!)
Another Oddity was a twin fuselage C-5 proposal from Lockheed, and they made a small scale model of that bizarre concept, which also ditched the landing gear in favor of air cushions.
Haven't done a full feature on the unique Convair YB-60, but that airplane is shown in this bio of test pilot Fitz Fulton: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Y-jcCCXBqN8.html
RE: The Air launched Ballistic Missile. They now have a Rapid Dragon System, which is Pallets of Cruise Missiles they push out the Back of a C-130 or C-17.
Chase / Stroukoff YC-134E was an upgraded C-123 with BLC for STOL, a strengthened sealed fuselage (mo boat "step") fitted with "Pantobase" pair of skis. On skis, it operated from pavement, unimproved ground, sand, swamp/mud, water, snow/ice. For some reason, the Pentagon wasn't interested.
One of those Northrop YC-125 "Raiders" is on outdoor display at the National Air Force Museum at Wright Patterson AFB, OH. Wonderful video of "aerial oddities" and thanks for sharing! BTW, I still have a nicely built (by someone else years ago) plastic model by Aurora of the Lockheed XFV-1
Yes Jim, that's a very undeveloped Palos Verdes Peninsula seen below, and the year would have been 1949-1950 based on those USAF Search and Rescue markings.Thanks for watching!
I can easily imagine those transporter launched ballistic missiles as part of an anti-satellite system that can be deployed en masse anywhere. But I prefer to celebrate all the presented concepts and prototypes as primarily beautiful artful expressions of creative engineering and to not think too much about the mission goals that spawned them.
As far as the Macon (and Akron) and the Sparrowhawks, those were less for defense of the airship (though, sure, they could be used that way) and more for scouting. And yeah, they removed the gear and typically added a belly tank for more range. Among the other things these are known for is surprising the USS Houston by finding it (while remaining out of sight) while it was transporitng President Roosevelt and dropping current newspapers to the ship.
While the XF-85 was tested on the B-29, it was intended for the B-36. There was the NB-36, which was a test bed for a nuclear powered air plane,and while flew with a reactor, it never powered the engines. There also was a design of a twin C-5 for possible shuttle transport.
One suggestion for your list - Custer Channel Wing. One of two remaining on display at MAAM in Reading, Pa. Mr. Custer was a contestant on the 60's. "I've Got a Secret" TV show. His secret was "I built the world's slowest airplane." There's a RU-vid video.
6.55 Did work very well but the wimp of a pilot ejected due to a little bit of wing flutter then the aircraft glided down but the project was scrapped because of this one pilot. I'm British.
Those turboprop powered C-121Js weren't oddities, instead, they, along with a small number of C-97s that were reengined with Pratt&Whitney YT34P-1 engines to become YC-97Js were used by MATS to conduct operational testing on the T34 engine, which was selected to power the C-133 Cargomaster.
Hi Mike, I remember seeing some artwork, similar to what you are showing, from the early 1980s (???), outlining what seemed to have been a stretched, and significantly enlarged F-15, that was proposed as a maritime patrol / anti-submarine aircraft. It featured three engines mounted in the rear, underneath the twin vertical stabilizers. The concept was that while on-station both outboard engines were shutdown and the entire aircraft operated on the single center engine. For takeoff and times where maximum performance was needed, all three engines were utilized. From what I remember it was supposed to have a payload of 30,000 pounds and an un-refueled endurance of approximately 8 hours, while being capable of achieving speeds of more than Mach 2. I was wondering if you had seen or heard of this aircraft?
It's possible you're misremembering the NR-349 proposal of the A-5 vigilante, everything you described is pretty much on the dot save for the twin verticals, I can't find any 1980s concept of a twin tailed tri-engined maritime patrol aircraft anywhere.
No, what the first three planes he mentioned in the beginning had in common was that they were only concepts that never left the drawing board. I will say that this is an interesting video. I wish we could talk about some of the really weird stuff being developed now. I have a friend, retired USAF communications guy. Let me tell you, you don't realize it, but those guys overhear an awful lot. Anyway, what's bleeding edge now is probably at least 10 years ahead of what we're told about.
@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 a lot of the oddities you listed were not "production" types, so the scissorwing fits into that category. A couple of other oddities- other strange 747 variants like SOFIA, the Shuttle carrier, and the engine testing 747. WW2 oddities- the Dornier 335 Pfeil, with it's front and rear engines, and the Me 163, a tailless rocket plane with poisonous fuel.
