HOW AIRLINERS BECOME MILITARY TRANSPORTS- The Evolution of Military Aircraft and Civilian Airliners 

Appreciate the great comment, thanks!

@@Knight6831 Great info, thank you!

If only we could get UFO coverage like this. : )

@@Knight6831 of course the Lockheed L1011 Tristar tanker transport wasn't a British plane, although admittedly they were the only ones to use a military variant, which I guess is what you meant. I like your comparisons between British ideas as they related to aircraft the US produced. One slight correction: the RNZAF did fly the Bristol Freighter as a military transport and supply drop aircraft, and Safe Air of New Zealand also operated them as civil transports, so the Br.170 did see service both ways.

Great point, thanks!

Awesome, I've never even heard that!

Agreed!

It really is, it seems all Dehavilland aircraft were distinctive, in my humble opinion.

I've wished several of his videos were five hours long. I'd love a five hour video on all the different types of ejection seats with their various timing requirements.

I am all for it!! 👍

Appreciate the comment, thanks, Mike!

The Electra is always fascinating with those forward-swept wings and fat props!

@@donaldstanfield8862 not bad for a passenger plane I wonder how many ships they sank with those torpedoes … they were used as bombers as well … quite an interesting story

Many thanks and glad you enjoyed the video!

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 You are most welcome! The 707 was the first airplane I ever flew in. Once I was convinced the wings did move a bit in flight, it was great. Yeah, I had to have a window seat. Once again, many thanks! 🤣

Thanks for that information. Hard to believe it's been 40 years since I saw the first KC-10 fly at LGB!

Sad to see this retirement happening. I worked them at McGuire when they started arriving there in '94. Great platform.

Great point, thanks!

Glad you enjoyed the video, thanks!

Another point that was missed was the 707 had a different diameter fuselage from the C-135. The C-135 had 5 abreast seating where s the 700 has 6 abreast. FYI the DASH 80 was even smaller with 4 abreast seating.

@@captainclone1367 That point is mentioned in the video at 16:35. Thanks for watching.

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 Right, my mistake I missed it. I worked for Boeing as a structural engineer for 33 years, retiring in 2010.

@@captainclone1367 That's awesome, what a great time to have been on the Boeing team, I hope they iron out the issues we all know of and continue to pioneer new products in aviation! What do you consider as Boeing's greatest accomplishment during your time there? Did you get to help with the 747-8?

Great point, thanks, and yes, I should have had an "Honorable Mention" category with the DC-9-30CF into the C-9A, C-9B, and VC-9C at the top of that list.

Thanks, Max!

Great comment, thanks! My photos were acquired from numerous sources throughout my 50-year career in aviation - well over 100,000 images total.

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 The narrative is, of course, important but your picture selection is highly additive and I often watch a post more than once. Thanks for your efforts Mike!

They're so tiny and cute, absolutely love the engine sound, I call them "wing rockets!"

Great story and congrats on your airline career. Appreciate your watching the channel!

Neat story, thanks!

Thanks Bert - appreciate the comment.

Appreciate the comment, thanks!

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 Yes, indeed, more, please!

Many thanks John!

Thank you Wayne, appreciate the comment!

Great comment, and glad you enjoyed it!

Appreciate the comment, thanks!

My pleasure, and glad you're enjoying these videos. Appreciate the comment, thanks!

Appreciate the comment and glad you like the channel!

Appreciate the comment, and thanks for watching!

Thanks Chuck, and yes, the aircraft names video is a few weeks away. There will be plenty of surprises in that one!

Neat story Jeff, thanks!

Many thanks!

Thanks for the comment, and yes, your point about the DC-3 is quite valid. However, I went with the 707 as number one because of its enduring impact on the design of so many other aircraft that came after, including every Boeing jet airliner flying today. Interesting that both the DC-3 and 707 cut travel times by 50% from their respective predecessors, the Ford Tri-Motor, and DC-7/Constellation!

The DC-5 should have been on the list too. Every single DC series aircraft from DC-1 to MD-11 had military use.

Greetings to a fellow Long Islander (I lived in Rockville Centre), and many thanks for buying Craig's book. Great having you abord the channel!

Terrific point and excellent comment, thanks!

Great comment, thanks!

Where did your first 707 go?!

@@donaldstanfield8862 KCI to SFO (Kansas City to San Francisco, 1979 on TWA.

Thanks for this information.

Good suggestion, thanks!

Good point, thanks!

Good observation, and those involve the air intakes for the engines' turbocompressors for cabin air and pressurization. Depending on fuselage size of the various 707 models, there were either four, three, or two pylon air intakes. If the airplane had three, the left outboard pylon was shorter. If two, then both outboard engines had the shorter pylon.

Yes, absolutely. The DC-10 was America's first wide-body tri-jet one year before the Lockheed L-1011. 'Should have worded that better in the narration, and thanks for watching!

Yes, and converted to an oil-carrying tanker for the Berlin Airlift. 'Should've clarified "tanker" as not for inflight refueling.

Good point, thanks!

Great information thanks, and as I mentioned at the beginning of the video, there were many such aircraft from many nations as well. Much great aviation history from Canada!

Wow, did not know that, thanks!

A great airplane, and we had them at Van Nuys in the California Air National Guard. Thanks for watching!

Thanks for the question, and "367-80" was actually an early variant of the Boeing Stratocruiser, used as code to avoid any suspicion of a new jet program. The airliner version of Boeing's prototype Jet Transport was called 707 right from the beginning, hence the N-number and '707' painted on the tail of that jet in 1955.

Just a thought -- wasn't the B727 Whisperjet the first jet tri-liner, before the DC10?

@@randytaylor1258 The Trident flew first, but the 727 entered service before the Trident.

@@randytaylor1258 Yes, and that line should have been "First tri-jet widebody" without the pause, sorry.

@@viksaini Yes, and that line should have been "First tri-jet widebody" without the pause, sorry.

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 Thanks Mike. I get it now.

Yes exactly. Good catch!

Yup, sure did. Good catch!

Yes, correct, although President Truman had a Douglas VC-118 (DC-6) named "Independence" for his home town in Missouri. Ike actually flew on two Air Force Connies (749 and 1049) named "Columbine" for the Colorado state flower. Thanks for watching!

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 Yes your right about Truman he flew in a C54 /DC 6 that was customized for FRD it that a electric power wheelchair lift built-in. It was Eisenhower who flew Connie. 👍 But both designs had there beginnings as military planes that be civilian transports👍. Great video I love to see you do a video/ videos of history of the great Aviation magazines Wings and Air power I saw enough of your art Grace it's pages back in the day I really miss them . Again great video

@@cmdredstrakerofshado1159 Many thanks!

Great information, thanks! (1941-1947 was actually U.S. Army Air Forces and my birthday is 16 SEP 47 - two days before the U.S. Air Force was formed.)

See comment above - missed it by three years!

Appreciate the comment, thanks Eric, and I thought about that very fact. The 707 won out, however, because as the DC-3 was to propliners, the 707 provided the aeronautical DNA for just about every modern jet airliner flying today. Amazing to me that a 737-900ER uses the same basic fuselage as the first 707-100 series, yet carries more passengers over longer range, and with two engines (and much less noise!). Thanks for watching!

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 The more passengers is likely due to the tighter spacing of modern airline seats. When I fly, I usually fly with Southwest, but a few years ago I was asked to care for a friend's elderly mother. I flew from Oregon to Indiana via Denver on a Horizon Airbus. I'm an amputee and if I don't have room and have to bend my knee to much the top of my prosthesis hits the back of my knee. This becomes quite painful after just a few minutes. I asked the flight attendants to change seats, explaining why I needed a new seat, but they refused to let me change, even though suitable seats were available. When I changed planes in Denver I asked the gate agent if I could change my assigned seat and she refused, even when I called the Airline's customer service and explained why I needed a different seat. The CS agent asked to speak to the gate agent who told the person no, hung up and handed the phone back to me saying, "Nice try" I suspect the flight attendant spoke to the gate attendant, but when I called CS back they said someone was already on the way to help me. Two people showed up with a TSA agent and spoke to the flight gate agent then the security guard and the gate agent left and one of the other people took over. The Gate agent snarled "Thanks a lot" at me as she left. I suspect she was being fired. But I don't see it as my fault or my problem. The new gate agent reassigned my seat to an isle seat on the left side of the plane. I had never been treated so rudely on any flight ever. I have no idea what that flight attendant had against me. I wasn't rude or anything. I even said please! In any case, I'll never travel with Horizon again, neither will me friend. Maybe some people reading this too.

@@erictaylor5462 Sorry to hear about that experience, and yes, air travel has descended well into oblivion today.

@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 I never did much airline travel when I was a kid. Mom and I used to fly back to Michigan until I was about 9. My Grandmother's sister passed away and Grandma came out to California to live with us, and after that there was no more airline travel until I was 16 and my family went to visit Europe. Dad was a pilot so all the flying we did was in small planes. When I was 16 the Family flew to Europe via Pan Am. I remember the 747 was a bit old and run down looking, but it got us there and home just fine. I didn't do any more airline travel until I was grown and could afford to do it. I was shocked at how different it was. Pan Am was long gone by this time. The airlines seemed a lot less luxurious. I got to go aboard the very first 747, though I was only 2 weeks old, so I don't remember it. We didn't fly in it though. I think it was at an airshow. I grew up next to Travis AFB so we always went to airshows. Dad is a bit of a wing nut, so am I frankly. You mentioned Travis, you would have gone right past my elementary school and my high school. They both backed up to Air Base Parkway. Dad's last station in the AF was at Travis, and he decided he wanted to raise his family in Fairfield.

@@erictaylor5462 Neat story. I flew through Travis deploying to Japan in September 1967 and returned in 1969. Take care.

Thanks, and that was taken during an Air Force Art Program Assignment with the 92nd Bomb Wing outr of Fairchild AFB. Telephoto shot from the jump seat, hence pretty grainy.

The Japanese (Nakajima) BUILT a DC3 version (the Showa/Nakajima L2D) during WW2 (they got a license before WW2). The Nakajima built aircraft had two additional cockpit windows behind the standard DC3. A wooden and a steel version was also built in Japan. So did the Russians as the Li-2. (You can tell an Li-2 by the turret behind the cockpit, a smaller left hand side door and the shutters on the engine intakes for ultra cold operation.) The Germans also operated DC-2s and DC-3’s during WW2. The Japanese built 487, the Russians built 6,157. The Li-2 was replaced by the tricycle geared Il-14 in Russian service.

@@allangibson2408 The DC-3/C-47 was an amazingly successful design. Possibly *THE* most successful in aviation history, considering they are still being operated to this day, some with turbo-prop engines.

@@erictaylor5462 Douglas thought the DC-5 would be better - that’s why they started the production line for it as a replacement. WW2 got in the road. The DC-5 production line got converted to make the DB-7 A-20 Havoc/Boston… Fokker (Douglas’s agent in Europe) liked them so much that they built their own slightly enlarged turboprop version after WW2 (the F-27 Friendship). The US navy used them as the R3D-2 and Army as the C-110…

@@allangibson2408 The history of technology is filled with ideas that were thought to be better. Some were, some were not. Often, some other ideas were even better than the other ideas.

@@erictaylor5462 Tail dragger airliners ended with the DC-3 and Fw200… The loading problems just isn’t worth the hassle unless you are getting the aircraft basically for free - and they were selling surplus DC-3 aircraft after WW2 for less than the cost of the fuel in the tanks. The Fokker F-27 Friendship ensured no new DC-3’s were built because it was so much better an aircraft in every way. The DC-3 was good for its day but it’s day was 1937. Only the military needs of WW2 ensured it continued to be built (like the Fw-200 and Ju-52). The DC-5 was a much better aircraft (and I got taught to fly by a guy who flew every DC series aircraft from 2 to 11 (except the DC-4E)).

Great point and certainly significant aircraft. This episode was my "Top Ten" picks for commercial to military aircraft, so I'll add those in "Part 2" sometime. Thanks for watching!

Appreciate the comment, thanks!

Very true!