Тёмный
No video :(

Propeller INSANITY - The Convair Model 37! 

Found And Explained
Подписаться 706 тыс.
Просмотров 239 тыс.
50% 1

In the post-war glow of the late 1940s, Pan Am shocked the world with news that it had placed an order for a truly insane aircraft - taller than a five-story building and with six propeller engines, it could carry an unimaginable amount of people in first class, across two decks from both edges of the Atlantic ocean
but this early jumbo airline would never actually make it off the production line, and its prototype would end up lost in the desert.
This is the story of the never build, Convair Model 37
After the end of world war two, the US military understood the need for rapid troop transportation around the world, and that aircraft provide the ideal solution over ships. Thus they contracted convair to design a heavy cargo aircraft that would become the largest piston-engined transport ever built.
Conviar started with its other large aircraft at the time, the B-36 pacemaker, and took its wings and controls for this never version dubbed the XC-99. It would have a cpacity to transport 400 fully equipped troops across the Atlantic at a moments notice, or delivery aid to europe especially for those cities isolated by hostile forces.
Incredibly Convair managed to build a service prototype, that took to the skies in 1947 and would operate for the US airforce as an essential cargo lift in the Korean war - setting several records in cargo capacity and flight times as it did so, putting the design, and its team on the map.
But the engineers who came up with the xc-99 had much grander plans than a simple military transport... they knew they could change the future of air travel forever.
this is what they came up with.
The Convair Model 37 was a gigantic plane. It had a length of 182 ft 6 in (55.63 m) and a wingspan of 230 ft 0 in (70.10 m), which is one meter shorter than the folding wingspan of the Boeing 777X. It was tall too, coming in at 57 ft 6 in (17.53 m).
With its five cockpit crew and five relief crew members - for a total of ten on the flight deck, it would be able to transport 400 troops in a military configuration, 100,000 lb (45,000 kg) cargo if a cargo carrier, or 204 passengers in the very best luxury of the era.
If economy class had been invented back then, it is likely we would have seen 400-500 passengers per flight. Which would have been low key incredible for the era.
It was powered by six Pratt & Whitney R-4,3,60-41, Wasp Major 28-cylinder, air-cooled radial piston engines, that could push out 3,500 hp (2,600 kW) each.
With a fuel capacity of 19,112 US gal (72,350 liters), it could fly a total range of ,4,200 miles or 6,800 km with a 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) payload, putting it well within reach of European cities with a single refueling stop.
It did however, only fly at a maximum speed of 307 mph (494 km/h), which is just over half the speed of modern jetliners today. So clearly it would have taken a while for passengers to make the transatlantic hop. Unlike the military version, the civil version wouldn't have the complicated radar nose but instead would have something for lack of a better world, elegant.
Launching this design to much fanfair, 15 orders were quickly snapped up by then airline jugganaught Panam, who sought to use this beast of an aircraft to link europe with north america. They claimed that 11 of these aircraft would transport 440,000 passengers per year between london and new york. It advertised that the trip would take only 9 hours, and that it would boast several lounges and full bathrooms across two decks. Fancy
So if this aircraft was going to bring a new age of luxury trans-Atlantic travel to the massess, why was it never built?
There are several reasons why the model 37 never graced our skies and didn't become the backbone of airline operations.
lets talk about those engines - the truth is that they were deemed far too insufficent for the task at hand of powering this enourmous aircraft.
Also, there was a general feeling at the time that the plane was simply too big.
Into the jet age, likely it would have become a cargo carrier and eventually used for special operations like fire fighting, where its huge capacity and slower speed would have made it idea for creating vast fire breaks.
But its future today, just like the single prototype ordered the us airforce that was built and retired in 1957, would be rusty away in the middle of the sunny mojave desert. The military determined that it had no need for such a large long-range transport at the time, and the arrival of the jet engine only a few short years later made the idea of a six-engine monster plane propositus.
You can find the original XC-99 cut up to peices in a"boneyard" at Davis Monthan outside of Tuscon, there were plans to perseve it at the museum, but such a huge fuslage is hard to keep together, and like many other never built projects it has now been put to rest only to dream of a future that never was.

Опубликовано:

 

5 сен 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 580   
@dunodisko2217
@dunodisko2217 3 года назад
Ah, yes. The B-36 Pacemaker. Not to be confused with the cardiac assistance device, the Peacemaker.
@FoundAndExplained
@FoundAndExplained 3 года назад
Hehe
@BosworthMcG
@BosworthMcG 3 года назад
@@FoundAndExplained dude this is a great video, but there are several errors where you misread words. Pistol engines, eggceptional etc. tidy those up and you’ll be rocking . Keep up the good work!
@LogieT2K
@LogieT2K 3 года назад
@@BosworthMcG he is australian he cant help it
@ytbandit1951
@ytbandit1951 3 года назад
@@BosworthMcG I "exspecially" want a "pistol" engine too!
@scottjustscott3730
@scottjustscott3730 3 года назад
@@ytbandit1951 sounds like an option package for your brand new 1968 AMC. Yes sir! I ordered my new AMX with the pacemaker pistol engine package! Set me back another seventy five bucks but it was well worth it!
@patrickradcliffe3837
@patrickradcliffe3837 3 года назад
B-36 Peacemaker keeping the heart of SAC beating regularly. That's a pretty big caliber "Pistol" engine.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Not PACE-Maker. It was PEACE-Maker. The narrator either was wrong or being an Aussie just sounded wrong.
@patrickradcliffe3837
@patrickradcliffe3837 4 месяца назад
@@danielocarey9392 autocorrect got me hahaha
@SirFawzar
@SirFawzar 3 года назад
This plane looks like a breed between Bristol Brabazon and B-36, really
@autism-overlord
@autism-overlord 3 года назад
That is because it actually is based of the B-36, like other planes coming out of ww2, it could have been retrofitted to be a civilian passenger plane
@StudeSteve62
@StudeSteve62 3 года назад
It does. One example was built, but as a military airlifter. Saw substantial service. Afterward it went on outdoor display across the road from Kelly AFB in Texas. It is now in disassembled storage at the Pima air museum in Arizona, having been slated for a restoration at Dayton that proved impracticable...
@Recon135
@Recon135 3 года назад
@@StudeSteve62 While in the AF I got to see the XC-99 at Kelly. It was an awesome aircraft.
@hambonemoerke3744
@hambonemoerke3744 3 года назад
Meyers Jacobsen, author of the Peacemaker and I were buddies in the USAF, Parks AFB, CA and worked on the book and we lived later in San Diego, CA. He was a determined person and I attempted to get out of the project but without success. He had planned an aero park in San Diego and later moved it to Palm Springs, CA where he finished THE PEACEMAKER. While I was at Travis AFB my friend was George Tomasck, base photographer and we flew in the XC-99. Travis was a truly beautiful base and is better today. Meyers Aero Park was later destined for Palm Springs but it was a gigantic costly project that failed but Meyers and I remained friends until his demise. He communicated with many people (LaMay, Jimmy Stewart and the B-36 test pilot Byrl Erickson) regarding the B-36 and sponsored a reunion at Castle AFB, CA which was a big success. So many memories,, thank you.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
As a boy I saw the XC-99 a few times in SAN. But I never flew on it. Dad designed the flight deck.
@TheB49
@TheB49 3 года назад
I worked with a guy who was a radio operator on a B 36. He said they never came back from a mission with all six engines running. One mission they had to shut down four and made an emergency landing at the nearest base! With 56 spark plugs per engine, 336 per plane, they changed after every mission?? No airline could deal with that! It's a good thing they never got into combat, those Mig 15s would have massacred them!
@bmac7643
@bmac7643 3 года назад
B-36 2 Electric Boogaloo
@tlshortyshorty5810
@tlshortyshorty5810 3 года назад
If only it had 4 burning as well
@soetekinhaentjens1462
@soetekinhaentjens1462 3 года назад
I see a grian fan
@bmac7643
@bmac7643 3 года назад
@@tlshortyshorty5810 one can wish
@catf4077
@catf4077 3 года назад
r2da
@edwardfletcher7790
@edwardfletcher7790 3 года назад
03:30 Love those old "pistol engines" ! lol
@StudeSteve62
@StudeSteve62 3 года назад
Not to mention "Pacemaker". B-36's name was "Peacemaker"...
@scootergeorge9576
@scootergeorge9576 3 года назад
@@StudeSteve62 - Unofficially. The USAF never actually named the B-36.
@funstuff2006
@funstuff2006 3 года назад
@@StudeSteve62 I was chalking "pacemaker" to the Aussie accent. "Radial pistol engine" on the other hand . . .
@therealniksongs
@therealniksongs 4 месяца назад
@@StudeSteve62 You don't understand. "Pacemaker" is simply Oz-tralian for "Peacemaker."
@SWright1978
@SWright1978 Месяц назад
AI has its limits
@charlesrussell1764
@charlesrussell1764 3 года назад
It was amusing to see the route map, down to Australia and then on to Singapore completely by passing New Zealand.Hey, hey! we're here! Hey hey! We're here!
@johno9507
@johno9507 3 года назад
New Zealand is just a large breakwater for Sydney...it really has no other purpose. 😏🇦🇺
@charlesrussell1764
@charlesrussell1764 3 года назад
@@johno9507 Actually it is a rather small breakwater that has no other purpose, since not many people have heard of us.
@roydrink
@roydrink 3 года назад
And what about Japan?
@charlesrussell1764
@charlesrussell1764 3 года назад
@@roydrink I confess I missed that.I suppose in those days they weren't considered a viable stop- off.
@ressljs
@ressljs 3 года назад
@@roydrink I'm not trying to be rude, because I love traveling to Japan and my job is also tied to that country. But... When this plane was on the drawing boards, I'm not sure many people considered Japan a major destination.
@pianoplayer5000
@pianoplayer5000 3 года назад
Thanks for this video. I have 1/200 model of this aircraft in the PanAm livery that I treasure.
@FoundAndExplained
@FoundAndExplained 3 года назад
Very cool!
@paulvanobberghen
@paulvanobberghen 3 года назад
Convair is the contraction of 2 manufacturer's name that merged in 1943: Consolidated (B24 Liberator) and Vultee (B13 Valiant). Another "major" problem with the Pratt's Wasp Major was the same as on the B36 from which it was derived due to its rear facing configuration at the back of the wing. It was frequently overheating and catching fire in flight. For the lovers of the B36, see Anthony Mann's 1955 movie "Strategic Air Command" with James Stewart, an Air Force officer himself. Numerous high definition sequences with the B36 Peacemaker and later B47 Stratojet.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Also at high altitude sometimes the oil became too solid and splattered out damaging the skin. But I would think the vibration would be great from a varied wind velocity from the top of the wing vs the bottom. Putting the engines in the front eliminates this .
@AaronCMounts
@AaronCMounts 3 года назад
6:50 - Definitely looking at the past through the lens of today. Prior to the construction of the Jebel Ali seaport, Dubai was little more than a fishing village with barely a few thousand population. Also, Singapore did not come to prominence on the global stage until after it gained independence from Malaysia in 1965.
@R.U.1.2.
@R.U.1.2. 3 года назад
Thank you for including the metric conversions. Much appreciated.
@mikerichards6065
@mikerichards6065 3 года назад
Really interesting to see how this compares to the enormous Bristol Brabazon which was pretty much the same size, had non-stop transatlantic range and did actually fly as a prototype. Convair at least thought things through and planned to carry a decent number of passengers; whereas the Brabazon would only carry 60 people in stupendous levels of luxury. Bristol planned a turboprop Brabazon 2, the project was abandoned in favour of the much smaller Britannia.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
All true. But the Bristol surely was a beautiful aircraft. Wow.
@skunkbucket9408
@skunkbucket9408 3 года назад
1:00 I would argue that the Model 37 was NOT "the world's largest piston-engine transport ever built." That honor goes to the Hughes H-4 Hercules "Spruce Goose." Yes, it only flew once and never went into service, but it did survive and you can still see it in the museum.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
I've been to both. And both are probably true. The Hughes Hercules had a bigger wing I believe. And it was powered by 8 instead of 6 engines. But the 99 was probably a basically larger bird.... I think.
@davef.2811
@davef.2811 3 года назад
Fuel stops=maintenance stops. Barrels of oil, cases/pallets of spark plugs, and QEC's all over creation. And PTSD therapy sessions for the FE's.
@Greatdome99
@Greatdome99 Месяц назад
336 spark plugs to be exact
@antonykuo3809
@antonykuo3809 3 года назад
Ryan Air: Lets fit 800 in this plane.
@jasoncentore1830
@jasoncentore1830 3 года назад
Your being generous, I was thinking 1000 of those stand up seats seatmakers are coming up with
@A..T..M..
@A..T..M.. 3 года назад
Cuanto me ubiera gustado aver nasido antes para poder escuchar rugir esos motores
@syxepop
@syxepop 3 года назад
@@A..T..M.. - sabes que ese avión nunca pudo ser construido porque sus 6 motores con hélice no eran lo suficiente para levantar 204 pasajeros (a la mitad de la velocidad de los jets actuales) en esa era? (y no había precedente para tantos pasajeros de 1a clase juntos, ya que "la clase turista" no se había inventado aún) ... y que el comentario que estas respondiendo es "una mofa" de una aerolínea irlandesa que tiene la reputación de poner a sus pasajeros "como sardinas en lata"? Creo de haber habido algo como Ryanair (o Spirit en EEUU) en los 1950's hubieran intentado poner los mismos 400 pasajeros "en esa lata de sardinas" como se proponía hacer para llevar tropas militares.
@ostrich67
@ostrich67 Месяц назад
@@A..T..M.. After 21 hours of that you'd have had enough.
@hectorsantiago5350
@hectorsantiago5350 3 года назад
You really bring out the emotion of aviation history with your videos! Thank you and keep it up!
@riliryrimaddyvia9630
@riliryrimaddyvia9630 3 года назад
I certainly do love your videos,they always cheer me up if I'm bored or feeling sad.
@riliryrimaddyvia9630
@riliryrimaddyvia9630 3 года назад
Imagine if this plane just came out later with jet engines and maybe more airlines would buy it?
@stephenketcham4179
@stephenketcham4179 3 года назад
A double decker version of the YB-60 bomber.
@shreybhandari4233
@shreybhandari4233 3 года назад
Yes maybe
@mcnudde
@mcnudde 3 года назад
@@stephenketcham4179 Convair had such a version planned: the Model 6
@Prof.Megamind.thinks.about.it.
@Prof.Megamind.thinks.about.it. 3 года назад
@@mcnudde The main problem with the Model-6 was the J-57 engines ; they were not only unreliable then , they were also fuel-hogs . Add to this the lack of jumbo-capacity airport terminals , and the superior speed of the coming narrow-bodies , and it becomes clear why Convair shelved the Model-6 project . *To examine this subject more closely , read my Post at : quora.com/How-long-was-the-Convair-XC-99-kept-in-service-with-the-U-S-Air-Force-as-a-transport-Was-the-designation-ever-changed-to-C-99-and-were-4-GE-J-47-jet-engines-ever-installed-as-they-were-on-the-B-36/
@rolandogamez
@rolandogamez 3 года назад
I think a Turbopop version might have been better.
@stevenvirdenrasmussen-jone4671
@stevenvirdenrasmussen-jone4671 3 года назад
My Dad worked at McClellan AFB, which was one of the few bases that could handle the XC99. It was a beast, and needed a very heavy duty runway
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
YES. Before the landing gear was modernized the only fields that could handle it were Fort Worth and San Diego.
@gabrielb9010
@gabrielb9010 3 года назад
This aircraft could have been an exelent choice for Pan Am or Northwest
@markfrost8745
@markfrost8745 3 года назад
No, it wouldn't. The B-36 and XC-99 used my favorite engine of WW2, the R-4360 Wasp Major. Unfortunately, the engines were mounted 'backward'. This is due to the pusher type of propulsion. This engine configuration caused issues, just one of which was carburetor icing. With the carb positioned in the 'front', the carb didn't get the benefit of heat from the engines. This caused some of the engine fires the B-36 was notorius for. The engines were also fully enclosed, creating overheating issues, thus reliability issues. The old adage about the B-36 "six turning and four burning" was modified by the crews to "two turning, two burning, two smoking, two choking and two more unaccounted for." So, no, this aircraft would have been an extremely poor choice for the airlines. Just because the aircraft set records, doesn't make it a good aircraft for day to day service. You can bet the aircraft used for the record setting flights were cherry picked from the fleet and meticulously prepared. With the issues the B-36 had in its day to day service, it's very frightening to consider this aircraft as an airliner. Airliner maintenance, even back then, was not the best.
@keithammleter3824
@keithammleter3824 3 года назад
@@markfrost8745 : Quite so. In the military, you follow orders. If it catches fire, execute the fire check list and hope. If you survive, well, you get ordered to fly again. In civilian use, after 2 or three fires reported in the news media no one would fly in the thing. No one wanted to fly in a Comet long after they fixed the design flaws. Anybody who thought it was reasonable to convert the B36 into a civilian airliner must have been smoking really good weed.
@markfrost8745
@markfrost8745 3 года назад
@@keithammleter3824 Back then, it was called "smoking rope." My mom, from the eastern hills of Kentucky, before she passed in '11, sometimes used that phrase. I'm sure some of the mind altering effects also came from the chemicals used for preserving the rope. Hemp was grown and used as rope quite a bit here in Kentucky, you can still walk some fields and find it. Regarding the military, been there done that. Although, my unit had a Master Chief in maintenance that was damn good.
@flavortown3781
@flavortown3781 3 года назад
@@markfrost8745 it grows wild down every rail line in the state just about I've walked a few and always always smell it reminds me of my youth, but compared to the modern hybrids it's kinda shitty
@deeacosta2734
@deeacosta2734 3 года назад
If you don’t care about passenger deaths sure.
@blurglide
@blurglide 3 года назад
A lot of sloppy inaccuracies in this one. I saw the XC-99 cargo version of that rotting away at the end of the runway at Kelly AFB in San Antonio about 20 years ago. San Antonio is not in the mojave desert- it's in Texas. They hauled it off to the Air Force Museum in Ohio a few years ago, not to Davis Monthan in Arizona . Also, the B-36 is the "Peacemaker", not the "Pacemaker" and it's "piston engine", not "pistol engine"
@burtbacarach5034
@burtbacarach5034 3 года назад
I thought he said "Peacemaker',just with a accent.Did catch the pistol engine thing tho.IIRC the XC99 used the prototype B36 undercarriage,the huge single truck affairs.The plane was so heavy it broke up the landing feilds so they switched to the multi truck gear.My dad flew on B36's during the 50's,man did he have some tales to tell.
@andrewthomson
@andrewthomson 3 года назад
I thought I was just imagining these things... Glad someone else noticed.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
I saw a B-36 in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, can't remember where, but I think it was somewhere around the DFW airport. But that was 35 years ago. I've always wondered what became of it - I hope somebody took pains to preserve it. [Edit - researched that - it was at the old Amon Carter Field, aka Greater Southwest International Airport, was moved to a museum aptly named the B-36 Peacekeeper Museum in Fort Worth (it still exists) but they couldn't handle the upkeep, so it was moved to the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona. ]
@jimcurt99
@jimcurt99 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 Live in Tucson- I've seen the B-36 at the museum- it's HUGE- must have been impressive to see that beast fly...
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@jimcurt99 My dad always said they made a very unique sound very much unlike other aircraft.
@martykarr7058
@martykarr7058 Месяц назад
Postwar, many of the bomber manufacturers at least proposed if not built cargo/civilian transport, Boeing did it for the B-29 and B-52, Convair with this one, and even North American proposed an SST based on the XB-70.
@F22Lover
@F22Lover 3 года назад
0:35 How do you lose a plane that BIG? *"Hey Bill did you ever find that prototype super airliner?"* *"Yeah it fell between the couch cushions"*
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Losing it was sort of a hyperbaly. They didn't actually lose the airplane. Its last flight was to Kelly AFB in Texas where it sat for decades before being transported to Wright Pat.
@widecat-1838
@widecat-1838 3 года назад
I was in the USAF and stationed at Kelly AFB in the early 1990s. I used to see the XC99 sitting in a field at the end of the flight line going to waste.
@StudeSteve62
@StudeSteve62 3 года назад
I was inside that beast once around that time. Visited Texas to see old planes. Loved the place, have unfortunately never been back since...
@parrotraiser6541
@parrotraiser6541 3 года назад
6 x 28 x 2 = 366 spark plugs to be changed regularly. (Assuming that one or more haven't caught fire in-flight.)
@Chuck59ish
@Chuck59ish 3 года назад
The B-36 was The Peacemaker, not the Pacemaker.
@archiescriven6178
@archiescriven6178 3 года назад
He said radial pistol engines too
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
I was just looking at specs for the B-36. It dwarfs the earlier B-29.
@MartinWillett
@MartinWillett 3 года назад
Slip of the tongue, reading error or auto- "correct"?
@MartinWillett
@MartinWillett 3 года назад
@@archiescriven6178 Maybe that was a Freudian slip. Colt Peacemaker.
@Chuck59ish
@Chuck59ish 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 There 3 B-36s in Museums, at Dayton, OH, Ft. Worth, TX and Tucson, AZ and it is a huge mother.
@joelwright4317
@joelwright4317 Месяц назад
The sole XC-99 actually sat at Kelly AFB, San Antonio TX, for several decades before it was disassembled and eventually stored at Dais Monthan AFB AZ relatively recently.
@bocahdongo7769
@bocahdongo7769 3 года назад
Imagine the motto of this plane advertisement *Two Turning, Two Smoking, Two Unaccounted for*
@daviddunsmore103
@daviddunsmore103 3 года назад
Two turning, two burning, two smoking, two choking, and two more, unaccounted for. 😀
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Jim Sproat was given the commission to design the flight deck of the XC-99, I've been told. And just behind this flight station was a sleep station for one of the 2-crews to utilize for ultra long flights. The last time I saw the plane was at Kelly AFB in Texas. But it flew into Lindburgh Field at San Diego where it was built several times. The USAF configuration I believe was 200 troupes on each floor for a total of 400.
@riliryrimaddyvia9630
@riliryrimaddyvia9630 3 года назад
Another great video,keep up the good work
@markpatterson4917
@markpatterson4917 3 года назад
Another plane that fell into the same trap as the Bristol Brabazon. Impressive didn't know about this thankyou keep up the good work
@EstorilEm
@EstorilEm 3 года назад
Not really, this evolved from a very successful and important strategic bomber. Likewise the power plants were common on many aircraft and not funded/developed for a prototype. In the end convair didn’t really lose any money over the decision of airlines not to purchase it, while Bristol and the others lost over 8 million bucks (back then!)
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Well... the Bristol was a failed prototype. But the USAF used the XC-99 for about 10 years to transport troupes. And the commercial version was only on paper. No loss there except opportunity cost.
@tootired76
@tootired76 3 года назад
I'm weird. I think the B 36 and this version are two of the prettiest planes ever made!! The B 36 never fired a shot in anger!! That's why it earn the unofficial name of "Peacemaker"!!
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
That was the official title other than B-36. The other (unofficial) title was "Big Stick."
@SchaliAction
@SchaliAction 3 года назад
If the emdines were turning in the same direction and if the propellers were the Same as in your animation, the plane would fly backwards. Pushing propellers use negative pitch.
@scotttait2197
@scotttait2197 3 года назад
Dont you start with the typos enough mis pronunciation in the video
@ableland64
@ableland64 3 года назад
You were right the propellers were wrong pitch and would be pushing the plane backwards
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
Good observation.
@Matt_from_Florida
@Matt_from_Florida 3 года назад
6:48 BOAC *was never pronounced like it was a word.* Instead, *the individual letter names were said, B.O.A.C. (Bee Oh Ay See).*
@danawilkes6174
@danawilkes6174 3 года назад
I am 71 and heard it pronounced BOAC many times...
@Matt_from_Florida
@Matt_from_Florida 3 года назад
@@danawilkes6174 Noted British historian Mark Felton: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pP15KnpBdsY.html
@jmace5964
@jmace5964 3 года назад
Even the us air force had trouble keeping up on maintenance on the b36
@mightymystery9204
@mightymystery9204 3 года назад
Biggest issue was illustrated by a team of airmen who built a scale flying model of the B36, when it was in service: balancing the engine thrust would have been a tuning nightmare. Radial engines were such a specialized challenge that, after turboprops became viable, eventually, by the 1980's, there were only two genuine radial maintenance facilities in the United States, one of them, Piedmont Airmotive, being called upon heavily for outdated or restored aircraft, including one of the last Stratofreighters.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
The initial maintenance was a development process. The oil splattering out of engines at high altitudes was like ice, and would damage the skin. And the engines didn't cool well either. But those problems were mostly ironed out. However, probably PanAm would get to destination with one engine not turning, I suspect. But actually the expected air passenger traffic didn't arrive for 10 years.
@Climber_Doge
@Climber_Doge 3 года назад
B-36 Peacemaker? More like B-36 FREEDOMmaker.
@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245
@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245 3 года назад
Don’t call them bombs, they are liberty cylinders.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245 democracy exportation devices
@EmbeddedWithin
@EmbeddedWithin 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 cylindrical turkeys with extra load in the turkeys.
@StudeSteve62
@StudeSteve62 3 года назад
"Peacemaker" was specifically in reference to its being a deterrent. And it worked: no B-36 ever saw action...
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@StudeSteve62 Nor did its replacement the B-47, except for the reconnaissance variants.
@luckytaylor382
@luckytaylor382 3 года назад
3:34 “Pistol engines” Pronunciation isn’t this channel’s strong suit.
@kimmer6
@kimmer6 3 года назад
You will notice that the animated engines are turning backwards...reverse thrust when it flies.
@jamesyates48
@jamesyates48 3 года назад
Who cares ??? I don't. I've learnt in time to understand him Unfortunately don't think other people try.. so sad.
@stephengardiner9867
@stephengardiner9867 3 года назад
Caught that one too... along with "Pacemaker"... arrgh, but my ears still hurt!
@Recon135
@Recon135 3 года назад
@@kimmer6The rotation depends on the camber or pitch of the props. The B-36/XC-99 engine were pusher types rather than a tractor types. Some aircraft were designed with counter rotating props on all multiple engines (contra-rotating) like the Russian Tu-95 Bear and the Northrop XB-35. The gearing got a little complicated and heavy.
@kimmer6
@kimmer6 3 года назад
@@Recon135 These in the video are absolutely turning backwards.
@williamwingo4740
@williamwingo4740 3 года назад
The XC-99 was on display At Lackland/Kelly AFB from 1957 to 2004. I toured it in 1967. The thing was absolutely huge. Even the C-5 a few years later and Howard Hughes' Hercules flying boat a few years after that didn't make such an impression. The wings, tail, and engines were B-36, and the fuselage was two B-36's, one on top of the other. It served extensively through the Korean war, mostly ferrying aircraft parts around the U.S. and setting several records. But it was too slow to compete with jets and they retired it in 1957. It was ferried to Wright-Patterson AFB in pieces for restoration, but it had so much magnesium in it that 47 years of corrosion damage made this impractical [1]. At present, the parts are in storage at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson [2]. 1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_XC-99 2. wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=32.149210&lon=-110.844508&z=17&m=bh&search=XC-99
@fulanitoflyer
@fulanitoflyer 3 года назад
you make so much good content, been binge watching this channel.
@FoundAndExplained
@FoundAndExplained 3 года назад
thanks!
@FoundAndExplained
@FoundAndExplained 3 года назад
i have like 70 videos on the channel and it blows my mind that i get recommendations all the time to do videos... that i've already done. People are like "you should do xyz project" but its already on my channel a month ago! so thanks for rewatching my older stuff :)
@fulanitoflyer
@fulanitoflyer 3 года назад
@@FoundAndExplained Yeah for sure! while its not civil aviation per se, perhaps you could do a video on the old sea dragon rocket would be really interesting.
@lbe1309
@lbe1309 3 года назад
the props are turning in the wrong direction ...
@michaeleberly7351
@michaeleberly7351 3 года назад
Yes they are ... it's the propeller blades themselves which are incorrect. Actually the both could be wrong. In fact it is practically certain that not all the propellers on a real aircraft would be rotating in the same direction. This footage from the movie "Strategic Air Command" should suggest how the engines turned. The engines on the opposite side probably turned in the other direction from the one shown in the film. So ... Counter clockwise starboard side, and Clockwise port side. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-9FJVxtTNjJk.html
@FSXgta
@FSXgta 3 года назад
and the engines are backwards...
@michaelpcoffee
@michaelpcoffee 3 года назад
The animations have the propellers spinning backwards. Reverse thrust?
@PaulStewartAviation
@PaulStewartAviation 3 года назад
Great video. I've never been able to find an explanation of why they put the props behind the wing instead of in front of it like every other aircraft from the era?
@FoundAndExplained
@FoundAndExplained 3 года назад
Good question!
@mightymystery9204
@mightymystery9204 3 года назад
Paul Stewart, the reason for the engines' pusher configuration was streamlining and strength, as the swept wing would have required long nacelles. That would mean more vulnerable structure, and more drag. If, by chance, a propellor "got away", there would be no chance of wing damage.
@rafaelwilks
@rafaelwilks Месяц назад
Considering the originally intended engines were six 5,000-hp turboprops, four 7,500-shp GE T408 (GE38) turboprops would be precisely perfect for it.
@williamprice3929
@williamprice3929 3 года назад
You have a good site, keep up the good, hard, work. Also, I would love to fly some of these designs, like the Convair Kingfisher, in Microsoft FSX.
@Michael.Chapman
@Michael.Chapman 3 года назад
This ‘preposterous’ 6-piston-engined huge aircraft was ‘soon’ followed by the military contract for an 8-turbojet-engined Boeing beast, still in service today after > 50 years, that we all know as the venerable B52 :-)
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
On a windy night at Fort Worth one B-36 was lifted up and came down on another one. Since they were heavily damaged the USAF commissioned Convair to modify the 2 birds into two swept wing, 8 jet bombers called the B-60.
@dave8599
@dave8599 3 года назад
324 spark plugs, imagine having to change them after each flight
@keithammleter3824
@keithammleter3824 3 года назад
6 engines x 28 cylinders x 2 plugs per cylinder = 336 plugs. That's one of the factors that led to the B36 being withdrawn very early - it just took too much labour to keep flight ready. See my first post.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@keithammleter3824 6 turnin' and 4 burnin' as they used to say - that's a lot to maintain. My dad went into the USAF to become an aircraft maintenance specialist because he dearly loved the design of the B-36 and used to watch them all the time out in Alberqueque, NM. We got to hear all the stories. Years later we were driving somewhere in Ft. Worth, Texas and my Dad literally screamed "There's a Big Stick!" to which half of us looked at the road ahead, and the rest of us looked behind, and thought what the hell is he talking about?!?? Turns out, there was a hanger, or warehouse next to the highway, and on the other side of it was an old B-36 parked there, and the only reason my dad spotted it was because the tail was so high. We got off the road and went to see it, of course, my dad was beside himself for the rest of the day. [Edit: since I made this comment, I have researched that B-36, it was at Amon Carter Field, later known as Greater Southwest International Airport (which was replaced in the 70's by the much larger DFW International Airport only a few miles north) and that particular B-36 was called The City of Fort Worth, it was the very LAST B-36 ever built, so when the USAF decommissioned it, it was gifted to Fort Worth. From Amon Carter Field, it was moved to a place called the B-36 Peacekeeper Museum (still exists), but they couldn't handle the upkeep, so it was moved to Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona, where it is today. It is owned by the National Museum of the USAF]
@jasoncentore1830
@jasoncentore1830 3 года назад
I would like to do that as much as getting a work order to tint the windows on an A380
@AaronCMounts
@AaronCMounts 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 More like 2 turnin', 2 burnin', 2 smokin', 2 chokin', and 2 unaccounted for. Those P&W 28-cylinder engines were horrible for reliability.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@AaronCMounts 🤣🤣🤣
@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245
@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245 3 года назад
B-36 Pacemaker lol nice
@RydalS
@RydalS 3 года назад
Brilliant video. Thanks
@billmullins6833
@billmullins6833 3 года назад
I have been inside the XC-99. I don't know if it is still there but at one time it was on static display at Kelly AFB, San Antonio, Texas. It was a monster. Amazing feat of engineering. Too bad it never went into production.
@ralphludwig6202
@ralphludwig6202 3 года назад
The XC 99 is going to the Museum of the USAF in Dayton Ohio. It was disassembled for shipping.
@slimshady676
@slimshady676 3 года назад
This channel is so underrated
@jayyydizzzle
@jayyydizzzle 3 года назад
Great vid
@ebikeracer9
@ebikeracer9 3 года назад
3:33 pistol engines
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
runs on gunpowder?
@rolandogamez
@rolandogamez 3 года назад
7:33 The Aircraft was stored/displayed at Kelley AFB in San Antonio from the 1960s to 1990s.
@ta192utube
@ta192utube 3 года назад
There in '63...you could climb through it and I did; quite impressive.
@bernhardecklin7005
@bernhardecklin7005 3 года назад
Thank you for the fine and very informative video. At 1:16 a small but relevant slip of the tongue:It is said to be named "Pacemaker" however correct is PEACEMAKER. No offense of course.
@terryheard3011
@terryheard3011 3 года назад
Wright-Patterson is located in Ohio near Dayton. Famous for a couple of brothers.
@ghost307
@ghost307 3 года назад
The Patterson brothers?
@daviddunsmore103
@daviddunsmore103 3 года назад
@@ghost307 LOL 😂
@MrTaxiRob
@MrTaxiRob 3 года назад
a couple of bicycle mechanics, they probably wore skinny pants and drank craft beer
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
And their father was a United Brethren pastor who said "If man was meant to fly, God would have given them wings." Funny, ist't it?
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
@@ghost307 No. Orvil and Wilber Wright.
@michaelmckinnon7314
@michaelmckinnon7314 2 года назад
The B-36 Peacekeeper, mistakenly referred to as Peacemaker nowadays. Peacemaker won the contest for naming the B-36, but with the Cold War on Convair decided to name the aircraft Peacekeeper because if the Soviets heard about a nuclear bomber named Peacemaker they could get the wrong impression and start WWIII and because Convair had already figured that out, that's why the contest winner wasn't chosen by Convair despite the dress rehearsal video making the rounds on RU-vid.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
You're probably are very smart. But your statement is not clear. I don't know what you are talking about.
@downix
@downix 4 месяца назад
I still would have loved to have seen the planned turboprops for the B-36, although today we could use unducted fans instead.
@rev.andyh.1082
@rev.andyh.1082 3 года назад
How does this channel not have a million subscribers yet?
@brentboswell1294
@brentboswell1294 3 года назад
Looks surprisingly like a B-36 Peacemaker wing...
@toasterhavingabath6980
@toasterhavingabath6980 3 года назад
W o n d e r W h y
@c-57d55
@c-57d55 3 года назад
Terrific interesting video!! Thanks for posting!!
@mortified776
@mortified776 2 года назад
Cool! I never heard of this one.
@clarkjohnson3249
@clarkjohnson3249 3 года назад
The XC-99 never was in the Mojave but was at Kelly AFB, then moved to the USAF Museum several years ago. The photo of it broken up is outside the Museum’s restoration facility.
@artic9514
@artic9514 3 года назад
The pacemaker powered by pistol engines! When one take recording is life?
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
True. They needed to have someone listen to it first.
@cbmech2563
@cbmech2563 3 года назад
Convair...we need something to keep the b36 assembly line going. Civilian airport........your too heavy to land here. The runway for the b36 was 8ft of aggregate and 4 ft of concrete
@daviddunsmore103
@daviddunsmore103 3 года назад
I wonder how that compares to what's required for a 747 or A380? 🤔
@cbmech2563
@cbmech2563 3 года назад
@@daviddunsmore103 more tires, less pounds per square inch of tire contact area, so 🤔? Also the military does tend to take everything to the extreme.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
....you're
@cbmech2563
@cbmech2563 4 месяца назад
@@danielocarey9392 I'm sorry that my auto correct bothered you
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
@@cbmech2563 It does it to me too. I'm sorry.
@mickhall88
@mickhall88 3 года назад
I'm guessing all the errors in this one are intentional. It ups the number of comments, keeping RU-vid happy. Well you can have this one for free.... You're welcome 😊
@justtruth8281
@justtruth8281 4 месяца назад
I got to tour the XC 99 multiple times at Kelly Air Force Base.
@dave8599
@dave8599 2 года назад
Whoa,..... it has "a five cockpit crew"!
@tgmccoy1556
@tgmccoy1556 3 года назад
I flew copilot on a DC7 Airtanker for 9 years. Back in the 90's. I remember flying out of Fairbanks (Ft. Wainwright) With Hawkins and Powers KC97 converted tanker. 4000 gallons of retardant. Also they had many carcasses of 4360s on the field. Mostly spares, some fresh. Some dead. They were pretty good at keeping the 97 going. Like the DC-7 Wright 3350s if you didn't push them they weren't too unreliable.🙄
@sierraromeo
@sierraromeo 3 года назад
Still have my Hawkins & Powers beltbuckle purchased at the Greybull Wyoming operation. Saw Jet assisted boxcars, KC-97's , piles of QEC's, and I think the B-24 privateer, single vertical stab. This was 1986, summer.
@tgmccoy1556
@tgmccoy1556 3 года назад
@@sierraromeo good friend of mine flew Boxcars for H&P called the Jet the. Defueler. As well as providing power it lightened the fuel load considerably 😊.
@sierraromeo
@sierraromeo 3 года назад
@@tgmccoy1556 The C-123 had two jet engines, and the "turtle" Neptune also had two, I suppose they were used in all phases of flight, other wise, they were creating massive drag.
@magellan6108
@magellan6108 3 года назад
The military variant, the XC-99, was at Kelly AFB for quite awhile. It was loaned for display for a time, but that is another story. I got on board at Kelly. It was/is huge. I could stand up in the wing at the wing root. I am a tad over 6 ft.
@ogzephyr4166
@ogzephyr4166 3 года назад
Commercial B-36, I like it
@casualsleepingdragon8501
@casualsleepingdragon8501 3 года назад
The b-36 looks like the pokémon evolution the b-29
@elliotdryden7560
@elliotdryden7560 3 года назад
At 7:50 did he say "Davies Mothman outside of Tuscon"? What a cool name for a boneyard! I want to be a docent there! :) Cool video!
@765kvline
@765kvline 3 года назад
Adding the later four jet engines to the B-36 civilian counterpart might have made a difference in its deployment for public acceptance and airline use.
@Elizabeth-fw2gu
@Elizabeth-fw2gu 3 года назад
This is not the best time for anyone to be left out when going for digital assets.
@nichol001
@nichol001 3 года назад
I invested in both gold and crypto. but crypto is more profitable.
@nelsonlyjackson6904
@nelsonlyjackson6904 3 года назад
Investing in cryptocurrency is one of the best chance of making money .
@jacksonwalcott6674
@jacksonwalcott6674 3 года назад
Stocks are good, crypto is better.
@jimmys.fuller3659
@jimmys.fuller3659 3 года назад
@Saloli Galiato That won't bother you if you trade with a professional like Mr Nicholas howard.
@maryj.batson5339
@maryj.batson5339 3 года назад
I heard that his strategies are really good!.
@diGritz1
@diGritz1 3 года назад
For propeller insanity I'd have to go with the Tupolev TU-95 AKA: Bear. Though it has only 4 engines each one has 2 contra-rotating props. The prop tips spin faster then the speed of sound which makes this thing one of the loudest aircraft ever built.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
True. But the XFY1 Convair turboprop was faster at 610 MPH.
@leezinke4351
@leezinke4351 3 года назад
if they add the XC-99 for FS2020. I would love to fly this gorgeous plane.
@terryherrera5252
@terryherrera5252 3 года назад
In the “60’s” we climb through one of these at Kelly A. F. Base in San Antonio,TeXaS !!
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
climbed.
@ouroboris
@ouroboris 3 года назад
Around 3:40 I noticed that the props are turning backwards... Excellent video though!
@DeHama77
@DeHama77 3 года назад
The other factor with this aircraft was the it required reinforced concrete runways of sufficient depth, length, and width to support it's weight. This is the reason why the XC-99 was primarily confined to runs between Tinker AFB and Travis AFB during its active duty life. Most airports could not have supported repeated landings and takeoffs and would have required expensive improvements to support the Model 37. Foreshadowing the A-380 's similar issues and limitations, this aircraft was simply too large for the infrastructure of most airports.
@sierraromeo
@sierraromeo 3 года назад
The single main wheels caused the runway issue, after conversion to dual tandem each side, the issue was resolved
@Siryn
@Siryn 3 года назад
The XC99 sat out here at Lackland AFB (formerly Kelly AFB) for years.
@pessimisticvideographer5039
@pessimisticvideographer5039 3 года назад
I like B-36 Pacemaker - would have been a more exciting name
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
yeah, if you heard one coming, you'd be having a heart attack....
@brucebaxter6923
@brucebaxter6923 3 года назад
top rate video. bit confused why there is a leading edge shape between the engines though
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
Do you mean on the trailing edge? It could be just an optical illusion from the CGI. I've looked at images of the XC99/Convair 37 and as near I can tell from the available ass-end shots, the trailing edge is knife-edged. The whole idea of having a pusher aircraft is to avoid turbulent prop wash flowing over the wing - this contributes drag and decreases lift - so to avoid this, minimize drag (thus increasing cruise range, which is good for a strategic bomber design) and increase lift (more payload, also good for a bomber design) they went with a pusher design. But aside from that, the standard wing design would apply. Can't think of any reason they'd have rounding on the trailing edge along any part of the wing, let alone on control surfaces such as flaps or ailerons, and given that the pusher engines took up a lot of trailing edge, they probably needed all the space in between the engines for flaps.
@brucebaxter6923
@brucebaxter6923 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 thanks, it was a joke about the render issue, its clear that the nacelles are reused from a puller aircraft
@alanpope179
@alanpope179 3 года назад
For years the hulk of the XB-99 sat at the end of the runway at Kelly AFB in San Antonio!
@romad357
@romad357 Месяц назад
Notice the C-99 had to original planned single wheel main gear of the B-36. These didn't work out so production B-36s had multi-wheel main gear.
@jstudios3756
@jstudios3756 3 года назад
The only thing wrong with the video is the props were spinning backwards... Btw, I love your videos!
@toasterhavingabath6980
@toasterhavingabath6980 3 года назад
Wouldn't they have to spin backward because they're on the back of the wing
@jstudios3756
@jstudios3756 3 года назад
@@toasterhavingabath6980 yes, there spinning the right way. I said they should be reversed and he still has them spinning the normal way
@supertyfon1736
@supertyfon1736 3 года назад
5:19 little Beecraft Wee Bee just dwarfed by the propeller alone.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
I wondered what THAT was! According to the wiki on it, only one prototype was ever built, it was put into an air museum but destroyed by fire, so afterwards, the museum built a replica to replace the prototype. Imagine, a craft so small there's no room to sit IN it, so you had to lie prone ON it - wonder how it would have done in inverted flight, would the pilot stay on, LOL!
@supertyfon1736
@supertyfon1736 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 Who knows if the belts would keep you on.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@supertyfon1736 I'd rather have one of those BEDE 5's, you know which one I mean?
@supertyfon1736
@supertyfon1736 3 года назад
@@nobodyknows3180 Worlds smallest jet and it's piston counter part yep.
@nobodyknows3180
@nobodyknows3180 3 года назад
@@supertyfon1736 I've seen them occasionally at air shows but I've never seen one up close.
@Wall_T3mbok4556
@Wall_T3mbok4556 3 года назад
Sadly i can't watch bc i have to study for my last exam
@aurorajones8481
@aurorajones8481 3 года назад
GET THAT A!!
@Wall_T3mbok4556
@Wall_T3mbok4556 3 года назад
@@aurorajones8481 in Indonesia, there's only 0-100
@jaybee9269
@jaybee9269 3 года назад
It wasn’t Bow-Ack, my dude. Just B-O-A-C (British Overseas Airways Corporation; Bee Oh A See, to belabor the point). I enjoyed the video muchly though, and I appreciate the old airliner footage! Good job indeed.
@alifloydtv
@alifloydtv 3 года назад
That properly confused me, I was all 'what on Earth is Boh-Acq? Clearly not a Beatles fan.
@kbtred51
@kbtred51 3 года назад
@@alifloydtv Australian - all their abbreviations are read out like QUANTAS. Always B.O.A.C. or B.E.A. or B.A. never Boak, Bee, Bah.
@jaybee9269
@jaybee9269 3 года назад
@@alifloydtv >> Back in the USSR!
@mastro4065
@mastro4065 3 года назад
@@kbtred51 ....No “U” in QANTAS.....
@PatrickRosenbalm
@PatrickRosenbalm 3 года назад
Those Pistol engines packed a Hell of a bang on the Pacemaker! Stopped watching....
@StevieinSF
@StevieinSF 3 года назад
The XC-99 was successful with the USAF as a transport aircraft during its stint in the service. The drawback with the XC-99 and B-36 was its engines. They were temperamental, consumed oil, had cooling issues and were slow. Convair was a forward thinking aircraft builder, if they had turbo-props available which would've had the right efficiencies, the military and civilian versions would've been better off. A pure turbojet version would have consumed so much fuel and that technology wasn't fully developed either.
@rpsmith2990
@rpsmith2990 3 года назад
Another factor in this plane not entering service probably is similar to why Pan American didn't fly the Republic RC-2 (airliner version of the XF or later XR-12 Rainbow). With a lack of military interest and of sales from other airlines, the development costs would have made the plane very expensive. Either aircraft would have been very interesting to see in service.
@itsjohndell
@itsjohndell 3 года назад
I believe the Navy received a few of these and operated them longer than the Air Force. The AMARG or bone yard is at Davis(Pronounced like Bette Davis)-Monthan AFB. the Pima County Air and Space Museum is just across the road and while they have a B-36J I hope the C-99 will join it.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
No. The XC-99 was just one airframe. But the navy did fly Convair Tradewinds.
@erictaylor5462
@erictaylor5462 3 года назад
Peacemaker, not Pace Maker. 5:00 Why was it never built? One simple reason: The de Havilland DH.106 Comet and the Boeing 707. The age of the piston powered airline had come to an end. While the Comet and the 707 were much smaller, the Convair was a snail compared to them. My dad said B-36's used to fly over his house and they were really really slow. It wasn't a bad bomber, but it was an anachronism in the age of jets. Even the B-36 had 4 jet engines. "4 burning 6 turning" as they used to say.
@danielocarey9392
@danielocarey9392 4 месяца назад
They got those jets later though.
@aurorajones8481
@aurorajones8481 3 года назад
4:20
@Digi20
@Digi20 3 года назад
it would have been a bit slower than the constellation/super constellations of that time, but with three times as many people for one trip. however, as with the constellation, either way would have been superseeded only a short time after its hypothetical introduction by the first jet aircraft, mainly the boeing 707, which basically flew twice as fast and with almost as many people on board.
@kittenastrophy5951
@kittenastrophy5951 3 года назад
Clip of XC-99 has been on RU-vid for so long time. I saw it might be 7 years back.
@andyrendell7430
@andyrendell7430 3 года назад
Nerdy question- would a push- prop, rather than pull from the front, have the same ability to thrust air aft over the wing and give direct lift assistance? Perhaps less,but still some? Amazing vid,thanks
@erichpizer1
@erichpizer1 3 года назад
good vid. tks
@whatever8282828
@whatever8282828 3 года назад
nine hours to london! wow!
Далее
CRAZY Passenger Nose Door - The Baby 747 Saab 1073
12:38
У ГОРДЕЯ ПОЖАР в ОФИСЕ!
01:01
Просмотров 4,5 млн
15 Never-Built Commercial Planes we nearly got
12:51
Просмотров 1,8 млн
Boeing's Forgotten Failure
12:07
Просмотров 424 тыс.
VTOL Power - The Incredible Bell X-22 VTOL Plane
16:18
Просмотров 410 тыс.
Lockheed Jetstar - grandfather of all business jets
12:23
Star Raker! - The Giant Insane Mach 7.2 Space Plane
20:48