I was in Kingsbury Primary School on that day. All the children were herded out in the playground. I can still remember seeing it fly overhead.
@123rocker00719876 ай бұрын
How old were you in 1949?
@Elshe3em5 ай бұрын
HIW OLD R U HOW R U STILL ALIVE
@shanasapp62124 ай бұрын
I bet that was so cool.
@Maggot-Milk4 ай бұрын
and I remember watching the endeavor space shuttle fly over in elementary. crazy how far we've come
@MkFlurry4 ай бұрын
If a grownup in 1949 let's assume 20 years old in 1949. Commented in 2022. Might be 93 years old in 2022 and 95 now. But wait, my grandparents are younger in their 70s and face difficulty typing on smartphones.
@sandhopper993 жыл бұрын
My father worked on the Brabazon after working on Beaufighters during the war. My grandfather was Site Agent for Laing on the new Filton Brabazon hanger. There was a combined staff trip to Clevedon. My father went and my grandfather took two of his daughters one of whom became my mum. Her sister married another Laing guy and in 1968 he arranged for me to also join Laing as the start to a 54 year career in construction. We had the famous Brabazon picture in our living room for years.
@drew65sep3 жыл бұрын
Tip of the cap to your father...the world owes a lot to that particular generation.
@jwaustinmunguy3 жыл бұрын
Dad had pictures of the Beau on the same album page as the Mosquitos he was training on at No. 51 OTU. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the course syllabus had some trips in the Beau as they had some of the older radar sets in them. Training was thorough in those days and he spoke of using several different sets on the course.
@АдольфВиссарионовичПиночет3 жыл бұрын
Вы замечательный человек,если с такой теплотой поведали нам о своих предках !Спасибо!
@bernielomaxsmustache72043 жыл бұрын
Built a piece of crap
@alaaino3 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the so warm story
@Ralph29 ай бұрын
It has a Jules Verne look about it. It's the window placements and the streamlined shiny hull. Beautiful.
@memonk11 Жыл бұрын
This is one of those many aircraft that should have been preserved. It would be a sight to see.
@kevinmalone32103 жыл бұрын
It looks as if it's taking off in slow motion. Impressive size.
@stephenbrookes72683 жыл бұрын
It kind of was by today's standards.
@RealPlatoishere2 жыл бұрын
@@stephenbrookes7268 nah but for that time it was impressive
@stephenbrookes72682 жыл бұрын
@@RealPlatoishere It was a typical horse designed by committee. Out of date before the ink was dry on the drawings.
@calvinnickel99952 жыл бұрын
@ Steven brooks it wasn’t out of date. The Constellation Starliner would make its first flight 7 years later and only be in service for one year before regular jet service started replacing it. The problem was no market. The British Empire was shrinking and no airlines had the cash or passengers to justify it. Airliners like the huge Stratocruiser lost a lot of money because of how expensive they were to purchase and operate.
@stephenbrookes72682 жыл бұрын
@@calvinnickel9995 You have literally described the conditions of being out of date. You couldn't even spell my name correctly when it is written down. What other examples of idiocy would you like to display?
@leokimvideo2 жыл бұрын
Thank god someone did count the rivets
@jeremyfinch28352 жыл бұрын
Makes me wonder why they didn't count them for the Titanic? Seems a tragedy.
@saurabhkainturaofficial6332 жыл бұрын
@@jeremyfinch2835 R
@thecornercomplex5848 Жыл бұрын
@@jeremyfinch2835 3,000,000 million rivets in the titanic.
@IExist496 Жыл бұрын
@@thecornercomplex58483 trillion rivets? Lol
@abuyalatip75908 ай бұрын
🤣🤣
@3funke3 жыл бұрын
I saw the Brabazon overfly Liverpool around 1950 or thereabouts, my father worked at RAF Hooton Park at the time and told me to look out for it, it flew over around midday quite a sight for a young 9/10 yo lad.
@Ashoud_Anobetah2 жыл бұрын
Now that's a cool lie
@olliegueret43482 жыл бұрын
Pathe always had unique clear crisp footage of the early twentieth century! Class!!!
@Coppermiltac7 жыл бұрын
The propellor sound is, to use a modern phrase, truly awesome and I would think unmistakable. Great film footage.
@katoikatio46633 жыл бұрын
Ini kerana is
@funnyrabbitflyer68553 жыл бұрын
Right? Counter-rotating props in this video sound distinct from anything ive heard in person.
@dartmaster5013 жыл бұрын
Turboprops.
@dartmaster5013 жыл бұрын
@@funnyrabbitflyer6855 CONTRA-rotating. Counter-rotating props are separated, like on the Chinook or Osprey.
@bobsage63123 жыл бұрын
I heard that when airborne and the sound terrified me as a very young boy. Totally unmistakable, just as Concorde was later on.
@davidr99913 жыл бұрын
I lived in Filton Avenue , Bristol at the time of the engine tests . As a 3 year old I was terrified by the noise of the engine tests . One of my earliest memories .
@joemag60323 жыл бұрын
Just curious, which were louder, the engines or the props ?
@davidmicalizio8243 жыл бұрын
@@joemag6032 props
@joemag60323 жыл бұрын
@@davidmicalizio824 , thanks for responding.
@dotdashdotdash3 жыл бұрын
nobody vandalising statues in Bristol in those days
@bincamir13 жыл бұрын
@@dotdashdotdash out of topic!
@cassmanio3 жыл бұрын
For a second, I thought it was going to stall on take off. So smooth!
@theborg59812 жыл бұрын
Same. At or just soon after
@nk71552 жыл бұрын
Yeah. 160 mph is pretty slow for a plane that size.
@startingbark03562 жыл бұрын
@@nk7155 nah, usually larger aircraft are slower
@nicholai10082 жыл бұрын
@@startingbark0356 Larger aircraft don’t usually fly slower. They often have to fly faster, because they are heavier and they need to generate more lift. The reason this plane is probably able to takeoff and fly so slow is because it has little payload and is particularly light. A 767 can takeoff at 108kts when it weighs 90,000kgs, but it can only takeoff at 170kts at 190,000kgs. That’s the exact same plane and the only thing that changed was the weight.
@startingbark03562 жыл бұрын
@@nicholai1008 no, they bigger they have more drag
@mwales21122 жыл бұрын
It doesn't take off, the earth just backs away....
@tungstenkid227117 күн бұрын
If Einstein was a passenger he'd say "When does the earth arrive at this plane?"
@richardschindler88222 жыл бұрын
Built with NOT one computer. A thing of beauty.
@GreatDataVideos2 жыл бұрын
Lots of slide rule usage though. Amazing engineering.
@lovegarbage2 жыл бұрын
Plenty of slide rules.
@brandwilbll2 жыл бұрын
Lots of planes were built without a computer, they sucked. You sound like a luddite. "they don't make cars like they used to, they put all these computers in them." yeah, they're safer, faster, better gas mileage, better handling, better braking; what more do you old timers want? Go fly on a plane back in those days and you were taking your life in your hands. Now it is the safest form of travel. Thank god we put computers in these things to help us fly them.
@sightseer10273 ай бұрын
what's a slide rule? @@lovegarbage
@JohnJones-cp4wh2 ай бұрын
All laid out on Loft Plates.
@Bikewithlove3 жыл бұрын
Notice the great care taken by the pilot in demonstrating the airplane well within its limits and never losing sight of the fact that it’s not all about him. It amazes me how any flight organization can allow the kinds of out-of-control personalities to fly air shows, who ultimately cause terrible catastrophes. The way this pilot flies is how it’s done.
@craigpennington12513 жыл бұрын
Yes, arrogant egos cause a lot of grief.
@margaretross91503 жыл бұрын
"There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots."
@nigelwilliams93073 жыл бұрын
He could have at least done a barrel roll.
@Beezlie7273 жыл бұрын
It wasn't an air show. It was a maiden flight. Notice the announcer was even uncertain that it was going to take off rather than simply taxi again.
@Bikewithlove3 жыл бұрын
@@Beezlie727 - Same rule applies: don’t crash the plane.
@Saa42808 Жыл бұрын
I have a great respect for the engineers who designed these aircrafts without a computer.
@brianletter3545 Жыл бұрын
They used sliderules - cheaper and quicker.
@SirReginaldBlomfield1234 Жыл бұрын
Singular or Plural.. it's Aircraft ! Numpty 🥴
@SirReginaldBlomfield1234 Жыл бұрын
Singular or Plural.. it's Aircraft ! Numpty 🥴
@SirReginaldBlomfield1234 Жыл бұрын
Singular or Plural.. it's Aircraft ! Numpty 🥴
@SirReginaldBlomfield1234 Жыл бұрын
Singular or Plural.. it's Aircraft ! Numpty 🥴
@harryschaefer58873 жыл бұрын
It reminds me of a "Constellation", a plane I was always excited to see overhead when I was a kid.
@letoubib213 жыл бұрын
Good, old Connie didn't even weigh the half of that Brabazon colossus ...
@jrt8183 жыл бұрын
@@letoubib21 But it was profitable.
@letoubib213 жыл бұрын
@@jrt818 I like the Connie, too. She was a very good plane *. . .*
@jfh92092 жыл бұрын
The Constellation and the Brabazon both had a tapering fuselage, beautiful but more expensive to build.
@johnmorris78152 жыл бұрын
Some of the comments on here absolutely begged belief? The Brabazon had eight engines, one for each of its four contra rotating props, it was not in any way stalling as it flew, 160kts is pretty much flat out for an aircraft of that time, it’s failure was due to the fact that in 1949 jets had been flying for 6 years, this aircraft was abandoned for that reason and although it took a few more years before jet passenger aircraft flew, the Bristol company’s next attempt was the Britannia, a turbo prop aircraft that was ahead of its time for about 10 days before everything without jets were obsolete. That was the pace of progress at that time, 1949 piston engine aircraft that could nearly make London New York, 1969 Concorde M2.00 at 65,000’
@kukmica64222 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing!
@JohnJones-cp4wh2 ай бұрын
Flew in a Britannia in 1964.
@slome815Ай бұрын
Well, people are always fast to say it was obsolete on launch, but the Lockheed super constellation only first flew one year later, and that was a succesfull aircraft that flew comercially until the 70's, and in military service until the 80's. As for turboprops, they are still not obsolete for smaller range commercial planes, just look at the Dash 8 or ATR42/72.
@naclaski9920 күн бұрын
It had a cruising speed of 260mph according to the commentary, which sounds about right for a late piston-engined era air liner. 160mph was flat out for some aircraft of that time, but not this one.
@richardwest6358 Жыл бұрын
Living in Bath at the time I was lucky enought to see this big beast on many occasions
@missiontent1113 жыл бұрын
My grandmother was in the Red cross at the time the Brabazon was due to appear at a local air show. She and a considerable number of other medical personal were held on standby at a nearby location in readiness for what was considered a possible disaster situation in the event of the aircraft failing in flight. I believe we have her notes on the deployment in her Red Cross log book.
@manoelwanderleyguimaraes97473 жыл бұрын
Wheres is your grandmother in the moment dear ??
@missiontent1113 жыл бұрын
@@manoelwanderleyguimaraes9747 Sorry to report that she is no longer with us......but I clearly remember her talking about the Brabazon.
@manoelwanderleyguimaraes97473 жыл бұрын
@@missiontent111 Okay mate.
@SMGJohn2 жыл бұрын
@@manoelwanderleyguimaraes9747 You sound offended LOL
@themechbuilder61712 жыл бұрын
@@SMGJohn i can't hear him
@chrisparkes2 жыл бұрын
You can see some of the same aesthetics in the Comet. What a lovely design.
@Sashazur2 жыл бұрын
I think this is a more attractive design than the comet- the comet’s square vertical stabilizer didn’t match the rest of its curvy aesthetic.
@JohnJones-cp4wh2 ай бұрын
Comet flew 4 months before the Brabazon.
@ghostofdre10 ай бұрын
It was obsolete before it even flew, this was the dawn of the jet age.
@RuiPlaneSpotter4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the video!
@noelanderson7033 жыл бұрын
Love the sound of those contra-props
@TARUNKUMAR-mz4jy3 жыл бұрын
No NJ
@lisakingscott77292 жыл бұрын
I love the shape of airliners from that era, very similar to the Constellation. Note how Bristol engineers used round windows, but De Havilland screwed up the otherwise much more advanced Comet by using square ones!!! The Comet's first flight was 2 months before the brabazon, but once the windows were fixed, lasted many decades.
@Fourth4Element5 жыл бұрын
Wow the engineers did a fantastic job
@jerrybennett78563 жыл бұрын
No computers. Just slide rules and hand drawn blue prints. All those 1.5 million rivets bucked be hand.
@rsc95203 жыл бұрын
@@jerrybennett7856 It's amazing!
@MypeaceIgive0072 жыл бұрын
@@jerrybennett7856 That inpresses me more than this generations cell phones.
@jerrybennett78562 жыл бұрын
@@MypeaceIgive007 me too.
@redtale652722 күн бұрын
A little before my time but not long after take-off it would have flown over Stoke Gifford where I was born. I was a toddler when the Vulcan took out the Runway Garage on the A38, mum said it rattled the tiles on our roof as it flew overhead. Great place to grow up. The noise never bothered me, and I could watch the airshows from our back yard.
@guskuratlejr92283 жыл бұрын
Much respect for building her with hardly the technology that everyone is used to these days!
@sailormanoyster18492 жыл бұрын
Concorde soon followed on
@MypeaceIgive0072 жыл бұрын
Technology has ruined this world already and will control your soul one day if you dont put your trust in Christ Jesus.
@madmeh29293 жыл бұрын
Saw a doc on this about 20 years ago. The plane landed so softly the pilots actually had a light on the panel that told them when the wheels touched down. I believe it flew for a few years. Since it was so comparably slow (and took so long to cross the ocean) the interior still followed the concept of a “cruise ship of the skies”, and couldn’t economically compete with faster competing aircraft. Too bad it wasn’t preserved in a museum, as was the Spruce Goose. Sadly out of date before or just after it took off.
@nigelwilliams93073 жыл бұрын
What symptoms?
@billhosko77232 жыл бұрын
JFC... another passive/aggressive KAREN...
@beeble20032 жыл бұрын
"The plane landed so softly the pilots actually had a light on the panel that told them when the wheels touched down." That doesn't make sense. Any plane lands as hard or as softly as the pilot puts it onto the ground. Many planes have a weight-on-wheels sensor which, for example, prevents deployment of reverse thrust while in flight. Probably the maker of the documentary misunderstood this.
@straightpipediesel2 жыл бұрын
@@beeble2003 No, wing aspect ratio and wing loading are major factors in how smoothly an aircraft lands. Basically when an aircraft has a lot of excess lift available, lift tends to bleed off slower, and the pilot has better trajectory control of the aircraft during the landing maneuver and therefore can land softly.
@tryarunm2 жыл бұрын
I was wondering just that, how practical she would have been for regular commercial air travel. But as a luxury liner she must have been super comfortable. I wonder many for built, which airlines flew her and for how long.
@lesgriffiths8523Ай бұрын
An extraordinary achievement for Britain's aviation industry just 4 years after WW2......simply astonishing. Les Griffiths
@johne71002 жыл бұрын
I saw it flying over the Craigantlet hills near Belfast. I would have been 4 at the time. From our house across the valley from Stormont it was just a line in the sky as it turned towards us, but I could see the nacelles on its wings. That's all the memory I have, just that dark line with the lumps on it, but anything I see or read of it is still thrilling. Long ago now.
@beeble20032 жыл бұрын
For comparison with modern planes, the Brabazon was as long as a Boeing 767 (180ft), but had a much larger wingspan (230ft vs 150).
@jeremybrazier3004Ай бұрын
What a shame to see all those trees down, you kinda forget they were loving things that have been there for decades if not centuries before they are blown down. Thanks you two, great to see exmoor in the winter!
@thankGodlee60702 ай бұрын
Watching from Nigeria 2024 and still watching
@Руслан-ю4ш7ч2 ай бұрын
Из Британской колонии?
@TheAzzubaidi2 ай бұрын
😂😂@@Руслан-ю4ш7ч
@BENZENE6KАй бұрын
@@Руслан-ю4ш7ч cave man?
@fidelcatsro69489 күн бұрын
VIVA Nigeria!
@fredflintstone535627 күн бұрын
That landing was smother than most flights I go on these days…
@keegan7732 жыл бұрын
The village of Charleton was demolished to extend the runway for the Brabazon. In the jet age the aircraft was already obsolete and never came into service.
@slome815Ай бұрын
Well, the lockheed super constellation would fly the next year, and that was a very succesfull airlines.
@spider23000Ай бұрын
The DC-7, Super Constellation, and Bristol Britannia all had their first flights years after the Brabazon had hers, but were relatively successful. There was a lot more that played into it (e.g. the fact that the Brabazon was horribly poor on fuel economy compared to its rivals)
@Avi7272 жыл бұрын
The tail section reminds me of the fictional doomed “Reindeer” airliner in the Jimmy Stewart classic film “No Highway In The Sky.”
@simon_k45515 жыл бұрын
That nose gear took a pounding.
@spaceenemiesnovel3 жыл бұрын
Great footage. Nice view of the past.
@haroldhumerickhouse87313 жыл бұрын
I can’t believe I’ve never heard of this aircraft, and I thought I knew them all. What a Goliath and the sounds of the engines! Amazing.
@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND3 жыл бұрын
Same here.
@georgebarnes81633 жыл бұрын
there was no mention of the aircrafts unusual engine setup, 8 engines for 4 props, another forgotten giant is the Short Belfast turboprop of which only 10 were made for the RAF.
@peteryoungs42013 жыл бұрын
I have to wonder how many aircraft we may never hear of.
@S500-2 жыл бұрын
Its A Psycholigical fact , if a Person Think He Know All Infact They Know Nothing , Im Criticise Anyone , i Read This.
@Fastvoice2 жыл бұрын
@@georgebarnes8163 No, it had 8 props. 4 clockwise, 4 counter-clockwise - each with its own engine. You can see them at the beginning of the video.
@Blogzer28 күн бұрын
I'd never heard of this plane before. Wikipedia offers an explanation. Only one was ever built. Granted it was first flight, but that initial rate of climb didn't leave me in awe.
@steven22125 жыл бұрын
Stunning and amazing aircraft. Great history here.
@bertkilborne64643 жыл бұрын
It makes me sad that so many of these great planes became obsolete just as they test flew the prototype.
@austindarrenor3 жыл бұрын
The British had at one time ruled the seas but suffered so many setbacks in aviation. Like this Barbazon, only one was built because nobody wanted it. The Comet, Concorde, VC-10 and Trident were commercial failures because of the competition from Boeing and Douglas (besides the Concorde, Boeing was smart and bailed from its SST pgm). Not a single country in Western Europe aside from the UK bought the British made jets but instead went with the American.
@peterpiper4823 жыл бұрын
The Spruce Goose also!
@scottdowney43183 жыл бұрын
@@austindarrenor You know there must have been good reasons for that. fuel use, size, costs, the same things that people make decisions about today, perhaps politics, government and private.
@scottdowney43183 жыл бұрын
@@peterpiper482 Imagine the spikiness of that guy, likely a big turn off.
@austindarrenor3 жыл бұрын
@@scottdowney4318 True enough. And the 707 was just an incredibly well made airplane put thru every test under the sun. Also I believe that the demands put on Vickers and Hawker Siddely by BOAC and BEA made their jets unattractive to foreign airlines. And the fast American built Convair Coronado suffered its terrible demise for its fuel consumption just to get there ten minutes earlier.
@Gervie0073 жыл бұрын
Squadron Leader Jim Murray RNZAF flew the Brabazon once on Aug 25 1951 with W Gibb, R Ellison amd J Howman. Filton -Belfast return 4.50hrs. Jim was at Filton test flying the new Bristol Freighters for the RNZAF and had the amazing opportunity to fly the largest aircraft in the world. Jim was a 43 op Bomber Command veteran taking part in the Tirpitz raids in Norway in 1942, the 1000 bomber raids and many ops to Tobruk and Al Alamein flying Halifaxes for 10 Sqn.
@overbank562 жыл бұрын
A "sleek beast"! Love the sound of those engines
@alexandermiller5034Ай бұрын
The short feild performance is incredible for such a large bird, truly magnificent
@davidedmundson8402Ай бұрын
Not hard to do with no passengers and a light fuel load.
Inventions at its best. Engineers did great at that time. All need to appreciate that.
@capunkmelky3 жыл бұрын
Teknologi yang canggih pada masa itu. Suara teriakan anak-anak penuh kegembiraan ketika menyaksikan atraksi pesawat terbang.
@wildanaffitrah88944 ай бұрын
Suara mesinnya itu loh yg bikin merinding
@brucestafford1813 Жыл бұрын
This was a beautiful piece of art.
@yerfillinois82543 жыл бұрын
To have such technology in 1949, was genius.
@jensahlers3 жыл бұрын
Stimmt.
@sirmalus51533 жыл бұрын
A bit old fashioned though by that time and a dead end.
@johnmunro49523 жыл бұрын
She was obsolete before she even flew. Technology was moving at an incredible pace in those days.
@billhosko77232 жыл бұрын
@@sirmalus5153 Thanks KAREN...
@billhosko77232 жыл бұрын
@@johnmunro4952 Thanks KAREN...
@gerardleahy6946Ай бұрын
It was outdated even in its maiden flight but was utterly beautiful. It is a shame that it was scrapped.
@robertmatch65503 жыл бұрын
Interesting looking plane I knew nothing about. Thank you.
@giancarlopellizzari1751Ай бұрын
Magnificent! Thanks for the video. 😊
@drew65sep3 жыл бұрын
I'd forgotten about this one...badass aircraft. Although this audio sounds like a V-1 "Buzz Bomb."
@suprianto68972 жыл бұрын
First amazing airplane🤩
@garryferrington8112 жыл бұрын
What a nice job reprinting this ancient 35mm film. Generally with a piece of footage this old, you get a one-light 16mm print with glaring bromide streaks, never mind dirt, splices, and scratches. Even the sound, albeit of course limited, is clear.
@narabdela2 жыл бұрын
Nonsense.
@fattymcfatso10832 жыл бұрын
@@narabdela yeah - ancient? - c'mon man
@gixiscrazy95272 ай бұрын
This random video made my Day ❤
@skychief77162 жыл бұрын
Today is the first time I’ve ever heard of the Brabazon. The only thing I know about it is what I listened to in this video. Nevertheless I have three comments about the Barbazon: 1. It should have been built with jet engines and not reciprocating engines. 2. I’m guessing here, but with its power to weight ratio I’ll bet it was extremely under powered. 3. It was a very sleek and beautiful aircraft. For that the designers should take a big bow.
@saveyourbacon61642 жыл бұрын
To be successful, the Brabazon needed to be able to pack in passengers, not like the cattle class of today, but sufficient to achieve satisfactory costs per seat mile, and to have the range to enable it to operate on long-distance sectors, and performance to enable it to achieve satisfactory turnarounds. It is doubtful if the jet engines of the time could have helped, as they had a voracious appetite for fuel.
@NicolaW722 жыл бұрын
Yes, it was totally underpowered and that was a major reason for its failure. So the Lockheed Super Constellation became the "Queen of the Skies" of the 1950ies.
@olsmokey2 жыл бұрын
@@NicolaW72 Then the Comet came along to be "Queen of the Skies" until it kept falling out of those very same skies. Oh well...
@NicolaW722 жыл бұрын
@@olsmokey The Comet was therefore never the "Queen of the Skies".
@wesinman23122 жыл бұрын
Great video, what a huge plane!
@carsten91683 жыл бұрын
The Brabazon was using a 4-engine, 3-blade 'contra-rotating propeller' which though noisy, enhanced air intake, produced more power but with fuel efficiency. The US and British aircraft engineers never mastered the problems with the rotary shaft systems. The Russians however overcame that with 4-blades and produced the legendary Tupolev TU-95 'Bear', a huge, long range, swept-back wings, turboprop strategic bomber aircraft in 1952. It is still being used (after many upgrades) by the Russian Air Force even after 70 years !
@gingernutpreacher3 жыл бұрын
Eight engine's look it up if you don't believe me
@rayjames60963 жыл бұрын
The US never tried to produce a counter rotating prop engine for airline use so there was no reason to master the engine.
@cnfuzz2 жыл бұрын
The Russians had captured German engineers for the contraprop engines dev ,without them the tu95 would not have flown
@johneyton54522 жыл бұрын
The tu95 geared hunbs are so noisy they can be detected by submarines.
@frankd79052 жыл бұрын
Clearly there were 8 engines as could be seen by the start up of a set of engines and the 8 air intakes per wing. Don't really have to look things up just have to observe. Sad that the aircraft was not saved. Lots of man hours painstakingly spent in producing it. Sad when it was destroyed. Much the same as the Avro Arrow in Canada. Easier to tear something apart than to put it together.
@johnnyfreedom34379 ай бұрын
That's absolutely amazing that that Behemoth got off the ground in a little over 1500 ft! Runways today are over a mile long, This Plane would have had no problem! A little before my time though. That's a great pilot in that plane. Getting up is one thing getting safely down is another!!
@SMGJohn2 жыл бұрын
This plane had maximum take off weight of 131 tons, whereas Boeing 747 had 300 tons when she made her maiden flight in 1969. Bristol Brabazon was very much a plane of the early 40s, and came too late to do anything, the age of jet was coming, to put things into perspective, Soviet Tupolev Tu-95 from 1952 had almost 200 ton capable take off weight, and was a turbo prop design as well, Bristol Brabazon never stood a chance.
@JS-fe8sx2 жыл бұрын
The B36 went into service a year before this video had a loaded weight of over 200 tons, but was superseded by the B52. Lightly loaded, it could fly high enough that MiGs could not reach them during the Korean War.
@NicolaW722 жыл бұрын
Indeed.
@encinobalboa Жыл бұрын
Brabazon was obsolete before she was built. Lockheed Constellation was already in airline service for fours years. Surely, the committee could see this??
@clydedonaldson736927 күн бұрын
I grew up during the time of the Dehavilland Comet jet airliner that had already established superior performance capabilities which largely spelled out the death knell for the prop jobs. The Comet of course, ran into major problems when 3 of them broke apart in mid air and during the 2 year investigation, the Boeing 707 reclaimed the queen of the skies.
@jaymac72032 жыл бұрын
What a sight that must have been 😳
@mariannwatt26782 жыл бұрын
Slide rule and brains what a fine aircraft should have been a game changer ! Great UK avation history cheers ! Retired us a&p mechanic.
@fattymcfatso10832 жыл бұрын
'ave a pint, boys - great job
@Whiterose-eb1no3 жыл бұрын
Watching this video wow what a feeling 🥰
@edwardfletcher77903 жыл бұрын
Damn that thing is LOUD ! Contra-rotating props make a lot of noise !
@scottowens15352 жыл бұрын
A excellent job of handling something that was in full stall. As stated it should have been doing 250 , at 160 it's amazing how in the video you can see him correcting with the stall condition he could feel... Applause!!
@sailingstpommedeterre49052 жыл бұрын
Wow, never knew about wonderful aircraft
@laverdajota80893 жыл бұрын
School kids sitting on a roof enjoying the event, can you imagine the headlines today . Near tragedy , as children put the lives at risk at air display , parents arrested for neglect.
@butwhatwouldiknowАй бұрын
Especially since it looks like there are no tiles or iron on the roof - just the timbers.
@robertmilne4304Ай бұрын
It's amazing it was able to actually take off.
@vishwassurve5893 жыл бұрын
Bravo for Efforts of scientists and technology revolution.
@mohitvazirani4204Ай бұрын
looked like it was going to stall, what a beauty
@omnacky2 жыл бұрын
And then they made the SR-71 15 years later
@danizweifler60612 жыл бұрын
this guy knew how to land an plane.. ! // climb out did scare me quite a bit // don't even think about a take-off in hhh-conditions !!
@afterburner28692 жыл бұрын
That fuselage is very reminiscent of the Lockheed Constellation’s fuselage.
@kassatekluАй бұрын
The mind that invents a machine heavier than air astonish me to this very day😮😮😮God bless them
@giselo665 жыл бұрын
Fantastic airplane!
@tomsharpe22513 жыл бұрын
Aeroplane*
@Erkele3 жыл бұрын
@@tomsharpe2251 Lentokone
@davidsimpson96473 жыл бұрын
Dreadful piece of garbage!! Underperforming,underpowered,sloppy construction
@tomsharpe22513 жыл бұрын
@@Erkele karl pilkington
@mattpaulson1044 Жыл бұрын
Only made a few flights before structural cracks manifested in wings. Hardy a great plane
@Glen.Danielsen2 жыл бұрын
Why have I never heard of this magisterial plane? 🇺🇸💛🇬🇧
@fattymcfatso10832 жыл бұрын
Because it never flew commercially
@alanchantiefighterskuanlia6272 жыл бұрын
Truly awesome plane which is way ahead of its time. A flying luxury cruise ship. .
@borusa322 жыл бұрын
I think it was more likely significantly out of date by the time it took to the air. If it was intended to steal passengers from cruise ships that bird had already flown and flown again by 1949.
@xkgbciax52862 жыл бұрын
well it was when it was thought of but b4 it was a prototype it was all ready too old and anyone can see it was way underpowered just from the rollout and take off and on top of that as it was test flight so im guessing the fuel would have very lite load and only a few on board no bags
@bax545 Жыл бұрын
wonderfully menacing haunting sound the prop engines make - beautiful!
@admiralbenbow5083 Жыл бұрын
The dawn of the jet age, British style.
@steventurner84282 жыл бұрын
A British spruce goose, one only but this thing actually flew
@Sashazur2 жыл бұрын
The spruce goose flew too, but only once!
@brianlam16632 жыл бұрын
My Gawd!! Wort will these megnificent men end their flying machines do next!?
@jwaustinmunguy3 жыл бұрын
Sound is reminiscent of the B-36 which had six contrarotating props.
@tomsamuelson8512Ай бұрын
B-36 had NO contra rotating props....
@jonathanjohnson1339Ай бұрын
B-36 had six conventional props and it was functionally obsolete when it entered service -- so underpowered that they had to add jet pods to get its bulk off the ground. You may be thinking of the fact that the props were mounted behind the wings (pushing), instead of in front of the wing. One result of this was that the engines tended to overheat easily. OTOH, the Soviets sure did like complex contra-rotating props on their big bombers (also on their helos).
@mikek824917 күн бұрын
@@jonathanjohnson1339 B 36",6 turners and 4 burners" !
@wrsmith711Ай бұрын
never heard of this before....
@ichabodon3 жыл бұрын
What a sight that must have been. To actually be there and see it.
@TescoRoadman8 күн бұрын
Still safer than any Boeing plane with doors falling off mid fight and two engines detaching from a 747 and a horizontal stabiliser coming off another 😂
@davidsheppard13622 жыл бұрын
It was a time when we were proud to be British. Of course I still am.
@grandaddyoe14342 ай бұрын
In the days when most people in Britian were born there . . .
@anderikusjuadi2 жыл бұрын
Amazingly amazing!!
@mixe12 жыл бұрын
My father was born in that year. God those planes were slow :D
@cremebrulee47592 ай бұрын
Based on some of the window locations, it looks like it has an upper deck like the 747.
@shanvideoskL103 жыл бұрын
Great job 👍
@gammaraider2 жыл бұрын
"especially built 1.5 mile runway". For those days, that was huge. Nowadays 2 mile+ runways are the norm for any serious airport
@sudarshanrajbhandari3913 жыл бұрын
How proud they all might have been then
@russellsamuel79503 жыл бұрын
Whilst at School Camp at Ogmore By Sea...1949..Brabazon did a flypast...HEADING TOWARDS Bristol...A giant in the sky...
@massihkheiry74113 жыл бұрын
With those engines was an amazing flyer
@allanwestcott37753 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@trevormillar15762 жыл бұрын
After its second flight, they found structural cracks that meant the wings would gave dropped off if she went up again; the whole project had to be scrapped.
@olcotttheosophy3 жыл бұрын
Thanks scientists and engineers. World changed by Engineers and scientists..
@abundantYOUniverse3 жыл бұрын
And dont forget the air.
@vishwassurve5893 жыл бұрын
Yess its Aviation technology revolution at that time.