Flying Down To Rio (1932)

[@divisioneight]

Thank you so much for posting this footage. When flying was indeed an adventure of discovery, innocence and freedom. When taking to the air meant civility, not economy. When the act of going somewhere was the adventure, not merely a means to the adventure. When the simple act of staring out a window and marveling at the scenery below without texting, twittering or whatever else is done with smart phones nowadays. It's all gone, dust in the wake of faster and more efficient. I do submit, that there was something lost, but not forgotten in that time that we sorely need today. I submit that the days of travel for the sake of travel could happen again, in large airships, gently sailing through the skies.

[@Matt..S]

dude, bus tourism and cruiseships are booming side by side with destination oriented tourism. Just airships died out due to WWII. But maritime cruise holidays are a huge business with ships, large and outfitted like cities, putting Titanic and co to shame. There is also a small but loyal and consistent customer base for train travel, both in modern trains and vintage trains, along scenic routes or towards tourist cities.

[@Matt..S]

Also, the entire point of cruiseships, airships and aeroplanes in the early days was to *communicate*. Royal MAIL ship Titanic. And in other videos about the Graf Zeppelin, you can see them writing postcards and letters on stationary with the zeppelin's name that would be left at the next airport and sent to its destination asap. If they had smartphones, they would have made pictures every second to send to their loved ones to brag or have them be part of it.

[@paistinlasta1805]

If you want to travel in civility why don't you fly in first class? You can't afford to? Well then you definitely couldn't have afforded to fly on the airships.

[@mitshumarner5870]

First class is still sitting in a tin box seat, with the din of the air moving past your tiny window at over 600 knots. If offered the same fare or more for a two day journey on an airship, where I have my own cabin, bathroom, a dining table to sit at for a meal, a lounge to relax in and pass the day gazing out at the scenery at 5000 feet or lower, instead of 34,000 feet, I'd take it as a "bucket list", once in a lifetime experience. And with billions flying annually, just one tenth of one percent of those billions, would make enough fares for the airship to exist. And flying first class now is what coach was 40 years ago. I recall flying coach on a regional flight on Eastern from PA to Chicago for a transfer. I was served a hot breakfast of scrambled eggs, sausage and coffee and OJ. All included in the coach fare! Now you pay far more for what is called "first class". It's a rip off when you look at what commercial flight has become.

[@leosaura1993]

Man those that flew must have had a experience to tell about it.

[@TonboIV]

Flying to Rio at 80 miles an hour... I remember learning to fly ultralights, doing my "cross country" practice, which involved flying down river to the next airport, maybe 50 miles away, and being annoyed that we could ONLY make 100 miles an hour, and they're doing 80 with a tailwind? I mean, I would love to take a Zeppelin journey someday, but only if I have a LOT of time to spare!

[@googleuser3163]

They could go from Germany to New York in 2 and a half days. Compared to the week an ocean liner would take it was very impressive.

[@dieseldragon6756]

Ah, I should've watched this one first! 😁 Seven British Imperial tonnes of petrol (=7,112kg) if it's 80% the density of water works out to about 8,900l of fuel for a distance of about 5,000 miles, or 8,000km. ↔ In modern speak the Graf Zepplin had a fuel economy of about 3 miles to the gallon, or about 111.25l/100km. 👍 For a compliment of 20 pax plus (Maybe) 10 crew that's about 14ml/head/km, or assuming 70kg/head and adding the 110 imp. tonnes of the Zepplin itself (11,175kg) suggests that each litre of fuel burnt was moving just over a ton of mass a distance of 100km (66 miles). 😳 Now show me a modern *fixed-wing* aircraft which can deliver a fuel economy of that order, especially given a 110t zepplin with todays crewing and seating arrangements will up the pax count to well over 100 heads! 🌍

[@puebespuebes8589]

7 tonne of fuel for a transatlantic flight is nothing !! Imagine how capable modern zeppelin would be

[@cynthiacupler8005]

Why can't they make an Airship, that can have people go to one place to another?

[@Masada1911]

They could probably. But I don’t believe that it would be economically viable.

[@jaushg7219]

Only 20 people plus crew. Must have been pretty expensive then and it would be even more expensive now. Just like the jetliners of the 70's. Only a select few would be able to afford the trip.

[@claudedaco3339]

​@@jaushg7219 Je pense qu’avec l’amélioration des matériaux plus de légèreté et plus solide (fibre de carbone et autres)on pourrait embarquer 150 passager. Depuis 1930 on fait tant de progrès dans tous les domaines.

[@grum7140]

I think it is a combination of their size (they need absolutely huge hangars), cost, speed, wind effecting them more than planes, and unfortunately bad publicity from the few airship disasters. It's a real shame, because I consider airships to be one of the coolest inventions out here.

[@yuki-xh9kt]

Zeppelin to rio de Janeiro