Flying Down To Rio - No. 2 (1932)

Рет қаралды 133,549

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 79

@MaxFPSGamer 2 жыл бұрын

Crazy to think my great grandma was 13 when this came out! She died last year at the age of 100. To me something like this is ancient history but to know someone that was alive in this era makes it seem a little closer.

@trashcanman6649 Жыл бұрын

Yeah it is fascinating how quickly the entire world changes. Sadly there is no one left alive that can talk about being a passenger on an airship. I have a similar feeling when I talk to my 86 year old grandpa and when he talks about how he left Königsberg as a kid in late 1944 when the red army was closing in on the city.

@zachhaywood1564 Жыл бұрын

Yeah, my grandpa was born in 1932 and I can never get enough of him recounting all the historical things that have happened in his life.

@edwhitson9873 8 ай бұрын

Yet another year gone by. Jesus is coming shortly. We must forgive others , and repent of our own selfish sin

@tonyyu2243 7 ай бұрын

@@edwhitson9873Jesus is a figment of someone's imagination

@murphyjulian7393 7 ай бұрын

@@tonyyu2243esp baby jesus 😅

@newbeginnings8566 Жыл бұрын

Oh how I wish I could have flown one of these trips.. I love the magnificent idea...

@mcpartridgeboy 11 ай бұрын

IKR, a flying hotel, literally oe of my childhood fatasies !

@worldnotworld 7 ай бұрын

We'll make it happen again.

@seanbouker 2 жыл бұрын

This must have been amazing

@divisioneight 9 жыл бұрын

Amazing - thank you!

@joaobatistadeoliveiraolive5316 2 жыл бұрын

Very good. Brazil

@leosaura1993 Жыл бұрын

It would be great it this form of travel would have a come back.

@s.a.d1086 8 ай бұрын

It's too risky

@thepeach4638 7 ай бұрын

@@s.a.d1086 how? airplanes are just as risky considering flights crash all the time, not to mention they also disappear in thin air like MH370

@thatsmarco7413 6 ай бұрын

we can no longer enjoy the slowness, poetry, adventure and interaction with others on a journey. People just run and run..

@spooqus6541 5 ай бұрын

@@thepeach4638 no they are not

@thepeach4638 5 ай бұрын

@spooqus6541 yes they definitely are. Did you hear Boeing using dishsoap as lubricant to save money? Boeing planes breaking apart in the sky?? The murder of John Barnett?

@ZemplinTemplar Жыл бұрын

I love the fact that "zep" was part of period slang/jargon already 90 years ago. :-) The Graf Zeppelin was the best rigid airship in history. Everything that came afterward paled in comparison, and never surpassed it, in terms of actual successes, longevity and performance. It's rather fitting that the Graf Zeppelin was the last big success, the last hurrah of interwar Germany, before it slid down into totalitarianism and complete ruin. Whether one likes it or not, there's a fitting bit of symbolism in it. And at least the Graf Zeppelin was built to be a civilian airliner, rather than a bragging propaganda symbol.

@skymaster4121 4 ай бұрын

Not correct. In almost every parameter, the Hindenburg was better

@calvinnickel9995 4 ай бұрын

@skymaster4121 You’re not correct. He wasn’t talking about the technical aspects. He was talking about being the product of a peaceful inter-war Germany. The only reason the Hindenburg was built was for propaganda purposes by the Nazis. Their aggressive stance also prevented it from being filled with helium.. which lead directly to its demise. The Graf Zeppelin was the safest zeppelin ever built and travelled to the ends of the world.. outstripping the Hindenburg in every respect except size, capacity and amenities. That says a lot more than just specifications.

@OfficialHlostoops 14 күн бұрын

⁠@@calvinnickel9995It’s highly inaccurate to suggest that the Hindenburg was only built for propaganda purposes by the NSDAP. Manufacture of components began a full two years before they took power, and the construction of the ship in earnest was underway for a year before the chancellery was in their hands. What *is* true is that infighting within the upper echelons of the party led to funding to finish the ship being secured, albeit at the almost-literal Faustian bargain of the Luftschiffbau-Zeppelin giving up operational control of the ship’s to the Deutsche Zeppelin-Reederei, which of course functioned as an arm of the national government.

@thatsmarco7413 6 ай бұрын

we can no longer enjoy the slowness, poetry, adventure and interaction with others on a journey. my grandfather was an officer on the Ocean liners, he never wanted to be on land. it was like living a timeless dream..

@extraterrestrialfascisti7625 Жыл бұрын

The most amazing way to travel

@Charkel 2 жыл бұрын

Sad the gas is dangerous AF it was a nice way to travel.

@jimjones1130 Жыл бұрын

Not to mention wind lol

@Capochin950 3 ай бұрын

Excellent.

@montoneas9618 10 ай бұрын

its crazy how we cant do this today

@jimjones1130 Жыл бұрын

Ive jumped from 12500 feet but i would not have the balls to spend all that time up there

@mcpartridgeboy 11 ай бұрын

not overly safe, but the tech was good, and planes werent any safer at the time

@calvinnickel9995 4 ай бұрын

Why throw yourself out of a perfectly good airplane? Most jump planes are far from perfectly good.

@Ninatic 3 ай бұрын

Funny to think how too windy of a weather made it impossible to take flight, but it's kinda the same with planes these days, just not as tricky. I'm way too much of a chicken to ever travel by a zeppelin, even if they came back but wow, so impressive.

@dieseldragon6756 6 ай бұрын

In this age of rapidly dwindling natural resources, -there's a part of me that -*-really-*- wishes this gentleman had given us some details as to the Zepplins fuel consumption...- *_Edit:_*_ He does - See „Flying down to Rio - No. 1“_ 😇 I mean: At 80-100mph (128-160km/h) and with modern electric technology, something like this would be _perfect_ for internal flights around the UK and other smaller countries where aircraft really don't add-up! 👍

@beastboy_1263 Жыл бұрын

I wish those zeppelin were popular in actuality ❤...

@jaymothman Ай бұрын

did they keep flying at night time?

@_RandomPea 4 ай бұрын

Ermmmmm does anyone know, what would happen in bad weather ? Did it suffer from excessive winds or was it too high and slow for turbulence that factor ?

@mcpartridgeboy 11 ай бұрын

Why did the world abadon such a great way to travel ? we didt stop aeroplaes when they crashed ad killed hudeds of people, the tech back then was roughly as safe as flying we just eeded more time ad more scien tists on the case ad it likely would have been perfectly safe now

@TheAngeyMovieCritic 6 ай бұрын

It was ran by free energy and the oil family Rockefeller destroyed them

@_RandomPea 4 ай бұрын

But considerably slower and people supposedly wants to get to places quickly.

@mcpartridgeboy 4 ай бұрын

@@_RandomPea Well they dont, its quicker than a cruise ship by a lot !

@_RandomPea 4 ай бұрын

@@mcpartridgeboy yeh but they cram them onboard in their 1000s with cabarets, casinos, cinemas and restaurants. The economic viability is just not there, mind you, if Bezos can charge money to give folks 1 min in space then you gotta wonder what people would pay to experience this eh. Meh... Things like this always interesting, the akranoplan was another that was supposed to revolutionise passenger transport but again development just stopped.

@CrimpKeeper 2 ай бұрын

This is what they took from us.

@Brubarov Жыл бұрын

I wonder what they could hear onboard

@yasminbarry7941 Жыл бұрын

Did they use hydrogen instead of helium because of the embargo on helium? And if so, could this mode of transportation have survived if helium had been available non-stop?

@38vocan Жыл бұрын

Yes, the Graf Zeppelin did use hydrogen for the reason you described. If Helium was as cheap as Hydrogen, I think we might see more zeppelins today for tourism, but they are not a practical way to move around with the competition of cars, high speed train and planes

@stuglenn1112 Жыл бұрын

You lose a lot of buoyancy using helium as opposed to hydrogen. Yes helium is lighter than air but it is still twice as heavy as hydrogen. So the lifting capacity of a airship using helium is a lot less than one that uses hydrogen.

@markhandley Жыл бұрын

@@stuglenn1112 The difference in lift is only about 8%. Yes, Helium is twice as dense as Hydrogen, but both are an awful lot less dense that air, and it's the buoyancy that actually matters.

@stuglenn1112 Жыл бұрын

@@markhandley About a year ago I watch a video that ran the numbers. The hydrogen airships of 100 years ago if filled with Helium would not be able to get off the ground. They would have to be a lot larger. Even the hydrogen ones for there size don't provide a lot of lift. If you look a YT videos that contemplate uses of modern helium airships or blimps they all have rotatable motors that provide additional lift like helicopters also they're huge. The reason 100 years ago airships were tried is because they got you across an ocean a lot faster than a ship.

@markhandley Жыл бұрын

@@stuglenn1112 The USS Akron and USS Macron were from the same era as Graf Zeppilin, roughly the same size, and used helium.