SNCASO SO.8000 Narval; Terrible Beauty

Buy my book: amzn.to/3preYyO
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatters.online/
If you like this content please consider buying me a coffee or else supporting me at Patreon:
ko-fi.com/ednashmilitarymatters
/ ednash
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.

[@richardwarfield7386]

"The Germans were not in a position to complain at the time" classic !

[@CaptainLumpyDog]

@@Invading-Specious'You may have beaten us at our national game, but we beat you at your national game. Twice.'

[@markh.6687]

Yes, quite a turn of phrase there.

[@garynew9637]

Haha

[@minhthunguyendang9900]

Neither were the nazi-occupied Nations when the Germanazis pillaged their equipment.

[@bpora01]

"Peed all over their collective barbecue" 😂 Man knows how to turn a phrase.

[@MrKirby2367]

And let’s not forget the Russians jacking off into the potato salad.

[@wills2140]

I swear it is a somewhat British "trait". Naval historiographer Drachinifel (his channel name and pseudonym) has similar phrasing - "when hôtels go to war" about the built up designs of French pre-Dreadnought battleships.

[@MrHws5mp]

In all fairness, other naval air arms were a bit hesitant about jets in 1945 too. The British introduced the piston-engined Sea Fury and Firebrand and the turboprop Wyvern after WWII, and the US the piston-engined Bearcat and Skyraider and mixed piston+jet Ryan Fireball. The problem in France (and in the UK) was that the post-war economic crash radically slowed down research and development while it steamed ahead in the US.

[@Farweasel]

Money was a huge problem. But on the technical front, early jets had woeful acceleration from low speeds Making Carrier landings a near vital 'Right first time every time' requirement If the approach went wrong it was relatively easy to end up swimming due to lack of airspeed

[@Ushio01]

The UK built plenty of jets in the late 1940's the problem was that a defence white paper (shocker) said that everyone would slow development after WW2 so the UK took a 10 year holiday during Atlee and the US and USSR did not so when the UK realised they weren't after about 2 years into Atlee's term as PM the UK went from a leader to a bit behind the US and then were stuck playing catch-up till the UK gave up jet development in the late 1950's. The Lightning being a year after the F-106 showed the UK has almost caught up but the F-4 Phantom just blew everything else at the time out of the water with it's range, speed and weapon capacity.

[@Manco65]

I bet to differ with regards to the Skyraider since it was well into development and prototype testing in the Spring of 1945.

[@garyhooper1820]

Steamed along strong in Soviet Russia too, Mig 15 ring any bells ?

[@allangibson8494]

The French had real problems with jet engines. They didn’t have reliable working design until the 1950’s.

[@KF99]

I surprised they hadn’t even tried to swap a jet engine here, basically doing the same trick as Saab J-21R.

[@casinodelonge]

looks an obvious possibility, doesnt it?

[@derrickstorm6976]

The Saab was basically a failure too, and the French had no money for such experimentation

[@gregdrew874]

It also flew like a bag of water so I would say propulsion was the least of it's worries. 🏴

[@KF99]

@@derrickstorm6976 at least Saab had entered service and was produced in some numbers, so it wasn’t a complete failure. In fact almost all such designs of that transitional period were doomed to fail or become obsolete almost instantly.

[@Noodles-sd9hb]

It is planned but not implemented for testing. Project Designation SO.8010 - to be powered with the Rolls Royce nene engine Source is the book 'Les Avions de Combat Francais'

[@FirstDagger]

Basically a prop powered Vampire.

[@yes_head]

Frog 1: Monsieur, our new design is ready for review. A twin boom fighter with the pusher engine behind the pilot. Frog 2: The British have just unveiled their new fighter. A twin boom fighter with a jet engine behind the pilot. Frog 1: Ah, but ours uses a piston engine. Which makes it better! Frog 2: I see. So the engine must be French. Frog 1: ... Glass of wine?

[@FirstDagger]

@@yes_head I will take this as canon.

[@allandavis8201]

My thoughts went in that direction as well, but the big difference was that the Vampire actually entered service.

[@iroscoe]

@ArminHamner Surely the Venom was heavily based on the Vampire which was being rolled out when the Second Great unpleasentness was still (just about) ongoing , and was a succesful aircraft in it's own right .

[@iroscoe]

@ArminHamner How so ? .

[@bigblue6917]

I too wondered about the propeller being at the rear when it came to landing. I also wondered about the arrester hook as there did not seem to be a good place to put it.

[@shauny2285]

What about a bailout and striking the prop?

[@TheGrant65]

@Ed, as usual, a very interesting ep. The Narval also = the last pusher fighter prototype (out of several designed in the 1940s). As an aside - I believe the F8F Bearcat used by _Aéronavale_ (AN) outnumbered both the Hellcats and the Corsairs. Sources I have at hand say that 180-200 Bearcats were supplied to France from US Navy stocks, although these were used exclusively over Indochina until 1954 (when the survivors were handed over to South Vietnam). The _Armée de l'Air_ also operated the Bearcat over Indochina, although I suspect that AdlA and AN drew from a common pool of Bearcats. While the Corsair served longer with AN, only 160-165 in total were acquired by France.

[@EdNashsMilitaryMatters]

Ah, thanks for that. I knew the french used f8f in indochina, but thought it was just the air force.

[@Noodles-sd9hb]

Maybe the instability, weight and power output issues might be solved by using a turboprop; a shame since that plane looks beautiful.

[@johnstirling6597]

Stick in a Whittle jet and hey presto you have a Vampire!.............(sort of).

[@FirstDagger]

Turboprops had their own issues at the time, see Westland Wyvern.

[@bigblue6917]

@@FirstDagger Still early technology

[@FirstDagger]

@@bigblue6917 Literally my point, putting a turboprop on the Narval wouldn't have fixed anything. Jets provided a larger advantage at the time.

[@allandavis8201]

I agree that this aircraft had a certain beauty to it, a pity it didn’t work. One minor criticism about your comment, and not just aimed at you, when I went through my training as an Aircraft Mechanic myself, and the whole course, were told that we were never to refer to any aircraft as being a “plane” it was an “Aeroplane” or “Aircraft” and I don’t think 💭 I have ever called an aircraft or aeroplane anything else, and as, I presume, you are an aviation enthusiast I would ask you, and anyone else, to only refer to aeroplanes as aeroplanes or aircraft. I believe that it was one of Douglas Bader flying instructors who told him that it was never going to be called a “plane” and he never forgot that and, if memory serves, in Douglas Bader biography (Reach for the Sky) by Paul Brickhill, he would tell the same to all of his new pilots when they joined his squadron(s) during his time in the Battle of Britain (before he was shot down and captured by the Nazis).

[@petesheppard1709]

Where was the arrestor hook supposed to go? It's interesting that just about everyone tried the 'pod/boom' layout, with DeHavilland doing the best job.

[@American_Jeeper]

The SO.8000 looks like Sud Ouest ripped off De Havilland's basic design of the Vampire/Sea Venom. As for their desire to reestablish themselves as a relevant colonial fighting force, Võ Nguyên Giáp flushed those hopes and dreams right down the loo at Điện Biên Phủ. I met him in 1998 at a dinner in Hà Nội, when I was a member of the Joint Task Force-Full Accounting mission. Being a Vietnamese linguist, my job was to translate for the American dignitaries, although I didn't need to, as Ambassador Pete Peterson's Vietnamese was impeccable, thanks to his forcible stay at the Hilton. We were almost finished with our first course, ironically Vichyssoise, when he leaned over to me and said, with a Cheshire Cat smile in flawless English, "If your President Nixon had bombed Hà Nội for one more day, we would have surrendered." With soup spoon in hand, I paused, look at him and said, "Eh bien, Général, il aurait dû." (my mother is French; I'm fluent) and finished that last spoonful. The smile disappeared and he didn't speak to me again for the rest of the evening. Later that evening, one of our Majors got drunk, peed on Hồ Chí Minh's mausoleum, was immediately PNG'd and shipped back to Hawaii, before there was an international incident...a story for another day.

[@spyridon3089]

What do you smoke? It seems to be good stuff

[@American_Jeeper]

@@spyridon3089 You've made a worthy contribution to the Internet's Department of Stupid, Ignorant or Ill-informed comments, bravo!

[@spyridon3089]

@@American_Jeeper nevermind, Tell me what you smoke, it must be good stuff! Is it liar's whiff?

[@starliner2498]

@@spyridon3089 r/nothingeverhappens

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated excellent insights as always from you.

[@The_ZeroLine]

Another fantastic video. Hope you continue providing us updates on the smaller conflicts. Your Myanmar reports have been great as well as greatly appreciated.

[@jamesbugbee9026]

Never knew of this beauty; pity she didn't work. Building licensed Venoms might have helped a bit, but still having another inique item not work out is sad: The French prototype sandbox was otherwise so fruitful. Dear Ed, your presented material is ever satisfying on so many different levels, & i deeply hope any threats from youtube pan out to nought. God bless you ❤

[@johnforsyth7987]

Thank you for another informative video. That reminds people to not judge anything by its appearance alone.

[@Farweasel]

Ed touches on the risk of prop strikes landing on carriers I was alredy wondering how they hoped to reconcile that risk with the need for an arrestor hook?

[@frednakor6617]

I too was quick to wonder, where does the hook go!?

[@robertdragoff6909]

I was wondering how the pilot got out in case of trouble. Did they eject up or down? Silly me, I had no idea those geniuses didn’t have an ejection seat in the first place! Talk about a brilliant design

[@basilmcdonnell9807]

​@@robertdragoff6909Must have been a very popular assignment for the test pilots.

[@McRocket]

You've done it again, ED. I had never heard of this before now. Thank you. ☮

[@UncleJoeLITE]

Thanks Ed, great plane to check out.

[@timgosling6189]

about the carrier landing issue, if you draw a line from the mainwheels to the tail skids there's a fair bit of clearance from the prop arc. Where you'd put the hook looks interesting though.

[@ethanmckinney203]

The SE.400, which was about to be a prototype in 1940, had a tailwheel in the bottom of each vertical stabilizer. (Regular twin tail like a B-24, not a twin boom.) So there was precedent for those tail bumpers, more or less.

[@ralphhathaway-coley5460]

A lot of different designers and countries dabbled with that twin boom pusher configuration not many were successful, though the Saab 21 prop version and the upgraded Saab 21R jet versions are notable exceptions.

[@MM22966]

After watching various Nash, Drach, and Rex videos, plus a fair amount of reading, I have come to the conclusion that the French military R&D motto starts with "I'm not going to do what everybody thinks I'm going to do..."

[@wills2140]

Ahh, lovely Drachinifel, naval historiographer - "When hotels go to war" is still a favorite. The old saw is "no one copies the French, and zee French copy no one".

[@anthonydelagarde3990]

Thank you for the video. I learned a great deal today from your information. Cheers!!!

[@clydedopheide1033]

Always enjoy your content.

[@PaulieLDP]

Always love your videos.

[@robertbice529]

Well done Ed, as usual, another obscure but VERY interesting aircraft. The "Steptoe's Dad" of the Vampire.

[@aerialcat1]

As the saying goes: “the French copy no one… and no one copies the French”.

[@MrBlackACT]

You can replace the word “copy”with “understand” and your statement will still ring true

[@leno4920]

Great quality & info .... 100k subs v close now & will be well deserved. 👍👍👍👍👍

[@RemusKingOfRome]

Every nation has their "Lets design a futuristic plane ..to astound everyone ! .. YEH ! " moment. Later " ..lets quietly bury this heap of .. it never happened. .. yeh." :D

[@bigblue6917]

This is true. And they should be kept away from drawing boards at all costs.

[@rogerkay8603]

Never heard of it, great work Ed, sure is a looker!

[@demos113]

That's quite a surprise... good vid. 🙂

[@babboon5764]

I wonder if this error was the result of excessive Narval gazing?

[@stevetournay6103]

Badump bump crashhhhh...

[@garynew9637]

Haha

[@kiwisteve6598]

Looks rather like a de Havilland Venom that overindulged at the mess and woke up to discover his prankster mates had retro-fitted him a propeller engine.

[@johndavey72]

To sum up Ed . The Narvel was no marvel !!! Thanks Ed.

[@johnreep5798]

I love the picture with the two officers clog dancing.

[@wideyxyz2271]

Le Bagofshite. Great video as always, Ed.

[@alaingadbois2276]

Looks a lot like some late war German paper projects. Great video!

[@MilitantOldLady]

Idk I have a soft spot for weird planes like this.

[@steveshoemaker6347]

Thanks Ed.... Old Shoe🇺🇸

[@Ob1sdarkside]

Being French, they used 2 baguettes for the twin boom arrangement. The engine name was shortened to arse during the test phase

[@TomPrickVixen]

Funny considering that at the end the sea-venom looks very similar...

[@PJRye]

Looks like they had a twin boom jet fighter in mind, but put a piston engine in by request ... then got their way with license manufacture of the Sea Venom.

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day, Well, on the one hand an Ejection Seat is heavy - and this thing had trouble rising off the Ground as it was, without (sans) that extra weight in the Cockpit...; so it apparently lacked the capacity to loft any such a Bang-Seat, regardless of it's desirability in the application. On the other hand, the Contra-rotating Meat-Grinder behind the Cockpit might be perhaps dealt with, by way of a detatchable Airscrew/Gearbox setup as employed on the Dornier Do-335 (Explosive Bolts, electrically activated to blow away the rear Propeller - before egressing in an emergency) ; but in the Gripping-Hand..., that Horizontal Stabilisor atop the two low-set Tailfins Appears to be Perfectly Configured to bisect anybody who ever makes it past the Propeller's two rows of viciously Contra-Rotating Blades. "Contrived by a Madman, who was (very) narrowly foiled...; in their attempt to construct an actual Infernal Machine...!" Seems to sum up the Project, as a whole. And, not only but also...; my best guess is that if ever the Motor failed while aloft, before the Pilot managed to stop and feather the Airscrews - then like the Turbo-Contraprop powered Westland Wyvern - it would have extreme difficulty in achieving a 1 : 1 Glide Angle, without stalling..., due to ALL the Aerodynamic Drag of those Windmilling Blades.... Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@yes_head]

Thanks, Ed. Never heard of this one before. I think -- along with the other types you mention at the end -- the French also operated F8F Bearcats for some time.

[@hamsterbox4732]

Super, carry on!

[@rich7787]

Aw, the Triton looks adorable! Oui oui!

[@Chongo_657]

I thought it reminded of something then the Sea-venom pops up at the end!

[@brucewelty7684]

It took a while for the Frogs to relearn how to fly.

[@sergarlantyrell7847]

Not really surprised that a 1st attempt at a swept wing, especially a crescent wing aircraft had stability issues. I wonder how well they understood how the centre of pressure moves around with changing speed.

[@cabanford]

Looks great. Very stabs look like a French leftover from a WWI biplane though...

[@moodogco]

Only problem with what was said at the beginning about being beholden to the US or Soviets in military jets is that for the first 10yrs post war it was the British that sold the most military jets & jet engines plus hardware not either them as we know the mig15 had a British jet engine design & a lot was sold to the US.

[@firstcynic92]

Where would the arrestor hook have gone? On the nose wheel?

[@bigblue6917]

That had me wondering as well. The whole thing has a look of someone with little understanding of naval aircraft design.

[@adrien5834]

Horizontal stab? One on each tail boom? Although that could be problematic if only one of them catches the wire...

[@aussie807]

The French were very agricultural in their designs, at least they finally got there with the Rafale which is beautiful

[@garynew9637]

Mirage was a winner as well.

[@RobSchofield]

@ 7:03 and where would they put the arrestor hook? Didn't think that through very carefully... However, lovely looking airframe. Surprised that they didn't retrofit a Rolls-Royce Nene, given the ogival shape of the mid-fuselage.

[@slotcarpalace]

Fetching is a wonderfully appropriate term for this "dog" of an aircraft.

[@bodan1196]

The pusher, twin boom configuration seem to have been somewhat "in the now" during the mid to late 1940. The Saab J21 also had issues with cooling the backseat engine, and a lack of speed. It did though have an ejector seat. It is one of the few, the only(?), piston engine designs, which later was converted to have a jet engine. Semi-successfully?

[@Manco65]

One issue with any carrier aircraft in thst era was the best carrier deck/carrier plane compatibly. Think about exhaust blast of a jet vs. propwash and deck crew safety.

[@DavidGreen-hp5yq]

I gather ast WWII, MOST Navies (US and UK) wanted, but were NOT rushing to jets, as they were not yet best for carriers, I thought. I think post Koria, it possibly did go full speed.

[@wkelly3053]

Pretty intricate flap system. Double slotted, they look a lot more like something from a modern airliner.

[@cedhome7945]

Wonder if a goblin or nene would have been a better choice of power plant

[@joeperson4792]

I remember when I could draw planes like this for endless hours wondering if they could really fly.

[@HootOwl513]

I wanna see a simulation between this and a Curtiss Assender and the Kyushu J7W...

[@aaronlopez492]

It's a great looking plane. How does it handle? 🤔 Thanks Ed.

[@alterego2421]

probably a boat 😂

[@lord_kinbote3920]

Looks like something Messier 82 would design in Flyout.

[@microy]

Just make it VTOL as well. "Then we don't need no stinking arrester hook"!.....

[@paintnamer6403]

To my eyes it classifies as a strange plane like the Chance Vought F7U Cutlass.

[@backwashjoe7864]

Since the prototypes initially couldn't get off the ground, did they consider adapting them to run their high speed rail?

[@JeffBilkins]

Contra-rotating push -propeller and twin tail boom sound very sexy on paper.

[@bowser515]

And definitely not something you want to bail out in front of.

[@joewoodard40]

Please cover the Textron Scorpion

[@michaelwright2986]

When it started, choosing a piston engine for a carrier based aircraft wasn't dumb. The early jets were very slow to spool up, so a piston engine driving a propellor gave much better control on landing. And the French did end up with piston engined aircraft--Hellcat and Corsair. I also wonder, looking at this thing, whether there was any thought that it might be (relatively) easy to convert to a jet engine: it was done with the Saab 21 and 21R, an aircraft of generally similar layout. So it might not have been a dumb idea--just badly executed.

[@nidgem7171]

The biggest concern of Vampire Pilots (if I correctly recall the words of author Frederick Forsyth who once was one) was that if they had to bail out (no ejection seat) the tailplane could slice them in two. So the French, being French ........ Well, they just had to go one better?

[@oboyles]

Very like the Mitsubishi J4M

[@stevetournay6103]

New one on me. Bit reminiscent of the American XP-54.

[@ifga16]

It might be an interesting idea to pursue regarding French government ministries and Monty Python skits.

[@davefellhoelter1343]

what about the tail hook?

[@JTA1961]

Don't change my already low opinion of them frogs but it did actually look pretty cool

[@dallesamllhals9161]

6:45 SO...an early blender/liquidizer?

[@russkinter3000]

No Grumman Bearcats for aircraft carriers?

[@666toysoldier]

Was there ever a pusher engine design that DIDN'T have cooling issues?

[@AsbestosMuffins]

looks like a vampire but without the big jet

[@Idahoguy10157]

Jet engines were difficult to procure before the 1950’s

[@allandavis8201]

Putting aside the actual topic of this video it was, in my opinion, a good thing that we colonial powers did loose almost all of the territories we had claimed, the economic losses were very very bad news for us but that was a consequence that we had to accept, we had just fought WWII with one of the main objectives being the freedom of the territories that had been seized by the Axis forces, it would have been a hugely hypocritical move to try and restore the British 🇬🇧 Empire, and it would have been virtually impossible to help the war torn territories rebuild their countries, so, for me, loosing the Empire was a logical and reasonable step forward. Ok, with that all said………..on with the show. Another excellent find Ed, never heard of this aircraft (using the term loosely) before, it struck me that the concept was unique and interesting but still an utter disaster for the French aviation industry, but I am glad that they were able to pursue the design and manufacturing of aircraft “in-house” as they have produced some great aircraft, civil and military, that have been so beautiful and would/are very effective. Thanks for sharing your research and insight into this two of a kind ugly duckling, really interesting and informative, thanks again Ed.😀👍🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇺🇦

[@gregdrew874]

Well, at least it never killed a test pilot.

[@Thesomersetgimp]

French jets rock. M2000 is still a cracking yoke & the Rafale is the sexiest jet ever built.

[@mickvonbornemann3824]

Don’t see any arrestor hook anywhere……?

[@stephenkneller6435]

It may just be me, but it appears, at least at certain angles, the nose appears to be heavily inspired by the He 162.

[@steelscooter]

Happy Shopper Vampire 😅

[@6thmichcav262]

1:25 and 4:20, is the Narval so bad that the crewman is kicking rocks at it?

[@flymacseamus3474]

You can tell it's french almost straight away because it's pretty

[@SPak-rt2gb]

Kinda looks like a XP-54 Swoose Goose

[@goddepersonno3782]

you can see some atrocious design decisions with the crescent swept-back wings it's a high speed, high performance wing that does not fit with the optimal performance speeds of a prop aircraft (of any kind) and of course with any pusher design you have Centre of Mass (CM) balancing issues, the moment arm of the elevator would also be much smaller than usual because of how close the Aerodynamic Centre (AC) and CM are to it, meaning you're guaranteed to get miserable pitching force unless you increase the elevator size I'd also imagine you get all the worst tendencies of a swept-back wing too - sidewash causing the air pressure to be dumped out onto the wingtips and lost, causing a reduction in lift at the desired operating speeds, etc etc just some really sketchy design choices even though it looks so good

[@tomlobos2871]

somehow i have a heart for pusher planes or canards. this one could be converted to a jet quite easy by design. lets give this a further thought. so if it was intended for multi role it could potentially be thought in different versions to ease production, a bit like F-35 A, B and C versions offer their own set of skills each. when it comes to equipment, i tend to ask what enemy it is intended to fight against. seen in a post world war time frame, it was the soviets. staling demanded for taking germany, marking the rhine as border. already close to france. many of the decisions being taken in the west were influenced by the experience of the german eastern front. or at production of aircraft under problematic conditions. many "what if's" were discussed back then. now back to the flying stock, this smell like mass producing into an urgent gap. six cannons pack quite a punch against ships, logistics, bombers. taking all that into account somehow explains it though just an uneducated guess.

[@SanderAnderon]

would have fit beautifully in a Miyazaki film

[@JZsBFF]

5:20 I'm baffled at the idea that at that time any aircraft manufacturer would still be able to build a prototype that was unable to take off. What happened?

[@TollHammer]

Sydney Sweeny of prop planes...just look at those booms!

[@bored383]

makes me think of something from a Japanese Anime - like 'Wings of Honneamise'

[@ulfpe]

Looks a bit like the Swedish J21

[@TazziedoesWT]

Imagine if like the A21 jets Sweden made, they put a jet engine in the back of this thing!

[@russchadwell]

Looks a bit like a split boom version of an A10 Warthog.

[@K1W1fly]

Hang on.. a low-slung pusher prop on a carrier-based fighter? if the arrester wires sprung up off a missed catch, where are they going to go? someone hasnt thought....

[@dwharbin]

That old addage about if "It looks right it is right" just never seem to apply to pusher prop planes beyond WW1. Did anyone ever build any that got beyond the prototype stage?

[@PRH123]

b36

[@dwharbin]

@@PRH123 Well, some would argue that plane didn't look right:)

[@PRH123]

@@dwharbin seems it didn’t fly right either, fuel leaks, breakdowns, apparently they were glad to get rid of it…

[@Jemasonj]

It looks more like an FAC plane than a naval one