Hi all - as some viewers are pointing out, it's a mistake to describe a 133 dB to 96 dB reduction as 15%. It's much more than that, as decibels are a logarithmic unit. Sorry for letting that error slip in and any confusion (note that 96dB is still incredibly loud).
@qadarinimo2585 жыл бұрын
Can you make a video about the international space station and the Mir space station
@ChrisPrefect5 жыл бұрын
17db reduction is almost 8 times less noise! So a reduction of about 85%.
@CrazyHorse1515 жыл бұрын
Well it reduced the noise level by 15%. The whole reason we use dB is to use perceptually linear scales. (EDIT: sound pressure level in dB is not perceptually linear. Sone is. F*ed that up) What you wanted to express is that the -perceived- noise level was reduced by 15% and that is in fact the case. Converting to linear levels, we get a far greater reduction but who cares when we don't perceive the difference as such?
@Henchman19775 жыл бұрын
I was just going to point that out.....
@sukhoifan5 жыл бұрын
*113dB, not 133 while i am being nitpicky once again. :P Still wish you had that awesome Energia-Buran thumbnail picture in high res. :( (asked you a while back about it on twitter, but largest available one was still quite small)
@randomroughneck10304 жыл бұрын
Why does the British government need to destroy all useful engineering documents of cancelled projects damnit!
@ijpg-fd7qn4 жыл бұрын
That's the one part I really don't get. There wouldn't be any hassle in just releasing the docs to the public, and they could have even sold them to some other company in the US or something but they decided to just toss them?
@HakunaMatata884 жыл бұрын
More likely somebody have hidden agenda
@62peppe624 жыл бұрын
More or less the same story of the Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow fighter jet.
@SlavicUnionGaming4 жыл бұрын
Random Roughneck Russias eastern sides could use this, Runways are not so common there
@danielrodriguez2484 жыл бұрын
The US also
@PongoXBongo5 жыл бұрын
It should be illegal to destroy research. Maybe shoehorn it into protections on financial records?
@owls65144 жыл бұрын
Agreed
@antdx3164 жыл бұрын
People have destroyed 3D development because they make no money off ads when people feel disoriented and focus on the 3D more than the ads that make them money.
@ericvalverderosado20464 жыл бұрын
Absolutely! Engineers can get what they need from them and make something better!
@karlosbricks24134 жыл бұрын
Fear of this rather useful technology falling into Soviet hands, I'd imagine it could make a good troop transport/lander if further developed (where noise no longer matters). So destroying something may be shortsighted given the work and lack of any ROI you'll get, given the risk of the reds though, they must have just thought this way was better.
@PongoXBongo4 жыл бұрын
@@karlosbricks2413/videos Destroy prototypes and manufacturing tooling sure, but keep the paperwork and data squirreled away somewhere safe.
@TallulahSoie3 жыл бұрын
This seems like a technology that should be revisited.
@Rogerv10323 жыл бұрын
That’s true. But when governments and such are stable.
@gompye18343 жыл бұрын
Totally. If this was developed in the 1960s then think about how better it could be today
@Spinattitude3 жыл бұрын
It will soon be superceded by electric drones.
@gompye18343 жыл бұрын
@@Spinattitude what kinds of drones
@TobiasHinz19923 жыл бұрын
Would be perfect for military use
@andrewhawkings51983 жыл бұрын
It almost physically hurts to see this beautiful thing to to waste. Couldn't they just resurrect the project and use today's advancements and technologies to fix the 60 year old issues?
@Coillcara3 жыл бұрын
No. In general, old technologies need to be re-engineered. I would imagine the safety standards would be different, as well as manufacturing methods. Analogy: you want to make an arrow, and have the best stone age arrow as an example; since you have no skill in cleaving obsidian, your stone arrow head will never be as good, but you can make a better steel head and make it faster with the available tools.
@Outlier9993 жыл бұрын
@@Coillcara Agreed, but the basic design is still viable and the concept is a good 👍 one. This would be a valuable aircraft for short flights. Your analogy with arrows is a good one, because the improvements and changes needed were not insurmountable.
@Garlan43 жыл бұрын
@@Coillcara as much as i apreciate the look of the original machine, the point of the argument is to look back to this "concept" and translate it on modern design. Today we have new materials and solution to make this idea to work. Of course it will not have the same form. But the concept is still interesting
@Ryvaken3 жыл бұрын
Keep in mind, this thing was being compared against helicopters, not fixed wing aircraft. There's no reason to suppose this design would be relevant. And I'm looking at a machine with too many conspicuous points of failure to go trusting it with human lives.
@voidofspaceandtime46843 жыл бұрын
@@Coillcara How much different do you think the design would be, really? It's semantics to get into an argument about the incredible specificities between manufacturing of the 60s and today. Most of the groundwork is still the same.
@jascrandom98555 жыл бұрын
"...and it all went to s$%t" That took me completely off guard.
@mojo50935 жыл бұрын
lmao, yeah that was classic :D
@JozMkII5 жыл бұрын
Seemed really out of place; He could have said ‘it went down the toilet’ to keep it PG-rated, without the need to hastily censor a word that we’re all going to recognize anyway.
@maniacram5 жыл бұрын
JozMk. II ok boomer
@livingcorpse56645 жыл бұрын
@Prometheus I disagree. I think adults today are rude and kids are polite. Oh wait you meant swearing. Eh, it's whatever.
@textech40565 жыл бұрын
I love it when someone tells it like it is...or was..:)
@tovsteh5 жыл бұрын
5:08 Gotta love the test pilot gear back in the day: Suit and hat.
@bigstupidgrin5 жыл бұрын
And probably a pre-flight drink or two
@troyt65325 жыл бұрын
Don’t forget about the spinning blades 2 ft from his head
@truthseeker84835 жыл бұрын
When men were men...not hair bun wearing pansies
@MarshallBananar5 жыл бұрын
What's even better is that that is Igor Sikorsky (if I'm not mistaken), the inventor of this specific helicopter and one of the most influential American pioneers of the technology The man invented it, learned how to pilot it, and tested it himself All the while wearing a suit and a fedora on every occasion What an absolute baller
@nqh43935 жыл бұрын
A real gentleman.
@MagicznaPanda5 жыл бұрын
6:54 Small correction - since sound is on a logarithmic scale, the reduction in noise wasn't by 15%, *but rather by 86%*
@MagicznaPanda4 жыл бұрын
@DT Undercover The loudness of a helicopter is about 85.5dB from 600 feet away - so if the rotodyne was to be no louder than a helicopter, it'd have to reduce its noise by 96% from the original (or 70% from the already revised version).
@MagicznaPanda4 жыл бұрын
@DT UndercoverYeah, something like 99.7%
@Friend_of_the_One-Eyed_Ladies4 жыл бұрын
@@MagicznaPanda SPL (sound pressure level; typically measured in dB) decreases with distance, like any other wave. Specifying a dB level without specifying the distance from the source is meaningless. Usually when they say "90 dB", they mean "90 dB @ 1 meter". Your 85.5 dB @ 600 ft would be hella loud @ 1 m.
@numalesoybea13484 жыл бұрын
How did you get the 86% exactly? It should be more like 98%
@CherrySmith4 жыл бұрын
even though the sound intensity has reduced by 86%, we’ll still perceive the loudness as 15% less
@jonathanhill48923 жыл бұрын
I remember, when I was a boy, the sound of the Rotodyne. There was nothing like it. When you saw it flying over you felt like you were seeing the future. And perhaps it could have been, but it was too much ahead of its time.
@saravanakumar-tw6yr3 жыл бұрын
Skkwkskskskwkwks yyou suck
@oadka3 жыл бұрын
Man you're a lucky person
@PinoyPickUps3 жыл бұрын
How old are you?
@jonathanhill48923 жыл бұрын
@@PinoyPickUps Being born in 1954, I am quite old enough to remember the late 50s and early 60s. Beyond that, don't be impertinent:)
@PinoyPickUps3 жыл бұрын
@@jonathanhill4892 Ow I see, thank you for sharing that. Im just happy to know that even at your age there are people that are still active in the KZbin community. I hope when I'll get old, I will still be sharp just like you.
@holthogan55625 жыл бұрын
I've never even heard of the Rotodyne. Man I love this channel.
@SYNERGYMIKE5 жыл бұрын
me 2
@spencerhardy86675 жыл бұрын
It's tragic that generations have been denied Airfix.
@Matmamtmamtmamtmamtm5 жыл бұрын
Probably because the rododyne never existed.
@holthogan55625 жыл бұрын
@@Matmamtmamtmamtmamtm That probably contributed to me not knowing of it.
@Jaxxal.5 жыл бұрын
Holt Hogan that’s because it’s the Rotodyne not the rododyne
@edwardhandley11325 жыл бұрын
I remember the Rotodyne flying over our house! The Rotodyne was based at a small airfield called White Waltham just outside Maidenhead and as a child we lived on the direct line between White Waltham and Farnborough which was the base of the British Aircraft Establishment. On several occasions we heard the distinct sound of the Rotodyne flying over and dashed outside to watch it go over. Yes, it was noisy, but so were most aircraft at that time, especially the big jets like the Boeing 707. The difference was the big jets landed at airports outside the city centres so did not fly low over the houses, except of course the ones on the flight path into the airports. People these days forget how noisy those old aircraft were! A few years ago I heard a racket and went outside to see what it was and was treated to the sight of a Dreamliner on its way to the Farnborough Airshow escorted by a Spitfire and a Hurricane. I could barely hear the Dreamliner - the racket was all being made by the Merlins. A beautiful racket though!
@kbryce145 жыл бұрын
edward Handley That’s a lot to read..
@Coreylahey10005 жыл бұрын
Thats an amazing read. Thanks!
@nancygreene58385 жыл бұрын
Wow, interesting! Thanks for sharing.
@Yawyna1245 жыл бұрын
@@kbryce14 Wha-- no that's not. It's two short paragraphs that are neatly and pleasantly structured.
@larushka15 жыл бұрын
Yup. Me too. Just posted. This is awesome.
@greatflyer_aviation3 жыл бұрын
TIP JETS? That is insane technology!
@dravskii3 жыл бұрын
E
@itsmaxiiii16053 жыл бұрын
But won’t be it to be too heavy for it and disturbing the lifting force?
@a.vanwijk22683 жыл бұрын
No, it's not. In the 1950's the Nederlandse Helikopter Industrie built a small helicopter that way. Not sure if if there's footage on YT, but has an entry in Wikipedia
@jackywhite8803 жыл бұрын
Assuming a system that works, tip thrusters are an excellent way to power helicopter rotors. There's no torque. Thats why the Rotodyne didn't need a tail rotor. The tiny Fairey Ultralight helicopter used a tip jet system back in the 50s. Its abandonment, once again, had more to do with politics than engineering.
@starwarsfan_12063 жыл бұрын
This joke?
@toinfinityandbeyond20823 жыл бұрын
I feel like out of all the failed projects this one is the only one im like damn thatd be cool as hell and i genuinly think it would work
@FlyLeah3 жыл бұрын
Don't forget Ekranoplans. Utilizing ground effect is far more efficient than any airplane. Best part is that it gets even more efficient and reliable the bigger the craft gets
@toinfinityandbeyond20823 жыл бұрын
@@FlyLeah as someone who currently works as an aircraft mechanic, the maintenance with that many engines and salt water that close to the ground makes those things a tactical nightmare, not only that but like the video says, controlling the ground effect makes them super difficult, maybe on a smaller scale they might work but as large military purposes I don't think it's feasible
@Mittens04073 жыл бұрын
@@toinfinityandbeyond2082 About the stability issues I've heard its the opposite. Supposedly, the larger the Ekranoplan is the higher and more stable it flew.
@NormAppleton3 жыл бұрын
The problem is the trans sonic barrier at the tips of all rotary wing aircraft. There is no way around it. This is why the only non jet powered high speed VTOL aircraft are things like the Osprey.
@salvagemonster36123 жыл бұрын
And that is what we need more Gen Z’ers giving us their opinion
@jensdevos64645 жыл бұрын
The models are so clean like this is even better than a model aircraft.
@lfox025 жыл бұрын
@@cap5856 It is. He makes all these 3D models and animations himself.
@DrWhom5 жыл бұрын
@@lfox02 Having them sit on a (cgi) tabletop is a stroke of genius. The models read as fantastic scale models, rather than attempts to render a real-life aircraft. It falls short of the latter, which is not a criticism as big movies have dozens of people working on these things and it still often goes wrong.
@n_tag94985 жыл бұрын
Me: you returned? Even after all this time? Mustard: of course, child. I never left. Me: *sheds a tear*
@buscentral9005 жыл бұрын
Aka. "I'm glad you're back"
@mro94665 жыл бұрын
Accurate description of my feelings
@lukewood92105 жыл бұрын
Nice
@BillKermanKSP5 жыл бұрын
he really never was gone, seems like the videos just get uploaded in a 2 month interval now
@rjmj77255 жыл бұрын
@@buscentral900 nice to meet u bic'ts !! 😁😀😂
@JD3Gamer2 жыл бұрын
I feel like this concept should be revisited to replace medical helicopters. You could deliver patients faster while burning less fuel. A lot of development has gone into miniature, quiet and efficient jet engines that could go on the blades. The larger cab size could also allow for more than one patient to travel at a time with ambulance like medical equipment and staff there for them.
@monhi642 жыл бұрын
Medical helicopters are a whole nother shitshow. Back when they deregulated air travel, it was generally good for the public but it left a loophole where air ambulances can charge whatever they choose. The companies behind the air ambulances realized no one really has a choice to take one or not, that’s usually up to a doctor and the patient might be unconscious so they started charging 5-10 times more than they needed too. And especially since doctors like the err on the side of caution with lives a lot of rides are both unnecessary and hyper expensive. So just to be clear the medical helicopters are not the expensive by any necessity, just price gouging lol
@procatprocat96472 жыл бұрын
@@monhi64 which country do you live in?
@somethingmoredecent2 жыл бұрын
@@procatprocat9647 America
@procatprocat96472 жыл бұрын
@@somethingmoredecent unlucky
@somethingmoredecent2 жыл бұрын
@@procatprocat9647 Depends
@chrissmith76694 жыл бұрын
An old coworker of mine worked on this project as a young man. He told me some of the technical issues. He liked to say that like Concorde it was ahead of the technology of the day. Even without the ear splitting noise he told me about thermal issues regarding the rotor blades and the complications of combustors in the rotor tips was just beyond what they could reliably build.
@matthew96773 жыл бұрын
That man must write everything he remembers. We must save the data that remains.
@monhi642 жыл бұрын
Yeah that’s the issue with destroying all the research we don’t have any records of all the problems this plane had. It’s possible they destroyed it cuz they were worried it would made them look bad or something. Would be cool to come back see if it’s viable now
@colintuffs568 Жыл бұрын
My father worked on the Fairy rotodyne at Heaton Chapel in Stockport Cheshire. We a had photo of all the workers in front of the first plane . He worked on Hurricanes during the war and was scathing about spitfires . Damaged spits were scrap whereas hurricanes were repaired and generally flew again the next day . Any body remember Jindevics ? 😮
@ssbn617524 күн бұрын
@@colintuffs568wingset changeouts (fabric to duralumin) took three hours on the Hurri...in France during the battle thereof, rough fields, little support, using available tools. Marvelous aircraft. Try that on a Spit.
@charliehall24755 жыл бұрын
This is so great to see. I’m the grand son of Geoffrey Hall who was chairman of Fairey. I never met him but to see the work he and the team of engineers in the company was trying to create is so humbling. One point that was not mentioned was that the British government had also compulsory purchased Fairey airfields which just so happened to be Heathrow, so a vertical take off aircraft didn’t suit the governments new airfields strategy? If anyone know more about this I would love to know. Charlie.
@briangarrett-glaser4385 жыл бұрын
Are you familiar with Jaunt Air Mobility and Skyworks? They’re two companies working very seriously on technology that’s partially descendant from the Rotodyne, if i understand it correctly. The goal is to develop vehicles for urban air mobility, very much like the rotodyne concept. Really cool stuff.
@bsadewitz5 жыл бұрын
I relish reading comments such as yours. In less than 24 hours, a blood relative of the man happened to watch this particular video and left a comment. What sort of peculiar alignment of interest and circumstance brings that about? The answer, of course, is at once obvious and yet unfathomable. I did not know this craft existed until now. I hadn't even thought of autogyros for years, and am fascinated by this. Too bad you don't have one in the family to go see. ;-)
@bsadewitz5 жыл бұрын
@@briangarrett-glaser438 www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-skyworks-gyrocopter-returns-from-the-brink-459680/ Wow, so it is ... I had no idea.
@VCYT5 жыл бұрын
A friend of mine worked for Fairey Hydrualics.
@chris-hayes5 жыл бұрын
@@bsadewitz very cool!
@cedricye17675 жыл бұрын
Last time I was this early, the dassalt mecure was selling well
@Alvaricokemaureira5 жыл бұрын
jajajajajajajaja good one
@ianr5 жыл бұрын
LOL Great comment Cedric! 😂
@Yautah5 жыл бұрын
It was just a Mirage.
@toasterbathboi62985 жыл бұрын
Cedric Ye so, you were never early then?
@timothydaly21525 жыл бұрын
Intellectuals will get this👍
@LunringNassar Жыл бұрын
I genuinely hate how this aircraft didn't succeed, it should really be reconsidered.
@АлексЭколог Жыл бұрын
Я думаю, могу спроектировать лучше, если будет спрос.
@Rocker-123410 ай бұрын
and moreso, i hate how it almost got a chance of succeeding, hell IT HAD ORDERS unlike alot of these. they just got colossally shafted by a government that only wanted more of the same boring crap and mergers that likely sore ceos telling the teams to kiss actual inovation goodbye
@80HDpilled10 ай бұрын
I feel like this would be the perfect model for flying cars as it removes the need for a runway
@quandale_dingle635310 күн бұрын
The niche it was designed for is no longer needed. High speed trains serve the same purpose but do so more efficiently and in a less disruptive way.
@thatdeliveryguy89755 жыл бұрын
It depresses me what happened to our aviation heritage 😭
@HungrysitesRu5 жыл бұрын
You can buy an autogyro. It's this specific autogyro that failed, there are others for civil aviation.
@Alexandre-ul7oy5 жыл бұрын
I know so much great plane that could have changed the world like Concorde; Rotordyne; Mercure; and flying wings
@VCYT5 жыл бұрын
Blame Hitlers war - it drained much money from the UK gov.
@chris-hayes5 жыл бұрын
@@Alexandre-ul7oy Black Arrow too
@mohammedsarker57565 жыл бұрын
Alexandre Moreau Concorde was a toy for the rich and terrible for the environment
@Radhaugo1083 жыл бұрын
I sometimes wonder how big of a role does "Corporate Sabotage" play in the failures of these amazing technologies. For example, a technology like this would've significantly hurt the "Airport Taxi" industry.
@Thomk1213 жыл бұрын
There are to many examples of sabotaged technologies to count. The man who invented the diesel engine was murdered and all his designs are "missing". He had designs for all kinds of new engines that ran on different fuels. Big oil didnt like this. Also Nikola teslas research and designs were all stolen after his death. The list goes on and on. Windows and google are constantly buying up patents and small startups to either use or shelf so there is no competition.
@Bumphuk3 жыл бұрын
For more information on corporate sabotage and the British government try looking up Dr Beeching and his plans to "streamline" the British railway network whilst being actively employed by a massive asphalt company that wanted the government to shift towards road transport.
@ray.shoesmith2 жыл бұрын
It's not that far fetched tbh. Tullamarine Airport (Melbourne International) in Melbourne Australia still doesn't have a rail link from the airport to the city centre. The reason? Taxi cab lobbying.
@Steve-GM0HUU2 жыл бұрын
Not just taxis perhaps. Can't see airports supporting the idea of all their short and medium haul flights being handed over to mini inner city airports. All those passengers they would loose that are no longer paying for taxis, carparks or buying over priced food, drink and all the other tat they sell in airports to a captive audience? The financial stakeholders of airports don't care if if people spend hours travelling to airports by car, train or bus with all the additional pollution/congestion that goes with it. Not only that, from an air traffic control perspective, the creation of multiple new airports and the added complexity it would bring to airspace management is something that would take a lot to sort out and probably drive up operating costs.
@NeighborSenpai Жыл бұрын
@@ray.shoesmith same with Las Vegas airport, the idea was to make the Monorail go to the airport but taxi companies lobbied hard and the Monorail stops randomly a few blocks from the airport serving no one in that area
@ryanm.1915 жыл бұрын
So this was basically a massive gyrocopter? Not going to lie, that’s awesome
@paraandro5 жыл бұрын
Ryan M. Yes, at cruise. But gyrocopters are not able to take off vertically. Imagine a gyrocopter in this size with a rotor that is not powered by something. Technically interesting but I don't think that it will make any sense. 🤔🙂
@VaughnDavisTV5 жыл бұрын
No, the video is completely wrong about that. The rotor was powered but by very noisy rotor-tip jets.
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
Vaughn Davis Wrong. The video has it absolutely correct and it’s easy to read other sources as well. It’s described as a compound gyroplane, where the rotor is not powered during cruise, but the tip jets are run during hover and the transitions in and out of hover.
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
Parand ? Why imagine that? This isn’t a giant unpowered gyrocopter, it’s a compound gyrocopter.
@paraandro5 жыл бұрын
DoctorShocktor Yes, i think you are right. Sorry! People who has no clue about what they talking about are always right. The new rule. But wait, I did not ask you. 🤔 Have a nic3 Day. 😁
@stevenlitvintchouk31313 жыл бұрын
When I was a kid, I put together a plastic model kit of a Fairey Rotodyne, with a detailed interior including seats, passengers, even luggage racks. I really thought it was the wave of the future. Technologically, it could have been, given a sufficient commitment.
@matthew96773 жыл бұрын
If you still have it save that thing in a strong case. We got to save what little is left!
@billy40722 жыл бұрын
See Greg's Model s. Channel he makes the kit 🥰
@AntoineLeGrand6105 жыл бұрын
I love everything about your videos :) The amount of research done, the beautiful animations, the vintage footage and your narration! Thank you so much for all the effort you put into your videos!
@dirckthedork-knight12013 жыл бұрын
This NEEDS to make a comeback
@vihaanajaya30413 жыл бұрын
but autogyro is that loser
@FlyLeah3 жыл бұрын
@@vihaanajaya3041 how so? Would do for a helicopter to be more efficient, faster and safer
@vihaanajaya30413 жыл бұрын
@@FlyLeahauto gyros work by pushing arotor in front that spins to make lift. and helicopters use extra thrust to go foward that is less efficient than aurogyros
@inigobantok15793 жыл бұрын
It has its called the v 22 osprey
@dirckthedork-knight12013 жыл бұрын
@@inigobantok1579 The Osprey has nothing in common with the Rotodyne
@emancoy5 жыл бұрын
With today's technology, a quieter version can be made today.
@williamw25295 жыл бұрын
Yes. And one that's more aerodynamic, and faster, and lighter, and...
@imhorny1695 жыл бұрын
No drones are superior.
@emancoy5 жыл бұрын
@@imhorny169 drones are basically any remote controlled aircraft, this rotodyne can be one.
@jackthorton105 жыл бұрын
@@emancoy A remote controlled aircraft/helicopter, that sounds like it could work
@foxkinggaming35405 жыл бұрын
It would be made obsolete as soon it as it rolled of the assembly line
@Draktand012 жыл бұрын
For places like small islands or isolated cities (like those Spanish cities on the Morroccan coast that actually still have helicopter airlines), this sort of thing could be a really amazing addition to their transportation sector.
@The_Red_Squirrel Жыл бұрын
I'm not so sure that Spain operates helicopter services between it's North African enclaves and the mainland. Most of these connections are provided by sea ferry services and air services using efficient turboprop aircraft such as the ATR 72.
@davidwill5347 Жыл бұрын
@@The_Red_Squirrel There is a helicopter service to Ceuta from Algeciras on Mainland Spain with Helity using AW139s, priced very competitively with the ferry. You're right the ATR is used on rotations to Melilla from Madrid, Malaga, Granada and Almeria as the distances are much further.
@OTGT265 жыл бұрын
Your 3D modelling is spectacular, having been watching for a while it's been great to see the improvement per video
@maxsmodels5 жыл бұрын
One of the coolest aircraft that never went into service.
@sauropod53935 жыл бұрын
Canada in the late 1950s had the greatest plane that never was: the Avro Arrow with a top speed of 2,104 km/h which made it the fastest plane in the world and was scraped by Prime Minister Defeinbaker in 1959. Go figure why things are done.
@johnevans3885 жыл бұрын
You never saw it fly. I saw it at Farnborough and it was deafeningly loud. There's no way it would have ever have operated commercially.
@crazycaucasian93425 жыл бұрын
@@johnevans388 modern jet engines are 100-110 decibels, which are slightly louder than the rotodyne proposed production model (96 decibels). modern jet engines that just happen to be attached to commercial planes that commuters use every single day... :)
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
sauropod Freaking Arrow cult chimes in of course. Get over it already, shit happens.
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
Jay Jones Modern jet engines aren’t run at ear level in the middle of cities. The only reason for this to exist was to land in the middle of cities on rooftops. There’s a reason airports aren’t in the middle of office buildings.
@chrisstancer58574 жыл бұрын
There's no reason the US military shouldn't have picked this up, as it seems vastly superior and safer to the V-22 Osprey, and the military doesn't care so much about noise.
@namesurname6243 жыл бұрын
If they didn't then it wasnt
@shadfletcher68153 жыл бұрын
@@namesurname624 maybe your not aware of how many people have died in the osprey,so dont be so sure about the militaries decision making
@gearandalthefirst70273 жыл бұрын
@@namesurname624 I don't think you understand how the US military works lol. The whole thing only exists to make money for contractors and to scare people into submission, safety is a tertiary concern
@harbl993 жыл бұрын
NIH syndrome.
@richardpark30543 жыл бұрын
I've only seen a V-22 in flight about a dozen times, and my initial reaction has always been "A flying Osprey! Run! Take cover!"
@shenlun3 жыл бұрын
Someone needs to bring this back in today's technologies this should fit in just fine, including fixing the tip jet problem
@Vladdy893 жыл бұрын
Why? There are lots of airfields now in the World. Absolutely useless and inefficient thing.
@shenlun3 жыл бұрын
@@Vladdy89 I thought the idea of using less fuel was a good idea
@Vladdy893 жыл бұрын
@@shenlun It's still gonna be inefficient. And extremely loud.
@dolphindaily52713 жыл бұрын
@@shenlun modern planes Are still better
@Lildizzle4203 жыл бұрын
look up lillium jet test flight
@Luminite-hx3zs4 жыл бұрын
Innovative engineer: *Exists* Britain: "I'm about to end this man's whole career."
@Luminite-hx3zs4 жыл бұрын
@@Stealthy_Sloth That's unfortunate. I'm sorry to hear that.
@Parzival-sg2kl4 жыл бұрын
This comment is underrated.
@TheCUTTERbyPHOENIX4 жыл бұрын
take my upvote mate ! Also dead meme !
@RedXlV4 жыл бұрын
It's amazing how the British government seemingly went out of their way to destroy their own aviation industry.
@raymonds74924 жыл бұрын
@@Stealthy_Sloth that is a really interesting tale. please continue.
@Jigamanx25 жыл бұрын
“Oh we aren’t going to be able to build this, let’s destroy millions in R&D instead of putting it in a shelf and trying it with new tech later down the line” WHY DO COMPANIES DO THIS!?!?!?!?
@ptonpc5 жыл бұрын
The company would have been under instructions from the government most likely. The British Government especially had a habit of ordering prototypes and tooling destroyed.
@Admiral_Jezza5 жыл бұрын
@@ptonpc But why though?
@betelgeuse76455 жыл бұрын
@@Admiral_Jezza Because they are fools.
@allanadam45535 жыл бұрын
Same in America, all tooling for the C-17 is gone, same for many of the fighters built in the 80’s and 90’s, deliver the last one and destroy all the tooling, you can’t even make spares to keep planes you still have flying. A-10 tooling is gone, Boeing is actually having to rebuild wings instead of building new and it costs way more.
@poodlescone97005 жыл бұрын
Government bureaucrats.
@andyroper16134 жыл бұрын
A friend who worked at Fairey back in the late 50's said that the prototype was deafeningly loud when the tip jets were used for take off and landing under load. The Napier gas turbines and propeller tips combined to make it almost impossible to tolerate!
@batates743 жыл бұрын
Seems like a good application for an electric prop engine. The main rotor could also be powered to eliminate the tip jets.
@batates742 жыл бұрын
@Drew Peacock probably, could be mounted on a clutch I guess
@BiohazardPL2 жыл бұрын
@Drew Peacock main rotor of all helicopters function as an autogyro (to some degree) if power is lost.
@BlairdBlaird2 жыл бұрын
@Drew Peacock Yes, though it's not trivial all single-engine helicopters must be capable of autorotation to be certified. The US Army has an award (the "broken wing") for successful autorotation under emergency conditions (usually engine failure).
@thatcarguydom2662 жыл бұрын
@Drew Peacock you mean every helicopter ever?
@watintarnation98012 жыл бұрын
Well it still has to counter the torque when the main rotor is being spun, and that's why helicopters have tail rotors or counter-rotating second rotors. The tip jets avoid this problem because the tips themselves propel the rotor, and the gas that's shot out creates reactive force.
@vitor9000005 жыл бұрын
I wander how good one Rotodyne with modern technology would be when compared with current Helicopters...
@finnmurtons87275 жыл бұрын
See: OV22 Osprey
@Doppelfrog5 жыл бұрын
@@finnmurtons8727 That's not really the same thing.
@ChaseBlackmoon5 жыл бұрын
@Vitor Leão that is a good question, the Osprey is similar, but not the same beast as this thing.
@fulcrum29515 жыл бұрын
The v22 has two turboprop engines, similar to the rotordyne but it lacks one thing An unpowered rotor
@baginatora4 жыл бұрын
Rotodyne is neither a plane, nor a helicopter. It's an autogyro- completely different type of aircraft.
@Rambo113075 жыл бұрын
The loss of this aircraft really feels like industrial sabotage.
@Rambo113075 жыл бұрын
Лэнгтон Матраверс. Hey now. More and more of us everyday are getting tired of the corruption.
@jasoncoburn4455 жыл бұрын
I agree, it has the same air as The Tucker car story.
@alessandroarcuri2095 жыл бұрын
More like government shortsightedness and total lack of vision.
@Rambo113075 жыл бұрын
Alessandro Arcuri But it would still outperform today. just like the airship is still the cheaper way to distribute mass freight.
@redbluesome28295 жыл бұрын
@Лэнгтон Матраверс. more like the pesky British aviation industry that couldn’t stay afloat without consolidation you dumb russkie.
@TomEarley5 жыл бұрын
I literally went on Mustard earlier to check if you had any new videos. So glad your back!
@dominicperrone27903 жыл бұрын
Missed a perfect opportunity to title it “Why the VTOL Airliner never Took Off”
@BlazeByte213 жыл бұрын
Oof
@Outlier9993 жыл бұрын
Boo! Ewwgh! Bad!
@Outlier9993 жыл бұрын
Noise concerns? In American 🇺🇸 cities? Oh, come now.
@revolver2653 жыл бұрын
"but it did!" - someone that missed the memo
@animationspace85503 жыл бұрын
But it did
@FiniteFr5 жыл бұрын
I just looked at this page today and thought ‘hmm they upload every two months, wonder when the next video is out’ and here I am
@airraid96145 жыл бұрын
“It all went to shBLEEP” Me: surprised pikachu
@boywoofie5 жыл бұрын
I actually made the face too when I heard it lol almost thought I misheard it. lmao
@j.mccreath56315 жыл бұрын
Ah a man of culture I see
@Zakalwe-015 жыл бұрын
I actually thought he was going to use the classic British engineering term ‘It’s all gone tits-up’. He didn’t, but ironically it had.
@JohnnyZenith5 жыл бұрын
I thought that was hilarious.
@BleachJuice215 жыл бұрын
Same
@carlosjones87124 жыл бұрын
This higher quality than most tv documentaries
@HenryTheEngineer515810 ай бұрын
“It all went to sh*t” Mustard had finally snapped.
@dionamuh5 жыл бұрын
6:51 Going from 113 dB to 96 dB is not a 15% decrease in 'noise', but much more than that. Every 3 dB is roughly a 100% difference in sound energy and 23% difference in loudness. So the decrease of 17 dB was a reduction of loudness by around 130%.
@antoniolastname4195 жыл бұрын
Not sure your math makes sense there. Wouldn’t reducing noise by 130% be physically impossible? If you go from 113dB to 0 that’s by definition a 100% reduction.
@shiyuan17385 жыл бұрын
Mustard: Uploads new video Me: *Squeals of joy*
@filipgolonka37585 жыл бұрын
I can relate
@kolecava5 жыл бұрын
The one I never miss, or tell myself... il watch it later 😎
@miroBGgsi5 жыл бұрын
@@filipgolonka3758 Literally everyone who subscribes Mustard can relate.
@tritran6965 жыл бұрын
To be honest, I would love to fly on that thing. It looked really interesting and actually futuristic.
@DsantosGE4PA5 жыл бұрын
Maybe one with electric engines would solve the noise issue
@chris22capt7 ай бұрын
@@DsantosGE4PA how would you power the tip jet with electric motor?
@Palaeofreak2 жыл бұрын
My grandfather was a part of the production of this aircraft, and despite it not being adopted, he always spoke fondly of it. It was clear he was proud of his and his teams work, as am I.
@draconiusultamius4 жыл бұрын
Someone needs to revive this. It seems like a great idea. Even if there aren't any existing blueprints or prototypes, it can't be that hard to try and piece it together while updating as necessary.
@pharaongaming86175 жыл бұрын
next video is gonna be: "the soviet rotodyne you didnt know about"
@s.sestric99295 жыл бұрын
The Aeroflot livery threw me off.
@chocomanger68735 жыл бұрын
They had probably had these in Ancient India. The west is so full of itself, thinking it has invented everything, and that history is only 2000 years old.
@pharaongaming86175 жыл бұрын
@@chocomanger6873 lol why you think so? first European country is over 8000 years old, Europe discovered metals and invented forging, West invented wine over 8000 years ago so how the heck it has 2000 year history can you explain?
@groovygambino49085 жыл бұрын
pharaon gaming the west invented wine over 8000 years? Do you have some information unknown to the world ? Please explain. Last I recall wine wasn't created by the west..
@groovygambino49085 жыл бұрын
i. rob what ?
@jacovichstabs8415 жыл бұрын
Airlines or businesses should invest in these again. They're still a great idea and new technology could make them even better.
@startingQB3 жыл бұрын
A "flying machine" that would be more economical and faster, got canceled because of "lack of funding". 🤔 I'm pretty sure the oil industry had a lot to do with it as well.
@spaceout25203 жыл бұрын
And the United States military could in theory make the Rotodyne a thing again because who loves cheap and effective military vehicles more than the US
@truthinaction00003 жыл бұрын
@@spaceout2520 of it ain't national debt over budget or built exclusively by Lockheed legacy, Murica won't buy. If it ain't overpriced, the other countries will make fun, except Putinland, he's allycat scrappy cool on the cheap.
@Ryvaken3 жыл бұрын
More economical and faster than a contemporary helicopter. That's not a high bar.
@daw1623 жыл бұрын
more economical than what? It didn't get interest, so it didn't get funding. It has to beat an airliner, not a helicopter (which is generally only used for short trips by wealthy people). Airlines will do anything to save fuel, including spending stupid amounts on newer planes that use less fuel but take eons to pay back.
@KaiserStormTracking3 жыл бұрын
@@spaceout2520 Russia?? They still use Cold war era bombers
@stfanboy4 жыл бұрын
"And it all went to S#$t." That was totally unexpected from this channel and got a big ole LOL from me. XD
@abcdefghijklmnoprstuwxyz47065 жыл бұрын
Mustard: says the S word Everyone liked that.
@angelainejarrett11155 жыл бұрын
What's up with all the comments about mustard?
@darthsalmon36145 жыл бұрын
Angelaine Jarrett that's a joke right?
@angelainejarrett11155 жыл бұрын
@@darthsalmon3614 no. I just realized it's the name of the channel. Sorry I've been stuck in the house watching KZbin videos for 2 weeks after an accident. I like I'm losing my mind.
@tobymassoom5 жыл бұрын
@@angelainejarrett1115 you good?
@justicewarrior91875 жыл бұрын
What about CUM word??
@degraj4185 жыл бұрын
*_Alternative Title_* : _Why The Vertical Takeoff Airliner Never Took off_
@orinpolansky3865 жыл бұрын
It's not VTOL. It's just a big autogyro. It can do short takeoff and vertical landing. Autogyros had jumping takeoff systems when rotor was prespinned to 150% of its usual RPM then angle of rotorblades was changing to high angle and autogyro was making a jump. After jump was done main engine was turned on and craft started to do normal flight.
@yeg4k1655 жыл бұрын
@@orinpolansky386 smart boi but this was a pun
@SeanMirrsen5 жыл бұрын
@@orinpolansky386 This thing literally has jet engines on the tips of the rotor blades to spin up the rotor and vertically take off. It is not a simple autogyro.
@degraj4185 жыл бұрын
@@yeg4k165 thank u
@degraj4185 жыл бұрын
@@orinpolansky386 I mean the creator literally has Vertical takeoff in the title sooo
@michaeltom6373 жыл бұрын
This is one of the most heartbreaking and sad failed projects this channel has covered so far. A genuine bummer.
@roroguapo34 жыл бұрын
Why isn’t anyone making cool shit like this anymore in the US? We’ve had the same transportation infrastructure for the last 50 years! Travel is virtually no different today than it was in 1970.
@LocalGuardsman4 жыл бұрын
M L I think he/she is referring to commercial transport, not military.
@75aces974 жыл бұрын
A lot of crazy technology like this began in the 1950s, height of cold war paranoia. The US had planned for a state of permanent war, so the government had funded a lot of research in jet propulsion and other technology with potential military applications, and civilians benefited from this, too. Which is wonderful, but very expensive. Without a scary commie threat off in the distance, people are less willing to fund projects that may not ultimately work. Private sector outfits aren't going to risk too much on on an endeavor that may not pan out. US declined to invest in the Concorde in the early 1970s and AFAIK never seriously pursued supersonic civilian aviation again. You're right that we're stuck in a rut in air transportation for 50 years now. We have some improvement in creature comforts, but we're actually moving backwards in overall travel time. All his snark aside, Scott Adams (Dilbert Future) had an interesting explanation how airlines are stuck with minor, incremental improvements indefinitely because of the tremendous expense of converting an entire fleet of aeroplanes.
@NorthKoreaUncovered4 жыл бұрын
Because we'd rather spend our money bombing brown people in the Middle East.
@MikoyanGurevichMiG214 жыл бұрын
@@NorthKoreaUncovered The US doesn't even have decent railroad or public transport infrastructure save for maybe cities like New York
@kingofthemoon30634 жыл бұрын
Due to the dismantlement of streetcar networks and poor city planning, travel is arguably worse now than it was 50 years ago.
@LeodiAstoriaXIII5 жыл бұрын
I really like Fairey's logo, so simple yet elegant.
@the5thmusketeer2155 жыл бұрын
As soon as the British Government “funds” any enterprising or innovative project, you know that the writing’s on the wall and there’s a very high risk that funding will be withdrawn before it’s completed. British Politicians have very little understanding of real world costs, while simultaneously lacking true vision and imagination (except when it comes to filling in the forms to justify their own Expenses Claims... 🤨)
@whatyousaidbud5 жыл бұрын
Or funding the DeLorean.
@lexifillems5 жыл бұрын
Well, in this case the video explains what happened. Also, you will find it is was mainly the Tories ending projects like that. This case: 1961 - Macmillan, Tory. APT: 1985 - Thatcher - Tory. privatising British Airways - same. Flogging the bus services - same. Flogging the rail services - Major - also Tory (then got backside kicked in the elections by Blair who, to be fair, started off pretty well but turned out to be the political equivalent to Darth Vader). The Tories don't believe in using public money for anything that might help the country, Britain's technical development, or indeed Britains. Unless they're fat cat bastards.
@the5thmusketeer2155 жыл бұрын
Dinsdale It’s simply outrageous to draw a similarity between Darth Vader and Tony Blair!!! How can you liken a shady, nefarious, plotter and schemer who ends up betraying everyone who trusted in him because he’s secretly sold his soul to the Devil... with a fictional character from “Star Wars?” 🤷🏻♂️
@PB237235 жыл бұрын
TSR2
@172-e5s5 жыл бұрын
Yes you are right. Their only true talent and profession is lining their own pockets.
@falling_homer2 жыл бұрын
6:05 I didn't expect that at all 😂😂😂
@Blkchevy985 жыл бұрын
Would love to see this with today's tech.
@fekete27305 жыл бұрын
People would probably not try to re-invent this, stuff like civilian ospreys will probably exist, it would be cool seeing this aircraft come back though.
@voidofspaceandtime46845 жыл бұрын
@@fekete2730 civlian ospreys would not be as efficient. The rotodyne is just a better design.
@mr.normalguy695 жыл бұрын
@@voidofspaceandtime4684 Plus if one or both engines of rotodyne malfunction, it can slowly glide to a safe landing, if the same happens to osprey then its lights out.
@jestertester69gaming544 жыл бұрын
@@mr.normalguy69 The Osprey may land like an fixed wing aircraft but may damage the propellers
@DAN007thefoxx14 жыл бұрын
@@jestertester69gaming54 Ok what if instead of huge rotors we used a series of small fans that can be tilted to either provide forward or downward thrust so you can land horizontally without damaging them?
@stayfrosty62905 жыл бұрын
Osprey: "Dang, my ancestors were a little funky back then."
@TheNpcNoob5 жыл бұрын
🤣🤣
@wenaldy5 жыл бұрын
Osprey is a tiltrotor not even close.
@TheNpcNoob5 жыл бұрын
@@wenaldy pretty sure it was born outta this idea
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
wenaldy actually it’s quite similar but in a different way. The rotodyne uses a powered rotor to lift a shortwinged turboprop vertically, the Osprey does the same thing but by tilting its rotors. Cousins at least.
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
TRXP RFT Similar, but no, entirely different executions but based in similar goals and similar base aircraft.
@Sn0wb0i4 жыл бұрын
If the rotodyne had not been British, then they might still be around today
@sandakureva4 жыл бұрын
Yeah this seems like it was more a problem of mismanagement on the part of the British government than it being a bad idea.
@bernardhaworth1123 жыл бұрын
The reason for its failure ( as with the Concorde much later) was simply that it was NOT American. The USA determined that American designed and produced only should be around so the Rotodyne had to be 'destroyed' , as I say same with Concorde. Had both craft been American the US they would have made sure they succeeded .
@fandangobrandango78643 жыл бұрын
The WWW is British and is obviously still around today. You're welcome
@SAHBfan3 жыл бұрын
@@bernardhaworth112 - never underestimate the amazing ability of successive British government to **** things up, though....
@disasterincarnate3 жыл бұрын
@@SAHBfan or sell their stuff to the americans at the detriment of themselves.
@Nate-zu3qw3 жыл бұрын
The 50's innovation will never be rivaled. Hands down.
@meetmeinthegame4033 жыл бұрын
Seriously, like there was this massive push for innovation after the war. And rebuilding our economy, But I’m sure a generation like that will come along again
@JaceTan-905 жыл бұрын
This should be revived as many want to avoid traffic.
@absalomdraconis5 жыл бұрын
That's more of a flying car thing, and _that_ is waiting on the FAA to finish their next-generation air traffic control system so that autopilots can hook into it.
@Nevir2025 жыл бұрын
Seems like it would be excellent for regional commutes, going the “last mile” from hub airports to the regional one you want, etc.
@notsosilentmajority15 жыл бұрын
Then there would be traffic just trying to get to the takeoff location in Manhattan and every other major city. Nowadays it's probably quicker to get to one of the NY airports than it would to get to the rooftop of a midtown Manhattan building. Trust me on this.
@davidsheriff89895 жыл бұрын
yes, like all revolutionary techno, they get squashed
@bullterriermolly58745 жыл бұрын
They are check into personal drones there being pushed for the same reasons.
@mrvoyagerm5 жыл бұрын
There was a small sales model of this aircraft on my dad's desk when I was a kid.
@svennoren90475 жыл бұрын
I had the Airfix plastic model of it! Sadly I could never learn to use glue in moderation...
@sharonbraselton43022 жыл бұрын
good for yiu
@brotnjanin5 жыл бұрын
My favourite KZbin channel. Stunning 3D animations and heavenly editing. Keep up the good work!
@michaelvogt77873 ай бұрын
All - for 'sound', each drop of 6db equates to a 50% reduction in pressure, so, simply, from 113db to 107 cut noise in half, from 107 to 101 cut that in half again, and from 101 to 96 very nearly cut again. Dropping from 113 to 96 was tremendous improvement.
@emicklibs60245 жыл бұрын
Damn! Watching the failure of such a promessing and revolutionary machine makes me hella depressed
@zakofrx5 жыл бұрын
It could still be useful even if they didn't get the sound down. Just land it a bit further out than the center of the city. It will still need less space than an airport. It would also be perfect for island, Mountain and small town runs. Locations were they don't make enough for and airport or that an airport would not fit .
@Frost5175 жыл бұрын
don’t worry, you can watch it all over again with Uber Elevate. lol
@josephburchanowski46365 жыл бұрын
@@zakofrx I want to know how it compares to modern helicopters. If it is still more fuel efficient, it might be a good way to get humanitarian aid in places that don't have airports or don't have enough airports. Like from what I can tell it is still simpler and safer than an Osprey.
@remaincalm25 жыл бұрын
Sadly this isn't a unique story. British governments have cancelled so many cutting edge projects such as the amazing TSR-2 fighter jet, or going back earlier to 1946 the Megaroc was a converted V2 to take the first man into space. This and more killed off because of lack of vision by governments.
@raduantoniu5 жыл бұрын
Your videos are simply amazing. Way to go! Related to the video, it's crazy to think fast electric trains links were never built between the major cities on the West Coast. They're even cheaper and more convenient than the Rotodyne would have been.
@fridaycaliforniaa2364 жыл бұрын
Actually, electric trains are not so cheap. You have to account for the tracks, electrification, maintenance of all this stuff, digging tunnels and building bridges, etc... I'm not a engineer, but I think an electric train is a pain in the butt to design and use. I live in France, we have tons of these trains, they are often really expensive and not often a reliable system (I wish I was Japanese lol they have better records than us ^^)
@maitirkp55194 жыл бұрын
With today's technology, a quieter version can be made today.
@nordicberserk3 жыл бұрын
OR! Electric Rotodyne! Electric motor in stead of the tip jets, and when it is turned off, use it as a passive generator to power the electric props.
@SaHaRaSquad3 жыл бұрын
@@nordicberserk Using it as a generator during flight would just be a creative way to waste energy, unless you've found a way to violate laws of physics.
@kaunas8883 жыл бұрын
High speed trains are not cheap. California spend billions and only got a few miles of track.
@midnightminingspider78245 жыл бұрын
KZbin: New mustard video Me:I LOVE IT I think that a video about ford airplane would be cool
@crawdadlando40535 жыл бұрын
I dunno about that, gonna look it up now! Thanks.
@HirokaAkita5 жыл бұрын
Ford Airplane??? ._. ????
@crawdadlando40535 жыл бұрын
@@HirokaAkita I just started a 40 minute documentary on it. Sure nuff.
@rbmk__10005 жыл бұрын
@@HirokaAkita ford tri-motor like on indiana jones
@crawdadlando40535 жыл бұрын
Ford patented brakes and tail wheels. As well as made the first concrete runway. It's fascinating stuff!
@Aatell7643 жыл бұрын
I've spent my whole life finding awesome ideas that were lost in the past I'm glad I found this channel I don't know where you dug up some of these great relics of the past but thank you they are very interesting.
@theseageek4 жыл бұрын
6:00 didn't expect that in a mustard video 😂😂
@wakadoodledo45665 жыл бұрын
Mustard: Most revolutionary helicopter... Rotodyne: Aight imma head out
@Alexandre-ul7oy5 жыл бұрын
youre right it's more an autogire/plane
@ScienceAlliance5 жыл бұрын
@@Alexandre-ul7oy *autogyro
@MinutemanOutdoors5 жыл бұрын
It's a gyrocopter
@MGFBrasil5 жыл бұрын
Mustard really takes a looong time to upload stuff. But when he does, OH BOYO!
@AdlerTX5 жыл бұрын
Quality over quantity, thats for sure.
@theworldoverheavan5605 жыл бұрын
unlike the infographic show
@MGFBrasil5 жыл бұрын
@@theworldoverheavan560 The Infographics Show is a piece of junk
@toolbaggers5 жыл бұрын
@@MGFBrasil They have the shittest animations out there and they make a lot of money. They'll do some really shitty stuff like using generic airplanes on a vid about airplanes!
@creolophus82762 жыл бұрын
Thank god this is story without huge crash tragedy But this piece of aviation is beautiful and so retrofituristic-ish, looks absolutely amazing
@kazzyanddecchan7335 жыл бұрын
I'm disappointed that the title says "failed" instead of "never took off".
@glanced96845 жыл бұрын
That would've been much better.
@raymiller63515 жыл бұрын
it did take off tho
@the5thmusketeer2155 жыл бұрын
Ray Miller Don’t despair, Ray... Online courses in, “The appreciation of Humour and Irony” are freely available. 😉
@raymiller63515 жыл бұрын
@@the5thmusketeer215 I know. I like the title but it should be reserved for a plane/aircraft that didn't really take off.
@the5thmusketeer2155 жыл бұрын
Ray Miller That is *a very worthy answer* and *a fair comment.* Nicely done, Sir. 😊🤝😊
@AverytheCubanAmerican5 жыл бұрын
Mustard: planes Wendover: it's treason then
@victormatheusbezerralima30565 жыл бұрын
Man, seeing all those potentially revolutionary machines getting just discarded, never to be seen again just makes me sad, even more so when we could easily make it work with the technology we have today.
@RedXlV5 жыл бұрын
The British government in the 1950s and 60s seemed to be dead set on destroying their own aviation industry, and especially any actually innovative aircraft designs.
@TheHazyTimewalker5 жыл бұрын
Pfffff I got the 69th like on this comment lmao
@shinobione25755 жыл бұрын
Helicopters are faster now
@rach82413 жыл бұрын
His voice goes so well with the documentaries . I'm now interested in Aviation thanks to this informative channel 👍😀
@krollpeter5 жыл бұрын
Whenever I hear parts and plans have been destroyed I know there is someone behind, who did not want it to be successful. Your government had agreed to the downfall of your own country.
@ShaareiZoharDaas5 жыл бұрын
Sad but Tru
@martinwilson72465 жыл бұрын
So it seems. Look for the highly-capable TSR-2 from a few years back... and yet our taxpayers now fund two humungous aircraft carriers populated with imported STOVL jets, having abruptly scrapped all our Harriers a few years ago.
@krollpeter5 жыл бұрын
@@martinwilson7246 The Germans were famous for quality but the Brits were famous for clever technical solutions, sometimes also quirky ideas. That's very ok, isn't it? All key industries that have been giving jobs to your father and your mother have been destroyed. The car industry and the aircraft industry (UK had brilliant ideas there) are two famous examples. I was extremely surprised to learn about these facts. And then the rest was done by outplacement of many jobs to China. Do you really want to live from financial products and services? That won't work to feed the average John and Jim. Lucky for us in Germany our politics still rank the small and medium companies high. It's those companies which have a qualified job for my sister and my uncle in the neighbourhood, those who have expertise in doing stuff such as repairing and maintaining, or expert engineering. They are the salt of the earth ... and surely not the top 500, or banks.
@krollpeter5 жыл бұрын
@Grime Fork That particular problem seems just the opposite to me. Too much capitalism. They followed the US "advise".
@TubeDupe5 жыл бұрын
"5000 passengers, who would otherwise be condemned ... to this!" Smash cut to picture of California.
@alexh3495 жыл бұрын
California is bad
@goodbyemr.anderson50655 жыл бұрын
What's California??
@period53045 жыл бұрын
@@goodbyemr.anderson5065 it's a slang for broken toenails.
@paco_montsol5 жыл бұрын
We need to bring back to life the Concorde and the rotordyne.
The DC-3 is a classic, one of the safest aircraft ever built, and should never have gone out of production. In the early 1950s when I was a small child my mother and I rode in one from Houston to New Orleans, and then we took a TWA Constellation from there to Tampa. Both of those airplanes were/are exceptionally beautiful.
@axiolot58575 жыл бұрын
'And of course it all went to sh*t" well that was lovely and unexpected
@joinedupjon5 жыл бұрын
If he keeps doing the post WW2 British aircraft industry it could easily become his catchphrase... The avro Vulcan is amazing though.
@manooxi3275 жыл бұрын
GOD!, such a cool machine, I'm so mad that It didn't "take off" I'm sorry!
@angelainejarrett11155 жыл бұрын
You should be.
@tgay95945 жыл бұрын
Yeah especially with today's technology, such a shame. Seems very economical and would make a killing
@manooxi3275 жыл бұрын
@@tgay9594 now I want a wendover production vid on the logistic of it!
@tgay95945 жыл бұрын
@@manooxi327 Hahhaha :-)
@richard165s5 жыл бұрын
6:50 careful with the 15% figure - decibels are a logarithmic unit; we perceive every change in 10db as approximately double the noise. Going from 113 db to 96 db isn't about 15% reduction, but closer to 400%... still 96 db is wicked loud
@sproutingpotato69635 жыл бұрын
Yup. By my calculation 96 dB is 14.1% of 113 dB. Of course it also matters at what distance the sound was measured at.
@rustykilt3 жыл бұрын
How this machine was not grabbed by the military is beyond me......faster than a copter, larger and less complex than the OFSPREY, it was so versatile....
@ILovePancakes24 Жыл бұрын
The OFFSprey if it wasn't explicitly engineered to be a death trap.
@rustykilt Жыл бұрын
Dont diasgree, but it has real issues.@@ILovePancakes24
@paladin06545 жыл бұрын
The Brits have a habit of cancelling programs like this.
@Axemantitan5 жыл бұрын
Curious Droid has a good video on a cancelled British rocket that had great potential (even if it did look like a tube of lipstick).
@zapfanzapfan5 жыл бұрын
I was just about to say... develops revolutionary technology that then either gets cancelled or gets "shared" with the US never to be returned...
@kutter_ttl67865 жыл бұрын
*Cough* TSR-2 *cough*
@joshuadrakard29815 жыл бұрын
@@kutter_ttl6786 that one still hurts
@zakofrx5 жыл бұрын
It's a shame as the Greatest aircraft they have made seem to be based on out of the box thinking.. The Harrier etc...
@laudbentil81845 жыл бұрын
I wonder if it's still economically viable in these times, was quite fascinated by the auto-gyro
@johnjephcote76364 жыл бұрын
I guess so. We have advanced so much in rotor technology and the tip jet idea -used just for starting rotation and without the contra-rotation necessary to keep helicopters stable. So safe too as the unpowered autorotation is providing so much lift.
@TheSheiban5 жыл бұрын
Oh wow. A topic I never knew about! Great work Mustard!
@Pseud0nymTXT3 жыл бұрын
Damn, all this effort to avoid a high speed railway
@heksogen47883 жыл бұрын
High speed passenger rail is more expensive.
@nicopavvi84943 жыл бұрын
In the 1960s USA?
@eMKeaL3 жыл бұрын
@@nicopavvi8494 first bullet trains in Japan were operational in mid 60s. It is just US that fucked up this subject with decades of negligence.
@GingkaHagane435 жыл бұрын
Mustard: "But of course. . .It all went to $*** Me: NANI?!?
@abramo77004 жыл бұрын
oooooooooh! teacher he said a bad word!!
@daddybondrewd72714 жыл бұрын
no the teacher SAID the bad word
@6Six6Six6Bruh4 жыл бұрын
Gingka Hagane timestamp
@cheeseislit10704 жыл бұрын
@@6Six6Six6Bruh 6:00
@machina_spirit4 жыл бұрын
Thought you were just paraphrasing, so i was actually surprised when i got to that part of the video and he actually said that! 😂
@jamarmartin8845 жыл бұрын
I’d like to see this come back to life with 2019 technology
@tonyduncan98525 жыл бұрын
You'd hate it.
@DoctorShocktor5 жыл бұрын
Why?
@tonyduncan98525 жыл бұрын
@@DoctorShocktor Tip rotors cannot EVER be silenced. City shuttles CAN be silent and also unable to fall onto one if they happen instead to be some type of underground transport. I endured their horrible and ghastly noise for many months as I trained as an aero engineer. No-one in management had any commonsense left at that time. Don't "why?" me, doc.
@h3adbang0r595 жыл бұрын
@@tonyduncan9852 Might be feasible to power the main rotor electrically since you only need a couple of seconds of thrust during takeoff.
@tonyduncan98525 жыл бұрын
@@h3adbang0r59 A 'couple of seconds'? Yes, but the noise would still be too much for comfort, and the thirty-ton plane could still fall on you. Why would this still be preferable to subterranean (and totally silent) transport?
@Evili5555 жыл бұрын
Thank you for your quality content. Ever since I found you two years ago I’ve been watching your videos everyday(not even lying,I rewatch many videos). Even when you don’t post, I still watch your videos and it still gives me a new feeling. I love your goal for quality over quantity. Keep up the work no matter how long it takes and you will get a million subs FAST.
@ethanpinella79763 жыл бұрын
That "all went to shit" caught me by surprise
@artistwithouttalent4 жыл бұрын
"Hello, I'd like to ship this package to the Prussian consulate in Siam by aeromail. Am I too late for the 4:30 autogyro?"
@CinemaDemocratica4 жыл бұрын
ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhcksellent.
@timothyp8735 жыл бұрын
This looks like it came out right of Thunderbirds.
@ianhudson93985 жыл бұрын
Actually..... you'll see 21st Century TVs interpretation of the Rotodyne in many Thunderbird episodes....
@Predator42ID5 жыл бұрын
An Upload from Curios Droid and Mustard in two days. I can die happy now.
@glennoropeza35453 жыл бұрын
I'm willing to bet that the Rotodyne was too far ahead of it's time and probably no more noisier than any other Helicopter of it's day!
@jimtaylor294 Жыл бұрын
^ The irony there is that Farley was the test pilot of an infinitely louder aircraft, the Harrier 😂 . His conclusions on aircraft projects other than those he flew in [and I've read a few] are to be taken with a pinch of salt, as his actual in depth knowledge of them was limited. Case in point TSR-2. Farley's conclusion is not only incorrect from an aerodynamic perspective, but it also contradicts his former boss at Hawker Siddeley, Sir Sydney Camm. Given the respective qualifications of the two, I think Camm's verdict wins it by a mile.