Has a very modern "short-field" transport look for a 30's aircraft: Four engines, high-mounted wing, boxy yet aerodynamic body....the only thing missing is a rear ramp and level/retractable landing gear.
"..pah! The customers are real Drongoes, I mean just look at some of 'em like ..erm, ..eh, ..ah damn, crikey see! ..that sheila over there... Or that bloke ona thattaways, strueth! Thar should IMHO be, some restrictions on customers that fugly not getting a booking, ...no matter how much better they might 'please sure' you if ya catch me driftwood winkaty wink wink."
Oh my, I really like the look of this one. In my eyes, really pretty. Not just for the day but even now it looks nice. A big fat humongous 'like' from me.
It's insane to me that something this good was built in the 30s, almost a hundred years ago with what limited knowledge and tools they had on hand. Someone had some proper neuron activation...
lol, tools 100 years ago were not limited!...the most significant differences were lack of electronic controls (e.g., cnc machines) and materials engineering (e.g., exotic alloys and plastics).
@@douglasharley2440 And those are the tool limitations. Lower-performance metals means heavier, underpowered engines; lack of electronics means greater manufacture tollerances. All of that means the airframe needs to be overengineered (heavier) to be able to withstand the metal fatigue of inferior alloys and not crumple. That and they did not have decades of hindsight to work with, the ability to come-up with something like this and have it reliably work is beyond impressive.
@@douglasharley2440 Fair enough. In that case, it's a question of semantics which makes this a reasonable point. Clarity is important. Was a good 'wel acsually' stand-off regardless. Take care, mate! o7
I really enjoy the non-warplane videos. There's something wonderful about listening to the history of planes who helped connect people throughout the world, carrying mail and cargo and love and hope as they did. Thanks for this video and the rest of them.
That would be great but with limited military service not sure it is up Valoms street. I referenced above Onemanmodel from Japan did indicate that he might produce in resin 1/72 - I have two of his Ensigns which are fine - but is doing a lot of modern stuff currently On a different note hoping Valom might one day do a Warwick which other than a very tough AIMs or very old Contrail Vac Form there is very limited options for an aircraft that served in quite significant numbers and different versions. I did mention to Airfix man a couple of years ago at a show and he politely laughed at me.
@@johnholt890 Speaking of airliners , It is a crying shame there has not been a high quality model kit in 1/72nd of the de Havilland Comet in BOAC markings early or late stretched versions. Scale 1/144th is too small for me.
Thing about Rex is , he not only knows what he talks about , but as a fellow aviation enthusiast, he knows how to keep it interesting while also entertaining , I watch every single video , even aircraft id never think about (civilian aircraft since I'm more about military aircraft) , anyway. Keep up the great work Rex . I look forward to the next video.... ps , maybe think about doing some videos of more well known aircraft , the in depth you do is fantastic
The durability of modern aircraft amazes me. Aircraft became obsolete so fast during the first 3 decades of the century, whereas we still have B-52's flying that are older than their crew.
That is not so much a matter of durability though. Back then it was far easier and cheaper to innovate. Whereas now, developing a new aircraft costs the GDP of a small country. Also, civilian and military innovation processes play by different rules, as one just needs to get the job done whereas the other has to make a profit. The B-52 is still around because it does it's job, and there has been no need to significantly innovate on the basic airframe.
@@rockyblacksmithIt is also very much a factor of durability. The airframes on the older aircraft are so over engineered, they have not aged out due to metal fatigue and pressure cycles. They were designed with slide rules. Modern aircraft are not as strong as it increases weight unacceptably.
Thank you for a much enjoyed and well told tale. Also a wonderful collection of photographs, some of them are new to me. Shell used an attractive Barnett Freedman painting of an Atalanta in 1932 to promote their lubricating oils.
I was ready to be amused by a chunky attempt at early streamlining, but I legitimately like the look of this plane. Sure, she looks a little dated now, but they did marvelous work for the time.
@ 8:42 - Is that a DC-3 in the background??? I would not have guessed that the Atalanta would still be in use so late in the game. EDIT: Okay, this caused me to do some reading. These two planes were only four years apart! Holy cow! The Douglass is still in use today here in the US by a number of small, private operators to move cargo or drop skydivers. You can find them in hangars at small, regional airports in the hinterlands. You never see the Atalanta in use anywhere. It did not make it in that regard, though it served to further many design and engineering advancements. How interesting, and what a perspective jolt to realize how contemporaneous these two planes were!
The DC-3 had the advantage that, as the C-47, they made about 3 squillion during WW2. Whereas AWA got moved over to Whitleys and the UK basically decided to buy in transport aircraft from the USA in WW2 apart from repurposing Stirling and Halifax production lines.
I think it may actually be a Douglas DC-2, not a DC-3. Both were operated by the little known Dutch airline KLM, hence the Dutch flag sticking out from the cockpit.😅
Atalanta was a Greek heroine who would marry only a man that can outrun her or be killed.. Eventually one guy named Hipponenes succeeded by dropping goldenapples.
What an interesting video about an aircraft about which I previously knew absolutely nothing. I'm glad that the first of the aircraft survived till the bitter end.
Love the 'forgotten aircraft' videos. Thanks for educating us nerds about this stuff! Spotted something weird on this though... On one of the plane's doors, it has ROYAL MAIL ER. As Queen Elizabeth (ER) would not be queen until 1952, how is this possible if the last airframe was scrapped in 1944? Edit: Of course - I forgot about Edward VIII. D'oh!
Good job Rex! I always learn something new here. I was totally unaware of this aircraft. To my eyes the Atalanta has pleasing lines except for the vertical fin and rudder. They look undersized. I guess they were functional though. My first reaction was, "This would look better with the tail of a Beaufighter." Looking forward to a vid about the Ensign😊
7:56 Rex: I think you missed a trick here. Unless I'm very much mistaken, the RPM gauges are those instruments that look like tapes in the centre of the panel. To the best of my knowledge this would be the first time that a tape-style gauge appeared on a commercial aircraft. The shading says they are not tapes but either huge drums (or more likely) partial drums. Their advantage over a normal circular gauge is that they make synchronising the engines a lot easier.
*The typical "you cannot go to manual". Fun fact, the last leg of the shuttle landings were always flown by hand. The space shuttle has actually never landed automatically. Reentry phase was computer-controlled though.*
Thanks Rex for another insightful vid about an aircraft that was clearly leading the way to the future. Has anyone else noticed that the photo at 20:49 has Amalthea carrying the Royal Mail logo "ER"? Confused me for a moment (surely not still flying in 1953?) before I realised it was "Edward Rex". Possibly the next mail flight brought instruction to scrub off the E and put back a renewed G.
@@johnholt890 ooOOooh. Holy crap, in looking for that kit I just learned that Haynes makes an entire line of owners manuals for historic piston aircraft?!?!
Rather randomly back in the 80's a cereal company Kellogg's did a promotion featuring tiny model aircraft in each box and the one I got was one of these. I never had a clue as to it's origins until now.
Really great video, this cha.ged my lofe, i drunk asf and i love your channel with all the silly planes videos. You explain all that's needed and do so with historical images and fun facts about the plane, i would definitely shake your hand. Don't ever stop making vcontent, i live for this shit
They were quite a sleek design for the early 1930s, roughly equal in size and total engine power of the even sleeker and much faster Douglas DC-2' though with only half the seating capacity of the latter. Also there was no mention of a cabin attendant or toilet facilities either.
I always questioned why smaller cargo planes are so boxy, but I guess at some sizes benefits of space utilisation outweigh those of better aerodynamics.
In those days, and indeed today, a heavy retractable landing gear would simply replace the form drag of the external landing gear with induced drag caused by the heavier weight of the aircraft.
The leaky cockpit roof is interesting I have read that the Whitley bomber built by the same company was notorious for being wet when flying through rainclouds etc.
@@Anaguma79 As it was too late for Ed VII and unlikely with the short reign, if any, for Ed VIII I doubt it was either. The system was called the Empire Routes.
Love your videos, the aircraft covered are always amazing, the similes like at 13:03 do you a disservice. They are jarring and take me out of the moment, sound contrived and forced to me at least. You should never try to inject humour when none is required. Your informative videos like this one are stellar as they are 🙂
15:04 It’s usually called a Tail Number instead of Serial Number Rex, G-for Great Britain, N- in the states for North America. Interesting that they are all letters instead of the country designation followed by one to five numbers or one to four numbers followed by one letter.
If you squint at the replacement engine shown at about 9 minutes, it looks like a squat robotic soldier brandishing a submachine gun or carbine-type weapon of some sort. It's almost "chibi" and wouldn't be out of place in an early 90s Gainax or AIC-created sci-fi anime.
You can see the same look at the nose of the C-119 flying box car and the C-123 also a transport. So, the British model was way ahead of its time. Cargo planes seem to have the wing attached to the top of the fuselage even today.
Rex--Bravo. I never had heard of this oh-so British airplane. Great old photos, especially at 16:38--the pith helmets and khaki clothing. Let's break out the tea and cucumber sandwiches.
'Serval' then engine name there after 8:57, that is name of a species of medium sized wild cat in Africa and they are interesting critters worth looking up if you don't already know what they are. 😺
There is a cromulent serendipity apparent to it, once you look closer. Yeah, some things could be better. But what it did, it did well. The Aussies ended with a bunch of Avro Tens. Not at all sterling material, but they did relatively good. How about a video on the Pander Postjäger? Cheers.
Love these videos and your channel. Hurts my heart seeing these old photos of Europeans when nowadays there are neighborhoods crowded with full body burqas. UK is being destroyed from within.
Q&A / Request Section - Ask your questions, or post suggestions, here :)
how are you doing Rex?
What was the first commercial passenger plane that put cargo space under the passenger cabin (double-decker)?
The picture shown at 21:20 shows the Royal Mail door marked ER. Was this taken during the brief reign of Edward VIII?
Great video on the Atlanta that is rarely mentioned!
Can you do a video of the post war Horten in Argentina. His son Diego Horten can provide some information regarding "paperclip".
Has a very modern "short-field" transport look for a 30's aircraft: Four engines, high-mounted wing, boxy yet aerodynamic body....the only thing missing is a rear ramp and level/retractable landing gear.
This one easily passes my "if it looks right it'll fly right" test.
True, you can see the future building up!
I like especially the passenger windows.
It does kind of give you a C-130 vibe a little.
It'd look downright futuristic if you put it next to an AN-2
A good thing about Rex's videos is that you can just hit LIKE before watching it. They are ALWAYS good.
Agreed
Absolutely true 👍
Thank you :) I try my best
@@RexsHangar Well your best is first class.
Yes, I do that too. In case I get interrupted and forget to like at the end.
Wow, a Qantas director at odds with what the public wants of the airline? What a shocking turn of events, surely it will never happen again!
"..pah! The customers are real Drongoes, I mean just look at some of 'em like ..erm, ..eh, ..ah damn, crikey see! ..that sheila over there...
Or that bloke ona thattaways, strueth!
Thar should IMHO be, some restrictions on customers that fugly not getting a booking,
...no matter how much better they might 'please sure' you if ya catch me driftwood winkaty wink wink."
@@ColinPacker Pesky breathing cargo, always with the complaints...
Have they installed the new 'extra leg room' corridor straps for standing passengers yet? :)
@jameslawrie3807 racking straps ? ..to help appointees 'stretch out' properly you mean ??
Was he Irish?
I so love learning about an aircraft I never knew existed. More please.
Finally something good to watch at 0530 while I'm getting ready to fly.
Same
Oh my, I really like the look of this one. In my eyes, really pretty. Not just for the day but even now it looks nice. A big fat humongous 'like' from me.
For the time and the fact that it was meant for rough field work a fixed gear makes sense.
For such a big and early aircraft, it is truly beautiful looking.
I took one look at the 3-view and knew this would be a fine flying aircraft. It's a textbook case of "if it looks right it will fly right".
Indeed, with room to evolve.
It's insane to me that something this good was built in the 30s, almost a hundred years ago with what limited knowledge and tools they had on hand. Someone had some proper neuron activation...
lol, tools 100 years ago were not limited!...the most significant differences were lack of electronic controls (e.g., cnc machines) and materials engineering (e.g., exotic alloys and plastics).
@@douglasharley2440 And those are the tool limitations. Lower-performance metals means heavier, underpowered engines; lack of electronics means greater manufacture tollerances. All of that means the airframe needs to be overengineered (heavier) to be able to withstand the metal fatigue of inferior alloys and not crumple. That and they did not have decades of hindsight to work with, the ability to come-up with something like this and have it reliably work is beyond impressive.
@@Dank_Lulu fair enough, but 99% of our tooling potential was already existing. that ain't limited, considering the whole.
Stone knives and bears skins can accomplish a great deal in the right hands.
th-cam.com/video/F226oWBHvvI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=e8pGe9CI-Yker17D
@@douglasharley2440 Fair enough. In that case, it's a question of semantics which makes this a reasonable point. Clarity is important. Was a good 'wel acsually' stand-off regardless. Take care, mate! o7
I really enjoy the non-warplane videos. There's something wonderful about listening to the history of planes who helped connect people throughout the world, carrying mail and cargo and love and hope as they did. Thanks for this video and the rest of them.
nice
She looks like fine subject matter for a new Valom model kit in 1/72. Thanks Rex . Another wonderful video.
Exactly my thought when i saw the Video. Get out of my head!
@@michaeljacobsen94 😅🤣😂
There is a paper model kit of it on ecardmodels. In a set that costs 4 dollars. You have to print it yourself but it's a nice 1:100 model.
That would be great but with limited military service not sure it is up Valoms street. I referenced above Onemanmodel from Japan did indicate that he might produce in resin 1/72 - I have two of his Ensigns which are fine - but is doing a lot of modern stuff currently On a different note hoping Valom might one day do a Warwick which other than a very tough AIMs or very old Contrail Vac Form there is very limited options for an aircraft that served in quite significant numbers and different versions. I did mention to Airfix man a couple of years ago at a show and he politely laughed at me.
@@johnholt890 Speaking of airliners , It is a crying shame there has not been a high quality model kit in 1/72nd of the de Havilland Comet in BOAC markings early or late stretched versions. Scale 1/144th is too small for me.
Thing about Rex is , he not only knows what he talks about , but as a fellow aviation enthusiast, he knows how to keep it interesting while also entertaining , I watch every single video , even aircraft id never think about (civilian aircraft since I'm more about military aircraft) , anyway. Keep up the great work Rex . I look forward to the next video.... ps , maybe think about doing some videos of more well known aircraft , the in depth you do is fantastic
The durability of modern aircraft amazes me. Aircraft became obsolete so fast during the first 3 decades of the century, whereas we still have B-52's flying that are older than their crew.
That is not so much a matter of durability though. Back then it was far easier and cheaper to innovate.
Whereas now, developing a new aircraft costs the GDP of a small country.
Also, civilian and military innovation processes play by different rules, as one just needs to get the job done whereas the other has to make a profit. The B-52 is still around because it does it's job, and there has been no need to significantly innovate on the basic airframe.
@@rockyblacksmithIt is also very much a factor of durability. The airframes on the older aircraft are so over engineered, they have not aged out due to metal fatigue and pressure cycles. They were designed with slide rules. Modern aircraft are not as strong as it increases weight unacceptably.
@@mikus4242everything worked and no flat batteries with a slide rule😊.
Thank you for a much enjoyed and well told tale. Also a wonderful collection of photographs, some of them are new to me. Shell used an attractive Barnett Freedman painting of an Atalanta in 1932 to promote their lubricating oils.
Aeronave interessante! Eu ainda não conhecia, grato pelo vídeo e pelas informações.
Another great presentation of a little known gem. Thank you, Rex !
I was ready to be amused by a chunky attempt at early streamlining, but I legitimately like the look of this plane. Sure, she looks a little dated now, but they did marvelous work for the time.
Only 30 years post the Wright brothers
Appreciate the Drachinifel style of commentary.
@ 8:42 - Is that a DC-3 in the background??? I would not have guessed that the Atalanta would still be in use so late in the game. EDIT: Okay, this caused me to do some reading. These two planes were only four years apart! Holy cow! The Douglass is still in use today here in the US by a number of small, private operators to move cargo or drop skydivers. You can find them in hangars at small, regional airports in the hinterlands. You never see the Atalanta in use anywhere. It did not make it in that regard, though it served to further many design and engineering advancements. How interesting, and what a perspective jolt to realize how contemporaneous these two planes were!
The DC-3 had the advantage that, as the C-47, they made about 3 squillion during WW2. Whereas AWA got moved over to Whitleys and the UK basically decided to buy in transport aircraft from the USA in WW2 apart from repurposing Stirling and Halifax production lines.
The DC3 was all metal. Of course metal will outlast fabric and plywood.
I think it may actually be a Douglas DC-2, not a DC-3. Both were operated by the little known Dutch airline KLM, hence the Dutch flag sticking out from the cockpit.😅
Juan Trippe of Pan Am was not impressed.
@@martijn9568 Right. So far I know.
This is actually quite a pretty airplane. I'm glad to see it actually did well as it was designed to. Just a really nice looking bird
The argosy looked at streamlining and said I'll have none of that give it to my chubby little brother Atlanta
Atalanta was a Greek heroine who would marry only a man that can outrun her or be killed.. Eventually one guy named Hipponenes succeeded by dropping goldenapples.
You are hosting one of the best aircraft history channel
Yet another brilliant and most interesting presentation. Outstanding work!
Ik glad to see your channel is doing so well today well deserved imo
Interesting bit of aeronautical history. Thank you Rex.
OMG those tiny little props!!!
Those engines did not have enough power for bigger ones.
thank you. very clear, interesting and understandable information delivered with immaculate speech. it was an amazing experience.
What an interesting video about an aircraft about which I previously knew absolutely nothing.
I'm glad that the first of the aircraft survived till the bitter end.
Fascinating... Great documentary. 👍
My first thought looking at it is that the inboard engines and propellers look very close to the fuselage!
Really nice looking airplane.
Thanks for this video! I have a 1/144 kit of it and really appreciate the reference material!
Welshmodels ? Wish they would step up to 1/72 both this and their Short Shetland.
I have been watching for your and I love you Rex, these videos are my idea of geeking out about old airplanes, one of my odd passions
I really appreciate this content. It is so rich in valuable knowledge. Thank you for all of your efforts in presenting these videos.
I love early and oddball aircraft that you feature... thanks for making this video
Another excellent vid. Thank you.
please do a video on the AW 27 ensign 😀
i love to get to know planes i never heard of in your videos, huge thanks and keep it up 😁👍
For a brick, she flew pretty good
I have a small-scale model of this aircraft, and it was not as chunky as it appears in photographs -it's really quite elegant in design.
The more I look at her, the more I think she's pretty, for her time!
Excellent vid, very interesting.
'Poor optics': nice one, Rex. 🤣😆
Interesting video. Look forward to one om the Ensign, the wikipedia article suggests it'll make for a worthwhile one.
0:45 beautiful picture there
Your mom
Love the 'forgotten aircraft' videos. Thanks for educating us nerds about this stuff!
Spotted something weird on this though... On one of the plane's doors, it has ROYAL MAIL ER. As Queen Elizabeth (ER) would not be queen until 1952, how is this possible if the last airframe was scrapped in 1944?
Edit: Of course - I forgot about Edward VIII. D'oh!
Good job Rex! I always learn something new here. I was totally unaware of this aircraft.
To my eyes the Atalanta has pleasing lines except for the vertical fin and rudder. They look undersized. I guess they were functional though. My first reaction was, "This would look better with the tail of a Beaufighter."
Looking forward to a vid about the Ensign😊
7:56 Rex: I think you missed a trick here. Unless I'm very much mistaken, the RPM gauges are those instruments that look like tapes in the centre of the panel. To the best of my knowledge this would be the first time that a tape-style gauge appeared on a commercial aircraft. The shading says they are not tapes but either huge drums (or more likely) partial drums. Their advantage over a normal circular gauge is that they make synchronising the engines a lot easier.
*The typical "you cannot go to manual". Fun fact, the last leg of the shuttle landings were always flown by hand. The space shuttle has actually never landed automatically. Reentry phase was computer-controlled though.*
A handsome looking aircraft.
Thanks Rex
Thanks Rex for another insightful vid about an aircraft that was clearly leading the way to the future. Has anyone else noticed that the photo at 20:49 has Amalthea carrying the Royal Mail logo "ER"? Confused me for a moment (surely not still flying in 1953?) before I realised it was "Edward Rex". Possibly the next mail flight brought instruction to scrub off the E and put back a renewed G.
Smooth brick
The photos around 15.20 - 15.40 are at Mbeya, I think, with Kilimanjaro in the background. I once arrived there in a Dakota - which also leaked.
holy cow I've never seen the HP42 before and it is adorable
There is nice 1/144 Airfix kit if you fancy building one.
@@johnholt890 ooOOooh.
Holy crap, in looking for that kit I just learned that Haynes makes an entire line of owners manuals for historic piston aircraft?!?!
Good design for rough fields.
Jim Terpin or Turpen 30's WWII start a pilot, or crew? Love HISTORY! Thanks for keeping it ALIVE!
Another great video
Cheers for the new video to devour!
Rather randomly back in the 80's a cereal company Kellogg's did a promotion featuring tiny model aircraft in each box and the one I got was one of these. I never had a clue as to it's origins until now.
Really great video, this cha.ged my lofe, i drunk asf and i love your channel with all the silly planes videos. You explain all that's needed and do so with historical images and fun facts about the plane, i would definitely shake your hand. Don't ever stop making vcontent, i live for this shit
Possibly the first nose/cockpit design which lead to the design which is used today.
13:34 Am I the only one that wishes there was a ninth plane named "Dave"?
I notice that Amalthea at 20:48 has the Royal Cipher ER (Edward Rex) on its Royal Mail door so this photo must be from 1936.
What a beutiful aircraft!
Its like a steam punk BAe 146.
They were quite a sleek design for the early 1930s, roughly equal in size and total engine power of the even sleeker and much faster Douglas DC-2' though with only half the seating capacity of the latter. Also there was no mention of a cabin attendant or toilet facilities either.
I always questioned why smaller cargo planes are so boxy, but I guess at some sizes benefits of space utilisation outweigh those of better aerodynamics.
fantastic
That's actually a beautiful flying brick.
The DC-1 met Imperial Airways' requirements, with only two engines. Entry to service (of the slightly stretched DC-2, 200 sold) was in 1934.
It really is a lovely plane.
Very good
In those days, and indeed today, a heavy retractable landing gear would simply replace the form drag of the external landing gear with induced drag caused by the heavier weight of the aircraft.
The leaky cockpit roof is interesting I have read that the Whitley bomber built by the same company was notorious for being wet when flying through rainclouds etc.
"That is a story for another day", like "beyond the scope of this discussion" are two of the classic statements indeed...(perhaps used too much).
Another comment I should have made was I had never heard of this plane !
The picture of AMALTHEA has her marked "Royal Mail ER" 20:54
I was seriously thinking that one at least made it through to 1952
'EMPIRE ROUTE'.
@@uingaeoc3905 And here I thought it was 'Edward Rex.'
@@Anaguma79 As it was too late for Ed VII and unlikely with the short reign, if any, for Ed VIII I doubt it was either. The system was called the Empire Routes.
@@uingaeoc3905 Thank you. It would explain the King's Crown too.
Such tiny propellers!
Kinda crazy they made more than enough thrust.
Love your videos, the aircraft covered are always amazing, the similes like at 13:03 do you a disservice. They are jarring and take me out of the moment, sound contrived and forced to me at least. You should never try to inject humour when none is required. Your informative videos like this one are stellar as they are 🙂
15:04 It’s usually called a Tail Number instead of Serial Number Rex, G-for Great Britain, N- in the states for North America. Interesting that they are all letters instead of the country designation followed by one to five numbers or one to four numbers followed by one letter.
If you squint at the replacement engine shown at about 9 minutes, it looks like a squat robotic soldier brandishing a submachine gun or carbine-type weapon of some sort. It's almost "chibi" and wouldn't be out of place in an early 90s Gainax or AIC-created sci-fi anime.
Not going to lie. I kinda like the look of this bird.
You can see the same look at the nose of the C-119 flying box car and the C-123 also a transport. So, the British model was way ahead of its time. Cargo planes seem to have the wing attached to the top of the fuselage even today.
I like this one.
perfect length. not too long not too short
Want one 1/72 Onemanmodel have indicated he might do but heavily involved in more modern stuff recently. Fingers crossed one comes out soon.
So pleasantly refreshing to hear someone speaking good English.
Rex--Bravo. I never had heard of this oh-so British airplane. Great old photos, especially at 16:38--the pith helmets and khaki clothing. Let's break out the tea and cucumber sandwiches.
Well done! Are you going to do a video about the A W Ensign?
'Serval' then engine name there after 8:57, that is name of a species of medium sized wild cat in Africa and they are interesting critters worth looking up if you don't already know what they are. 😺
I flew on a Shorts 220 once. A very nice aircraft!
Reminds me of the later Avro York in layout.
I just love the civilian aircraft videos.
There is a cromulent serendipity apparent to it, once you look closer. Yeah, some things could be better. But what it did, it did well.
The Aussies ended with a bunch of Avro Tens. Not at all sterling material, but they did relatively good.
How about a video on the Pander Postjäger?
Cheers.
How dare you describe the HP42 as weird! 🤣 Seriously though a great video- very interesting.
Love these videos and your channel. Hurts my heart seeing these old photos of Europeans when nowadays there are neighborhoods crowded with full body burqas. UK is being destroyed from within.
I immediately thought of the Shorts 360 Built through the 80’s in to early 90’s
You mean to tell me it hung in the air exactly the way a brick doesn’t?
I am seeing potential for evolution to trciycle fixed gear. With possibly a rear ramp. Hmm.
I find this aircraft, pleasing.
A truely "Art Deco" aeroplane. Nice machine.