Short Sunderland Flying Boat Takeoff

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 มิ.ย. 2010
  • From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Su...
    The Short S.25 Sunderland was a British flying boat patrol bomber developed for the Royal Air Force by Short Brothers. Based in part upon the S.23 Empire flying boat, the flagship of Imperial Airways, the S.25 was extensively re-engineered for military service. It was one of the most powerful and widely used flying boats throughout the Second World War, and was involved in countering the threat posed by German U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic. It took its name from the town (latterly, city) of Sunderland in northeast England.
    Click to subscribe! bit.ly/subAIRBOYD #AIRBOYD #AvGeek
  • ยานยนต์และพาหนะ

ความคิดเห็น • 22

  • @bhirlinn
    @bhirlinn 13 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    This aircraft was filmed on Loch Indaal, Isle of Islay, Scotland in November 1941. The pilot, Wing Commander Johnny Hyde was shot down over Norway, flying Beaufighters, in 1942. Film Cameraman was Jonah Jones..

  • @darracqboy
    @darracqboy 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Truly beautiful British engineering

  • @justforever96
    @justforever96 9 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Funny how everyone says that "Flying Porcupine" is because all of the defensive guns, yet the armament wasn't particularly heavy. They were just .303 MG's, even if there were a lot of them, and they rarely carried the total number possible. Only the latest versions carried the "16 guns" often quoted, and that count includes the 4 x .303's mounted in the nose of the Mk. V, which weren't useful for defense and never seen in the earlier Marks. A typical Sunderland before 1945 usually had 4 x .303's in the tail, 1 x in the nose (later 2), 2 x in the dorsal turret (later war only), and 2 x .303's or .50's in the waist, for a total of 9-10 guns. 7-8 for early craft with the single K-gun in the nose and no dorsal turret. Hardly overwhelming armament, although sufficient, especially in the tail. And keep in mind the waist guns were stored in the stowed position, and had to be removed and installed in the waist hatches before they could be used.
    No, in reality, the name "Flying Porcupine" comes from the forest of radar and radio aerials that could often be seen protruding from the spine and fuselage, and from under the wings. These could be quite numerous at times, and from the odd appearance they make, it seems much more likely that this "prickleback" appearance led to the "porcupine" moniker, not the supposed "heavy armament". Consider that the German Bv 138 is more heavily armed than a Sunderland, even though it's got far fewer guns...2 x 20mm's in powered turrets fore and rear, 1 x 13mm HMG, and random flexible MG 15's that can cover the side (I'd take an aircraft with a 20mm and a 13mm covering my tail and a 20mm covering my nose over an aircraft with 4 x .303's in the tail and 2 in the nose any day!), yet it doesn't get a badass nickname even thought it's armed like a AFV. Instead it's named for its appearance, "The Flying Clog", since most pilots were far more accustomed to identifying aircraft than getting into shooting battles with them. Sunderland encounters with aircraft were even more rare than their encounters with submarines (most Sunderlands spent the entire war patrolling without ever seeing a single enemy submarine or aircraft...war isn't glamorous for most participants).

    • @RockyRailroadProductions_B0SS
      @RockyRailroadProductions_B0SS 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      But porcupine quills aren't very big ;)

    • @gosforthlad
      @gosforthlad 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      just4ever - thank you for a great comment . I would like to add that legend has it that 3 Ju-88's were shot down by a Sunderland over the Bay of Biscay in of their 1st aerial combats . Also the British powered turrets were considered tthe best in the World [ by the British ofcourse ] even so it was the same 3-turret armament of the Lancaster bomber which was never considered a ' flying porcupine ' and needed to fly at night to have any chance of survivability . I like your answer , it makes sense

    • @stevebishop4926
      @stevebishop4926 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      When did you last fly in one
      You made all this up

  • @thegrayknight71
    @thegrayknight71 13 ปีที่แล้ว

    My all time fav. airplane.
    Fantastic design, lines, abilities. I wish they only built more.

  • @baggholma
    @baggholma 10 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I met a man around 90 years in Fuengirola,, Spain, who told me he had being good att drawing better than shooting, so he made some of the drawings to the Sunderland flying boat. He said he had a girlfriend in Budapest, around 60 years. He lived in London, and his kids never visited him. I took a video of his speach.

  • @hachipanki8634
    @hachipanki8634 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Damn, i love the Sunderland

  • @geomeerson6478
    @geomeerson6478 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Loch Ness training , tarbat ness accident , Raymond Bette Le Meer 👍 brother of my grand father .....c'est incroyable !

  • @2002And
    @2002And 13 ปีที่แล้ว

    @yorkshiresheep Sounds good.. thanks for the extra info.. :)

  • @2002And
    @2002And 14 ปีที่แล้ว

    Beautiful - i am trying to get hold of an Airfix model kit of this plane(/boat)!

  • @kolbpilot
    @kolbpilot 13 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    'Flying Porcupine'.

  • @thegrayknight71
    @thegrayknight71 13 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    very beautiful

  • @spidez8407
    @spidez8407 14 ปีที่แล้ว

    Reminds me of that cartoon the bear that flys a plane like this one and has a son that wind surfs behind it

  • @2002And
    @2002And 13 ปีที่แล้ว

    @yorkshiresheep Yes, since I posted that comment, I have seen several its for sale. I think I will wait for the Italari kit though.. :)Thanks.. :)

  • @nem1939
    @nem1939 14 ปีที่แล้ว

    its on offer in hobby craft at the moment for 12.99

    • @Simon-sv6qe
      @Simon-sv6qe 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      nem1939 cool il check it out

  • @sooline3854
    @sooline3854 10 ปีที่แล้ว

    are there any survivors that are in flyable condition?

  • @Russell3008
    @Russell3008 14 ปีที่แล้ว

    Haha, sweet