Why Don't They Build It Today? The Most Brilliant Aircraft Design Ever
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- During warfare, transport aircraft perform highly dangerous missions moving personnel, equipment, and vital supplies to keep fighters and bombers aloft. However, the loading and unloading stages of the missions can often take a long time, leaving both the precious cargo and the personnel extremely vulnerable to attacks.
As the C-119, a powerful Fairchild cargo aircraft emerged during the Korean War, the engineers believed it could be further enhanced with detachable pods to expedite the process.
This led to the experimental contract of the XC-120 Packplane, a converted C-119 with a detachable cargo compartment.
One of the most unconventional aircraft of the postwar era, Fairchild believed that the removable fuselage transport plane would have radical implications in the field of military logistics, as well as subsequent civilian applications such as portable hospitals, radar stations, command centers, airport control towers, communication centers, and even shelters for Arctic rescue work.
For a moment in time, the possibilities were endless…
---
Join Dark Skies as we explore the world of aviation with cinematic short documentaries featuring the biggest and fastest airplanes ever built, top-secret military projects, and classified missions with hidden untold true stories. Including US, German, and Soviet warplanes, along with aircraft developments that took place during World War I, World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War, and special operations mission in between.
As images and footage of actual events are not always available, Dark Skies sometimes utilizes similar historical images and footage for dramatic effect and soundtracks for emotional impact. We do our best to keep it as visually accurate as possible.
All content on Dark Skies is researched, produced, and presented in historical context for educational purposes. We are history enthusiasts and are not always experts in some areas, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with corrections, additional information, or new ideas.
![[Watch Party] RoV Pro League 2024 Winter | with Moowan ( Bacon Time Vs Talon )](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CCEDhu6dPN8/mqdefault.jpg)
As a former military combat pilot, I really look forward to your videos. Even after 22 years in aviation I am still learning a lot from your channel.
Just don’t look at the pictures, right?
Real life Thunderbird 2. Love it
Was thinking the same thing
Me too!
Me three
I hate it when people steal the perfect comment from my brain.
Beat me to it..
The modular pod idea hasn't been fully abandoned. Just tweeked. Instead of the pod being exterior, uniform containers are loaded and delivered. It's not 'as fast' as detaching a pod from the aircraft, but it maintains aerodynamics and flight stability as the only thing that changes about the plane is its weight.
Good point
I think the uniform container idea got real traction with commercial air cargo--look at what the likes of FedEx and UPS has done. And regular commercial airliners started to standardize on the LD3 container (most modern jet airliners use LD3's now).
Also the fact you can load new cargo on the return flight in a fixed fuselage loading area.
@Allen Watson that’s very true, but it’s still a shame the idea didn’t take off at least for civilian purposes. With technological advances automatic handling issues, portable field hospitals or kitchens could be a great niche design for disaster relief.
Like you said, standardizing the cargo and cargo bays was a simpler process for 99%+ of uses.
And with LAPES (Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System), palletized cargo can be delivered out of a C-130 very quickly, without the aircraft even touching the ground .
Definitely brilliant. Also about the same time people decided that cargo ship should go in the direction of containerization.
I agree it seems brilliant... but it never caught on. There must be a reason for that.
@@pkz420 the flight control issues when unloaded. Why bother developing complex and expensive flight control software when you can have a simple tubular fuselage that can take lightweight containers built for aircraft. Just pull up your truck and roll them off the aircraft reducing unloading times compared to removing the pod and then unloading it. Also there are less things to go wrong. Damage any if the attachment points and the system fails, damage an anchoring point in side the fuselage then just use the one next to it (the fuselage anchoring points will be duplicated along the fuselage every few inches to maximise utility.
While watching, my thoughts went right down that corridor as well. Good point.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 from a civilian point of view sure but from a military point of view they could fly in 3 or 4 of those cargo pods, pre packed and set up as barracks for a FOB or base camp, another as a command post, a third is a hospital etc. In the time it takes to build, set up, and stock those in the traditional sense these can be dropped, set up and be running even quicker.
In disaster relief they can prioritize pods. Drop a field hospital and blood bank then drop off say a water and food distribution point, a mobile auto shop to help locals fix needed vehicles and get their infra structure repaired. And as pods are no loger needed the clean up is simple and leaves a smaller footprint than we do now.
@@JosephDawson1986 which they do using C-130s using trailers with wheels already in place for FOBs, or fly in containerised based modules in to such locations using a heavy lift helicopter such as the CH-47, as they have find for decades.
My father was in the 101st Air in the latte '50's and spoke lovingly of his many Boxcar jumps. I thought I knew quite a bit about the 119's but this blew my mind. A "Skycrane" with wings!!
My dad was airborne infantry in Europe WW2... went up in C47's & 119's 22 times, but never landed in an airplane until 1972.
The S64 Skycrane, does have wings!
@@johnnunn8688 it does not have wings, it has a rotor which is similar to a giant propeller not a wing
@@jamesberry3230, best you get yourself schooled, as it is a rotary winged aircraft, nothing like a propellor.
The XC-120 was a pretty ingenious idea. If the cargo hold is detachable, then when it isn't carrying cargo it can leave behind not only the dead weight of the pod, but also it's aerodynamic drag as well, and you can just load a pod with whatever you need and snap it in. It also foresaged the eventual almost universal containerization of freight by ships, trains, trucks, and eventually even aircraft through ISO containers.
but do you create more drag due to the squared off end instead of an aerodynamic end?
The plane equivalent of the Sikorsky S64 Skycrane.
Was thinking the same thing
It's similar to the Ptolemy Class Federation Starship!!!! 😁
And given a practical trial in Vietnam, the Army abandoned the pod idea and just used the Tarhe as a skycrane
@@colbeausabre8842 Mississippi National Guard used the pods, I saw sky cranes flying ppl around in the 80s
The S64 IS a ‘plane’. (Aircraft)
I love these videos. It's fascinating to see all of the strange aircraft that have been tried over the years. Thanks for all the cool stuff.
Oh!! Did you see the landing gear? So cool!! A literal 4 wheel system!!
Amen to that...
What a brilliant cargo concept.
An amazing concept! Sikorsky Helicopter CH-54 “Flying Crane” also used the concept of a multi-purpose detachable pod.
The C-119 is one of my favorite aircraft. I never understood why they never tried, or made a twin boom C-130 which, in my mind, would be awesome. Maybe it's just less expensive to make a single tail aircraft over a twin boom?
Yup. While a twin-boom C-130 would look neat, what would be the practical advantage that justifies the added cost?
@@horusfalcon if one tail falls off you still got another one
@@hunterbear2421 uneven drag
Aerodynamics concerns. Flutter, shock wave at high speed etc.
@@hunterbear2421 If a tail falls off, you aren't flying much longer
Such a beautiful, innovative and straightforward concept of an aircraft.
That aircraft would have found many uses of today's application like that autonomous hospital in case of tornado or earthquake aftermath.
The C-119/C-120 is not a rough field assault transport. Which is vital, because in natural disasters, airports are almost guaranteed to be among the first thing to go
Did Fairchild accidentally make Thunderbird 2 in real life before Thunderbird 2 was imagined!! What an amazing aircraft, there are so many ways a design like this could be useful. Unless there's more to the story, it sounds like it wasn't far away from being highly viable. This is definitely a What-If, Missed Opportunity aircraft.
Miles released a much smaller aircraft with a detachable pod in 1947. There were a number of designs in Germany prior to and during WW2. It was a concept that was very much 'in the air' at the time, you might say.
did the thought of "the creation of Thunderbird 2 plane was based from Fairchild XC-120" ever come to mind ?? . something that we build today is based from the past experiences and knowledge ....
Brilliant idea. I'd never even heard of this aircraft.
I have seen modern versions of these types of planes where they can land and have a train drive inbetween the gear and load full containers to the bottom of the plane including passenger cars. This way you can get a train to the airport and then fly without having to leave your seat.
Except maritime containers, as carried by the railways, are heavier than those needed for aircraft and have the aerodynamics of a brick. OK, if we use aerodynamic pods we'll end up wasting space on the train. Plus you'd need to straddle vehicles that stand over a 1m tall at their highest points (based on UK container wagons) design to carry standard 40' maritime containers. You can do this for freight but not for passengers due to crash worthiness standards.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 Plus, there's usually way more room on a train so you can't pack passengers in like they do an airplane which means much less profit for the flight which means expensive tickets.
You had the C82, the Packet I believe and the 119 Flying Boxcar, iconic planes.
Went flying in the C-119, I think around 1957-8, with a bunch of other CAP cadets. Orientation/indoctrination to the USAF. It was called Wold Chamberlain Field back then (MSP). Of course I joined the Air Force in '62😁 and was QCI on the F-16 in 1980. We do build some really great flying machines.
This was a cool idea I’m surprised they don’t have something like this now
Except today they'd have to call it Mrs. Pac Man... (( wa ka~wa ka ((
What advantage would it have over pallets and ICAO containers designed to be carried by aircraft, ships, trains and trucks?
Why have I never heard of this amazing plane before. Thank you as always!!
The C-119 Is one of my favorite aircraft. I wish more were left today.
Me as well, very cool airplane! I was lucky enough to get to crawl all over them when I was kid, and my father flew them.
@@scottminshall6420 very jealous lol. It's too bad only something like 15 are left in the world in every condition I believe.
@@UpToSpeedOnJaguar I’d never heard of them until about a week ago. Went to the hill afb museum mostly to see the B1, saw their c119 and went wth is that? Thought it looked really neat.
I actually designed a C117 like this when I was in high-school. Awesome to see that they thought of this in the 50s. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for this video. I had never heard of this aircraft. As a child I had a toy model of the C-119 with clamshell doors and a tiny jeep and truck for cargo. It is still my all-time favorite cargo plane.
I will never forget when I first saw a flying boxcar. I was about seven years old and it flew over the field by and my friends used to play baseball on. It was the most amazing thing I had ever seen to that point in my life
What a Wonderful Aircraft
When I was growing up there were dozens of C 119's at Teterboro Airport being dismantled and carted away. A few blocks away from the Bendix Corp and the Bendix Diner. Great memories.
As a kid I loved the detachable pod concept of the Eagle Transporters from Space: 1999 and the modular Sikorsky Skycranes. I wonder if the XC-120 or the Skycrane influenced the designers of the Eagles?
I never knew a plane like that ever existed. Thanks for the history lesson👍👍
We'd probably never see it other than on a controlled military base or overseas.
This is very similar to the Sikorsky SkyCrane helicopter, that could carry pods. It's was a great concept, and I think it still is, as it can set down a "small building" onto any terrain to do whatever mission is required.
Yes this still exists and is still made.
1:42
Within the transition from metal-based to carbon-based technologies and the resulting double increment of strength and lightness - it would be good to see this design principle taken further for commercial trans-ocean haulage. A modular (extendable/reducible) wing-frame with carbon container pods shaped to contribute to the aero-dynamic requirements of an ekranoplan-based design and which would be detachable for onward land-based haulage seems worth investigating. Deconstruction of the economy of container shipping and reconstructing as carbon vessels using ground effect to avoid the vast expense of fuel in overcoming hull drag would be the conversation. Accurate weather-forecasting and out-run speeds would be an essential consideration as would retrieval strategies if ever needing to ditch.
The C-119 is one of the coolest planes ever
Ah yes, the Boxcar. The first airplane I can remember seeing as a child in the sky, thinking how cool it looked (1950s).
Thank you for this video. I love airplanes and hold an A&P license, but I've never heard of this plane, a little bit mind-blown.....
The 119 was a wonderful site in the sky's of my childhood.
Best to you Scott🏁
C-119s are my fav blast. Jumped 130s, 141s, A-7s, Hueys, Chinooks, C47s and skydived just about everything else up to todays modern sport aircraft.
Thanks for video. The XC-120 was a good concept. The same idea as a shipping/truck container but for the sky? However, my first thought was, "how will it fly without the pack attached?" It basically becomes a different aircraft when you remove most of the fuselage.
This wasn’t the only aircraft to use the external pod idea. The Sikorsky CH54 Tarhe, flying crane also had a suspended “office building slung under it. More versatile, as you only need a landing zone the size of the bird.
Surprising that the concept hasn’t been taken up and fleshed out and modernized.
To a point it has. The skycrane has been incredibly useful in various civilian industries, plus it's multitude of usefulness in the military.
@@tacomundo imagine what fleets of these things could do for a country’s supply chain, drop one container pick up another refuel and go again.
Although a bit off topic, wasn't one of the proposals for the Airlander airships to be configured such that it could carry a shipping container?
What a brilliant idea!! Thunderbird 2!! Obviously!! 🙂
This would be cool for civilian airlines. Land, drop off pod near runway, vehicles take you to your "gate", pick up loaded pod, etc. Airports could be smaller and handle more passengers. Missed opportunity.
These are always my favorite dark skies videos! I love seeing all the weird and unique planes that history has largely forgotten.
So much R&D that seems forgotten
@@A6Legit . . . . not by good students turned Engineers . . . . . many of us know the value of history in EVERY field. Success can only come from not repeating missteps, and in some cases not returning down certain roads at all.
@@gilzor9376 agreed! People think history is boring but forget what the real purpose is.
@@gilzor9376 Some of these old planes arent that far off from the shit we have today which blows my mind. 100 years later and its basically the same stuff, just different propulsion and materials
@@A6Legit (I just saw this) I agree, it is amazing what some had achieved without today's technology in manufacturing.
What a great idea. They could do this for cargo and for passenger craft. In the event of an emergency, the pod could detach and parachute to the ground. Load passengers near the terminal and drive it like a bus to the plane and attach.
that's a really neat design. makes me think of that sky crane helicopter.
❤thank you for uploading this video tape, my father used to work on Tainan Taiwan airbase, it was part of USAF back in 1955.❤
I remember the old Boxcars flying around when I was a kid in the early sixties. I think their was an airbase close to West Chicago where I lived. I thought they were so cool ! You'd see them flying around low and slow and could get a good look at them.
I've always liked the C-119 since I watched both versions of "Flight of the Phoenix" and I quite like the look of the modular XC-120 Packplane variant.
The C 82 was used for the movie.
Good movie both of them.
This is actually surprisingly brilliant
This channel is the closest thing to the old Wings program that was on the Discovery Channel back in the 1990s! Amazing work by you and your team!
Pack plane makes complete sense , very logical choice . Thanks for the info
Looks like something you'd see in Starwars. I could see a version of this (sans wings and propellers) being used by a nomadic bounty hunter. His living quarters in the modified container, point defense laser cannons mounted on the top and bottom, and a turbo laser MacGyvered on the front.
You need treatment 🤷♂️.
It was unique enough to warrant saving!
Former Boeing Everett... as an aviation buff, I never heard or saw this concept. It is actually very brilliant. Pods could be pre-configured depending on actual mission; hospital, cargo, rescue, recon, troop mover, etc. It had a 30,000 pound payload limit, which wasn't too bad for time period. They could put 30,000 pounds of TNT in it and make quite the MOAB lasting impression on the enemy.
Today with modern aviation, much larger and capable pods and carriers could be built. The bulkhead between plane and cargo in original version looks to be flat. Pressurized fuselage might dictate different design, but concept is valid. Maybe Boeing can make a special 747 flying boxcar with detachable cargo pod. My friends in Everett would love a new 747 project and so would I.
Wow, now we know where they got the idea for, Thunderbird 2.
France did build a similar aircraft, but smaller: the Nord 2501 Noratlas, with 2 14cyl SNECMA Bristol Hercules engines (sleeve valves, 2040hp), entered in service in 1953 and retired in 1986, was also used from Germany , Israël and many other countries...
As a kid in the mid 60's I had seen many flying boxcars flying in and out of Willow Run airport at Ypsilanti Michigan.
I worked in Alaska in the early 1980's and had the opportunity to fly in the C-82 Boxcar a few times. It was a great bush cargo plane. It had a chain drive landing gear extension mechanism that tended to fail. I remember they had to reskin the belly once. Carried about 20,000 pounds of cargo, anything from lumber to trucks to small bulldozers.
This concept would be perfect today. You have a battery pack built into the bottom of the pod, electric motors use this power to fly to the destination, you arrive swop out your pod/battery pack for a fresh one, and then fly to your next destination.
I have marketing artwork for this project showing a freight depot in operation. It was in the boxes that came home when Fairchild abandoned the commercial aviation market around 1973. That was a dark time at our house. From Fairchildren to orphans, just like that. Ed Uhl would fly over our house on his way to the Germantown MD HQ in the STOL Porter every morning back then. In the summer that thing was my alarm clock. Later my wife and I lived at the Showalter mansion across from the plant. We got to witness the initial check out of the first production A-10s from about 300’.
Fascinating concept plane. Seems like it deserved more than the cursory look.
What a great idea!!! An aerodynamic version of the con-x box's seen on trucks, trains and on flat ground for storage space... What makes this design so valuable is the quickly loaded and unloaded feature... And a ready made storage spot for mobilised workshops... It's hard to believe that the government actually scrapped programs like this... It would have enabled quick ultra-modern arrivals and departures of these containers, from any suitable air strip... Reduced dead-heading on return trips means that these planes could quickly generate fares in both directions of trips.... Very efficient...
based on another comment, it seems like the aeronautics were ok, but ground handling was difficult on dirt and impossible on mud
. Could have been a commercial success(?) but impractical for the military
Looks an amazing plane and idea.I've never heard of this plane before either.
We developed the 463L system. It's primary purpose was to standardize loading and unloading cargo across multiple airframes.
I flew the L749 Connie for PNA and Wal and we often carried an external “speedpack”that worked just like these pods.We would carry up to 8000 pounds in it and it just knocked 5 knots off our cruise speed.
That's actually a pretty cool concept.
That's one cool airplane . A detachable cargo box. The need use of a modern version would revolutionize air cargo.
I had this idea as a kid, wow so happy to see it actually was built lol
my pops was a flight engineer on c119 out of Everett AFB . then in Vietnam he got reassigned to a stinger. he said they were pretty vulnerable and took a lot of small arms fire.
My Uncle Ray served in the 1st Marines under then Col. Chesty Puller in the Frozen Chosin! So cool to see that the flying boxcar may have personally aided him and his fellow Marines during the Korean War.
I always loved the C-119 ever since I watched the original Flight of the Phoenix movie long ago...
After all the time involved boarding , and exiting an Aircraft , I suggested to my Buddy that '' they should have a removable Fuselage , that could already be loaded '' ... I never new this had existed .
Lockheed Constellation developed a “Speed Pack” which was attached to bottom of fuselage. It was used to increase general cargo capacity.
In the mid to late 1980's there were several C-119's on contract with state and federal agencies being used for fire fighting. I worked as a Mixer-Loader at the time. I believe they held 1200 Gal. of retardant. They had a single "cam lock" loading port located at the rear of the fuselage. We had to bring the 3" loading hose under the tail section to load the aircraft. Because of this we had to add an extra section of load hose and load them at the far end of the loading ramp.
I dragged hose for a short time at Ramona, CA, and made friends with Denny Connor. He piloted a C-119, and gave me a tour of the plane. He had fashioned a small bedroom/galley area into the front of the cargo bay and could park his jeep inside the plane. He got other crews to take me on rides of their aircraft that were also deployed there (from Hemet), a B-17, a PB-4y (B-24), and something else I don't remember. For some reason, I never flew on his plane. The whole gang was redeployed to a fire near Morongo, and I never saw Denny again...his right wing detached on a drop, and he and his copilot were killed in the crash.
@@bisbonian1183 So sad...There was a DC7 co-pilot named Chuck Sheridan(Don Ornbaum was the chief pilot) that flew a USFS contract out of Fresno in 1986. The following fire season he was chief pilot in a DC7. Lost his life in the high Sierra. Had an S2 pilot lose his life a couple of fire seasons later....tough way to make a living
What a Fantastic idea! I was aware of the 'Boxcar' but had never seen this!
Another Eye opener from the Dark series!
I bloody love this thing, never knew about it. Thanks for the video.
That's BRILLIANT !
I remember reading in either Pop Sci, or Pop Mechanics of a passenger plane with a detachable passenger compartment.
Henry J Kaiser purchased the Willow Run plant that Ford built to construct the B-24 Liberator during WWII. In addition to building Kaiser and Frazer cars, Kaiser-Frazer constructed the Flying Boxcar there. Kaiser complained that the USAF was constantly demanding design changes which were passed on to Kaiser-Frazer without being completely engineered by Fairchild.
Yes, a great concept and much faster than in-plane cargo containers. Amazing that someone hasn't cracked this engineering "nut" to this day.
based on another comment, it seems like the aeronautics were ok, but ground handling was difficult on dirt and impossible on mud
. Containers, although not quite as fast, are more practical.
I remember seeing the 119 aircraft flying low over our farm, and the soldiers were clearly visible thru the open rear doors.
Location? I saw them flying near Columbus Indiana (read doors closed)
This is a brilliant piece of engineering. this could be used today it just needs updating and the application of modern technology and materials.
This is a really clever idea, that I think could still be used today.
I remember this aircraft being the star of the film ‘Flight of the Phoenix’, one of my favourite films ever.
Makes sense. Just like containerisation for civilian shipping, containerisation for airborne transport, with potentially different modules to be slung underneath.
I think it's a great idea.
Bus carrier.
People get into the bus in the city while the plane waits for it on a runway and then it transports people between cities.
now i know where the inspiration came for Thunderbirds 2. very cool.
The load instabilities mentioned in several comments brings to mind the horrific crash of the National Air 747 that crashed at Bagram in 2013, just after takeoff. So sad.
I am working in aviation so I have some insight into the problems that civilian airlines face day by day in the post-covid era. Ground and in-flight crew shortage, strict slot time regulations, not to mention the drastic increase in fuel prices. An airplane like this could help with many of those problems nowadays. Any budget airline would kill for an opportunity just to land detach the passenger compartment reattach another one and take right off again. This could radically reduce ground time and the applications are nearly limitless! This is a good idea! Why don't we doing this?
The shape of the XC-120’s fuselage, specifically the frontal section looks like it may have been inspiration for the C-5 Galaxy. I wonder if it was or simply a product of the advancements and better understanding of aviation/aerodynamic properties?
This is brilliant. The pods would be even bigger today. It’s got to be an aerodynamic problem without pod
I was stationed at Rosie Rhodes in Puerto Rico when the C-119s were withdrawn from service. All the planes from the Caribbean flew into the NAS at Roosevelt Rhodes Naval Station, for hour after hour, finely lining every runway and taxi way, there must have been hundreds of them. It was an awesome sight! It took several weeks for them to all leave and I have no idea where they went.
Great idea for an aircraft to study. Very interesting
I'm surprised that they didn't build a larger 4 engine version! Also, you'd think that a jet version would have been considered.
Never heard of this. Impressive looking thing, the film of the landing gear being deployed was a little startling. A really attractive thing I think, looks like it would have many uses.
Thunderbird 2 . I agree they should build a modern day version today .
The versatility, especially for that time was pretty impressive.
That’s really interesting, thanks for the video !!
Most aircraft that could be converted to cargo or civilian transport were. It was a way of putting unwnted war stocks to useful purpose. Even the Avro Lancaster and B29 saw useful purpose post war. For me, the most amazing post war transport aircraft was the Super Guppy and its successor the Beluga
The very first aircraft that I had the privilege to jump from. As a child I saw hundreds of this plane flying I’ve my home. The C-119.
The US government stopped developing and producing this type of aircraft, but Jeff Tracy of International Rescue took and continued to build on it. I also believe Straker of SHADO used a similar transport for some time.
That's innovative and super slick. 👍
This is pretty neat.
I was just thinking about a flying wing that could load up 7 connex containers under its wings.
It’d be more efficient than any cargo plane in use.
Amazing plane and a fantastic idea. Perhaps, to my mind, the inspiration for Thunderbird 2 in the TV show, which showcased the idea brilliantly.