ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Watch More Mustard Videos & Support The Channel: nebula.tv/mustard
Support Mustard on Patreon: / mustardchannel
Mustard Merchandise: www.teespring....
Instagram: / mustardchannel
TikTok: / mustardchannel
Facebook: / mustard-109952378202335
Twitter: / mustardvideos
Website: www.mustardcha...
In 1974, Boeing vice president Jim Austin described the Airbus A300 as “a typical government airplane” of which “they’ll build a dozen or so and then go out of business.” He wasn't alone in his criticism. And he was almost right.
Airbus began a decade earlier as an ambitious effort to stop the Americans from completely taking over the global aviation industry. Boeing and McDonnell Douglas together were building over 80% of the world’s jetliners. And soon, they would be joined by Lockheed. All three manufacturers were introducing new state-of-the-art wide-body airliners that would revolutionize air travel in the 1970s by offering increased comfort and efficiency. Europe’s aircraft build stood little chance at competing. Unless they worked together.
By the mid-1960s plans were underway to build a truly European airliner. One that would involve the continent's leading manufacturers. It wasn't the first attempt at European cooperation (the French and British had already joined efforts to build Concorde), but nothing on this scale had ever attempted. The Europeans would build a new kind of airliner, a purpose-build, short to medium range ‘people mover’, which was increasingly being described as an ‘air bus’. The new plane would be highly optimized for efficiency by using the latest technologies and state of the art materials. It would feature just two turbofan engines, when the soon to be introduced American wide-bodies would have three or four. It meant Europe’s jet would offer increased fuel economy and lower maintenance. It would be called the A300.
France, Britain, West Germany, the Netherlands and Spain would each manufacturer portions of the plane for final assembly in Toulouse France. The logistics alone were a spectacular feat. But getting the new Airbus built would actually prove to be the easy part. Convincing the world to take a chance on a completely unproven manufacturer offering an unconventional twin-engine wide-body was another matter altogether. And to make matters worse, the new Airbus A300 debuted in the early 1970s, just in time for a global recession and oil crisis which put a near halt to airplane purchases by airlines.
But the A300 eventually caught on, thanks to perseverance and crafty deal-making by Airbus. By the end of the 1970’s the global economy had recovered, but fuel prices had not. The highly efficient twin-engine wide-body found its place in the market. But for Airbus, the A300 was just the beginning. With multinational partnerships in place and a sophisticated supply chain, the groundwork was set for the company’s truly meteoric rise.
#Airbus #A300 #Airliners
Select footage courtesy the AP Archive
AP Archive website: www.aparchive.com TH-cam: / aparchive and / britishmovietone
Like the the aviation industry posters found in this video? Visit The Aviation Ancestry Database, containing over 80,000 high-quality examples: www.aviationanc...
Special thanks to Nick Arehart for helping clean up our audio:
/ airhrt_
Thanks for watching!
Hey guys... looks like Mr. Mustard needs some new glasses. A couple spelling errors on the map slipped in. It's "Colombia" not "Columbia" and "Sao Paulo" not "Sao Paolo". Sorry my South American friends.
Tad more disappointing than a Columbia Hospital opening in my area. Was hoping for attractive looking healthcare professionals....
It's ok for the past 500 years every continent besides South America has been apologizing to South America. See: Spain, USA, UK, Portugal, even Russia by extension...I could go on and on!
Those fuckers don't speak English so it doesn't matter anyways.
Classic American mistakes.
LOOL, all good
When you go down a random youtube recommendation rabbithole and suddenly you've binge watched two hours of aviation videos.
Same here. 🤣
Its normal shit for me I’m an aviation geek
@@the3am368 now I want to specialise in aviation law. I can't be a pilot or owner of airlines but aviation lawyer for sure. 😍😌
Akash Chandra you could be a pilot if you wanted to, it’s not that hard to get a license, it’s like going it the dmv and doing your drivers test for 1-3 hours at a time for half a year
Avenger SAME!
Boeing: "Just a normal government airplane maker."
Airbus: "Hold my free samples."
lol
Guess we now know why free samples at grocery stores are really essential
Omg WOW
@@jacobnathanielzpayag3885 Of course, free samples still have to be good quality and hopefully not magically fly out of your hands and splat on the floor.......
@@EdgyNumber1 except with Boeing, you have to pay for the privilege of your planes splatting on the ground and eventually having the entire fleet grounded
>Mocks government programs.
>Is the largest government contractor.
Boeing : "LOL, typical govt programmes, nothing happening there"
Also Boeing Aerospace Defence: "Hue Hue Hue!!"
Maybe they considered themselves an atypical government program.
Boeing wasn’t going to make it without all the business from WWII. Even the 747 had a large chunk of its development costs funded by a failed bid on a military cargo aircraft
Chris Goodall Lockheed is better
>Be Lockheed Martin
>Start as civilian airliner
>become military
>Be used by military
>Monopolize large portion of military industry as a reliable company
>Be surprised American as one F35 costs more than Swedish submarine that sank entire Carrier.
>Monopolize space contracts.
>When exclusively used as part of ULA (Also Boeing) for most part by government to make rockets, gets beat by a 20 year start up Space-X in likewise manner, that goes to mars on Rocket that's half the cost of what ULA use to get into orbit.
As I recall, Boeing had been asking the FAA to change the 60-minute ETOPS rule for twin engine jets so they could market the in-development 757. Except when the change occurred, the 757 wasn't ready yet...but the A300 was.
Boeing literally threw its competition the lifeline it needed to survive. BY ACCIDENT.
That's interesting, Boeing seems convinced in making their rivals' lives easier thanks to their own mistakes. The Bombardier C-Series, now A220, is a recent example of that
I doubt that the 757 would have filled the same role of the a300, simply because of the 757 being a narrow body airliner.
@@dasovietpotato3784 Hmm, true. Maybe I'm confusing it with the 767? More research needed...
Just for the clarification, all of Boeing's narrow body air liners are the 707, 727, 737, and 757. All of Boeing's wide body airliners are the 747, 767, 777, and 787.
Ha ha
I really dig your graphic style. I'd watch even if you make a video about a garbage truck.
@@metanumia indeed, a review of garbage truck design and history is most likely very interesting
Mustard we want a history of garbage trucks video
I'm sure that a video explaining the complex mechanics involved.
There are whole channels on TH-cam dedicated to garbage-truck spotting...none of us should be surprised
+
The day is immediately nicer when there’s a new Mustard video.
Agreed.
Agreed also.
He’s not wrong
True story
Agree
Mustard + Airbus ? Is this Christmas already ?
Wdym? I want another video on Boeing. If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going. I'd even fly on a 737 MAX, even if I didn't have to.
@@everettrailfan Airbus vs Boeing is stupidly petty. Each company has had its highs and its lows. They're companies. Both make good generally reliable jets. It really shouldn't matter which company you're flying so much as if it can get you from point A to point B at a price you can comfortably afford.
RailfanReaper I would fly on a Max 737 too. Cause the 737 is still the safest jet on the bloody planet.
#boeing4life
@@Optimaloptimus The 737 Max is currently the safest jet on earth, cos it's not flying.
"The A300 is a typical government airplane"
-Boeing Exec.
So is pretty much the entire Boeing company.
The entire Boeing company, as it exists now, is a Bruh Moment.
Boeing like every other once venerable company is being run by bean counters instead of engineers.
@@coolcatmeow77 it has been said that McDonell-Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing own money
@@Rookie_One huh?
@@ColonizedEthan basically, once Boeing bought MD and the two company merged, the bean-counters management that came from MD managed to take control of Boeing, instead of boeing own engineering-oriented management keeping control
Boeing in the 70s: "Airbus is going to fail"
Airbus today: Full stonks with the A320neo.
Boeing today: The whole company is on fire after the 737 Max.
that what happens when you care more about the money and the bling-bling than the actual freaking passengers who are going to fly on your planes! lol, i feel like Boeing deserves all the consequences they're getting
@@clevergirl4457 They deserve worse, and I say that as someone who literally spent nearly 3 decades defending them (typical if it ain't boeing...stuff). Both them and the FAA should just be dissolved. They failed at the most essential task and responsibility and should not be allowed to exist anymore.
CharlieMason yeah, but you seem to be forgetting about the workers, the innovators, the engineers etc. I want Boeing to become a company led by engineers again, not out of touch money hungry businesspeople
I want boeing to go back to the oldish days like the 767 and before cuz I only really like Boeing up to the 767. Anything after I'm not really a fan of. With airbus I only like the a340 and the a330
@@clevergirl4457 You're right. That is exactly what I want them to be as well and have said so in many comments myself. It's just frustrating that they would let bean counters make decisions involving life and death. Suits never see anyone as people, just a number and a value.
Boeing in 1973: bruh they gonna die soon lol
Boeing in 2019: *NO HAVE MERCY HAVE MERCY*
@@jeshkam K
Boeing easly still gets out of the 737M7/8/9/10
@@jeshkam Just like the 737 Max
Shawn Esquilona no they both care about money lol, it’s a business
Shawn Esquilona ARBUS, HAS ITS PROBLEMS, BUT WITH THEM ITS always SOFTWARE RELATED, THE A230 NEO, seems to have a BALANCE PROBLEM ie; LUFTHANSA, has STOPPED SELLING TICKETS FOR THE LAST 2 ROWS OF SEATS!!, THENit seems ALL, their engine problems, causing engine replacements, NOW SAY, ITS A SOFTWARE PROBLEM. , in several models.the company HATES PILOTS, they wold Pd to ALWAYS CONTROL ITS PLANE BY COMPUTERS, SAYING , IT CAN FLY THEIR PLANES BETTER THAN ANY PILOT, JUST REMEMBER AF 449, CHEERS FROM NJ.USA🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Mustard: “This video was made possible by curiousity stream”
No, mustard, it was made possible by Airbus
lol
Lmao
@@normalwater8335 NEIN
lol
Patu
8:27
"...the move was nothing short of genius."
Clarkson: I'm staggered.
His genius is frightening... Really
@@straightbusta2609it creates gravity.
Mustard videos are simply amazing. Staggering visuals, video isnt too long yet isnt too short, long enough to compile the right information and to keep people to watching the video rather than skipping
Yeah. Great quality content.
Agreed
See you guys in 2 months
Lmaooo
It's worth the wait. It's so worth the wait.
Yup let's see if I haven't hanged myself in the next 2 months
Oooh... a optimist.. i like that
@@matsv201 you Know I just got my GCSE results and I have realized that life is just gonna keep on sucking. Might as well look at my options
Boeing: airbus is unproven and will go out of business after a few weeks
Airbus: laughs in A-330 & A-320
A380
Official D Clarke ATL a380 failed
@@wellhello4858 I know but thankfully it's still flying with us for the next 30 years or so
Official D Clarke ATL I’m not sure the airbus a380 and Boeing 747 will survive for much longer, small, efficient planes may take over
@@wellhello4858 it's wait and see
I guess boeing didn’t expect airbus to become their biggest rival, like the A320 NEO was carefully designed to replace older A320’s, as soon as boeing found out that the NEO series were becoming popular they designed the 737 Max in a big rush, result: 2 fatal crashes caused by design flaws and the company losing billions of dollars and losing trust in their newest product
Loopy Europeans created a short hauler with huge capacity. The airlines couldn't fill the seats. But they got lucky, twin jets were allowed to fly transatlantic routes.
hi
what actually happened is American Airlines ordered the 737 max before boeing announced the 797 nma and then boeing said that they will ditch the 797 and build the 737max
@@gloriousposter9296 at least those European planes fly without killing me, unlike American ones...
boeing is an US government subsidiary now. It doesn't matter for executives if the company loses billions on paper and trust coz their salary pack remain unchanged
The texture/bump mapping on that top-down view of the wooden table is freaking wonderful. What render engine are you using?
He once said Sketchup, but he's slowly switching to Blender.
I'd imagine Blender. I've used it for years, and honestly, it's a miracle Blender is EVEN free!
@@aeromartin7175 i mean that does not really say the render engine although if he is using blender it's most likely cycles
@@thetimewalrus7424 Or EEVEE
real-time render probably, look at on the render result, it has a bit of PBR characteristics
Everyone in the 70s and 80s: Airbus will go bankrupt
*BOY WERE THEY WRONG!*
odds1out reference? 1 like for you.
They were completely wrong, you mean.
The thing was, the American aviation community was kind of correct. They had seen Concorde and many other government run aviation projects go out the window really quickly. Some more examples of course include the 2707, and several aircraft by the Brabazon Committee. Airbus was just another one of these technologically advanced but not well enough supported aircraft. Not to mention that at this point you still had every manufacturer being separate and all the politics that includes. It was risky of course. It just so happened that the aircraft was well designed and the political issues of the day lead to it being a winner and selling a lot. This is one of those "hindsight is 20/20" sort of moments.
Of course they didn’t. They’re essentially a government entity.
Everyone in the 30's and 40's: "North American Aviation is unstoppable, they will always be number 1!"
I was in the first class of A-300 pilots from the US and was trained at the factory in Toulouse. It was a great airplane and did a fantastic job in the wide body class. One of the great things we could fly the aircraft from JFK to San Juan, PR or ATL to LGA and land this wide body on a 6000 foot runway. It was just a great flying no nonsense airplane.
Eastern!
The mechanics had a different story 🤣
Last time I was this early, Convair was still making planes
Edit: Wao that's a lotta likes, thanks y'all
Oh my god. It's you. Ethan
@@beepthemeep12 *Mild surprise*
Last time I was this early, Boeing hasn’t been established.
Last time I was this early, the Midwest wasn't covered with the shrapnel from cargo doors.
@@revolver265 dc-10
RIP Fokker, they had a nice long run
1912-1996
Davasaur The Real still quite a lot flying in Australia and Brazil
@@jox8334 Can confirm, many many flights. F70 and F100 are good solid aircraft.
@@ipoopalottm5979 Yes, curse the fokkers who crashed that business into the ground. Their profits were sky high but I guess they must have given their competent managers a window seat.
They live on in the Bus of the Air
I've been on a Fokker 50 several times. The name Fokker itself brings back so many childhood memories.
747: *Exists*
Tristar and DC:10: I’m about to ruin this whole man’s career.
Airbus: hold my European beer.
Hold my Dutch ale you mean
Wasn't beer a European beverage from the start?
@@903strikerunit No, Invented by the Egyptians
@@plaz6973 thank you
@@MarloSoBalJr Speaking of wish. I've only been drinking for a few months, and I'm a European beer loyalist despite being American.
So airbus was an underdog story. That just made me respect them even more.
Wendover Productions and Mustard should do a collaboration. They both LOVE airplanes lol...
Yesss
Anodyne Melody yaaass
Their voice sounds the same. I doubt they're the same person, lol.
*NOW THIS IS AN AVENGERS LEVEL REQUEST*
Well the voice in both creator's videos sounds almost the exact same...it isn't the same person?
I’m a simple man, I see a mustard video and click like.
Me too
William Robey agreed
same here
I did the same thing kkk
I'm a simpler man, I quit everything to click on his videos.
Trijets:exist
Airbus:I'm going to end this man's whole career
I wish there was more. Do u know how it failed so badly?
Neelesh Gunawardena more expensive, fuel efficient engines on 2 engined aircraft were enough to fly around the whole world so designing a trijet with expensive fuel efficient engines would be a waste of money and also more dangerous (more crashes from trijets percentage wise)
these arent the only reasons
The DC-10 crashes has not to do with the trijet configuration, but more because of design flaws made by Douglas, rushing to sell the plane before Lockheed sell the L1011.But yes ,a twin jet is more economical in fuel efficiency and maintenance and has the same capabilities and safety that a trijet has
@@jameskearsing9254 the L1011 was a trijet and it had a great safety record
Blame McDonnell Douglas for the DC-10 debacle
@@neeleshchithru6558 The trijet was the answer to regulations that prohibited twin engine jets from crossing the Atlantic (ETOPS). The regulations state that a plane needs to be within a certain range of an alternative airport in case of a single engine failure, at every point along the flight path. Progressively more reliable engines and better aircraft performance altogether caused those regulations to become less restrictive, paving the way for twin engine jets like the B767, B777 and A330 to replace the more thirsty trijets such as the DC-10 and MD-11 on the intercontinental routes.
That gift to the airline was a fine example of thinking-out-of-the-box. Airbus did a miracle. And they did it again, buying the Bombardier C-Series. From one day to the next they got a brilliant aircraft of the future, a future that commands for small and efficient planes!
Mustard: *makes videos about planes and trains*
Wendover: "wait, that's illegal"
HAI: *burns down the youtube office knowing that not only will he have to tolerate sitting next to the wendover guy, but also that weird aviation mustard ketchup guy*
(btw this is a reference to a video of his, so if you don't get it you can swiftly move on)
Today Airbus is more successful than ever before. Well done by Europe.
so proud of Europe.
I'd even bet that if Scania came to North America, they'd be a roaring success also.
@@dodecahedron1 Then what about a sort of Scania and Kenworth partnership, in which the chassis and bodywork would be made by Kenworth, but the gearboxes and engines by Scania?
Well because it allies 3 of the 5 major planes builder in history
@@adamp.3739 Well, Volvo is already selling quite a number of trucks in America
In my country, we had an airliner programme to be built by Bombardier. This was failing, so Airbus stepped in and are helping us go against Boeing. Thanks, Airbus!
Are you talking about the Bombardier C-Series / Airbus A220? Nowadays, I think, Bombardier builds it and Airbus sells it
@@Planefan1000 Yes.
@@Planefan1000 the A220 ones are the only ones that are made by Airbus in their US plants to work around the bribery US government got from Boeing that made foreign plane imports face heavy taxes (Bombardier decided to work with Airbus since the A220 will be a "made in america" plane so it would not have to face that enormous import taxes) .
The rest of the world gets the C series and it's built in Bombardier plants in Canada like their other aircrafts.
@@Planefan1000 actually bombardier sold the factory and tooling to Airbus, bombardier don't have a take anymore in the program
Especially when Boeing tried their legal bullshit on the CS/A220 series. A lot of planes sell lower than cost at the start to get traction going, boeing's argument was bogus bullshit.
Frank Kolk (Chief Engineer and later CEO) of American Airlines was extremely influential in defining the requirements for the A300. He spent entire day (they worked past midnight) with Béteille and his team defining the wide body twin he thought was the idea long haul ~250 passenger airliners with standard cargo containers in the lower fuselage. Kolk really didn't want the 747/DC-10/L1011 for operating cost, but was forced into it by the late 60's ETOPS rules. In the end what Kolk wanted is what is defining long haul commercial air travel today the 767/777/787/A300/A330/A350 do today. Kolk had amazing vision in the mid/late sixties.
The 767 really is just a Boeing's version of the A300 with just enough different to avoid any potential lawsuit.
The Airbus indeed is the pioneer of widebody twin-jet series that even Boeing once ridiculed, not struggling to keep up. So far upon the introduction of A350 as direct competitor of B777x and B787, there are no recalls, grounding, incidents and even crashes of the type.
7:59
"The A300 was out biggest new investment..."
*Was given A300s for free*
That's American bunsiness in a nutshell.
Never underestimate Americans’ love of free samples.
@@brandonryan1218 most be a costco shopper.
*S T O N K S*
Booyaka9000 because they could NOT PERFORM AS SAID, JUST ASK EASTERN, ( now defunct ) they were FLYING PIGS. They took forever to reach CRUISE,,THEY WERE NOT ECONOMICAL, AND THE AIR CONDITION IN FIRST MODELS REALLY SUCKED !
Good spot.
With all of the drama and thousands of just moneygrabbing clickbait channels, your channel is one of the best on TH-cam and from the first video ever, I can't help, but to just binge your videos over and over again. They are so informational and just pretty to look at. The animations are so good and insanely realistic. Thank you so much for the effort you put in these videos.
I can think of a few clickbait channels, Kurzgesagt (or however the fuck you spell that) In a nutshell, Bright Side, Smart Banana (made by the dude who created bright side so he could steal thumbnails etc) The infographics show, oh so many
Waird One
Wait, kurzgesagt is clickbaity? I must be living in a cave!
@@JostVanWair kurzgesat is a clickbait channel???
@@gsyt2356 Pal you're replying to a comment made 3 years ago. I don't really have an opinion on them anymore
Can't wait to have a notification from your channel for a video about the Avro Arrow!
But still, as usual, awesome video with an impressive quality!
You have my vote! I made the same suggestion several months ago.
Yes. I would love for him to do the Arrow. Would be an amazing topic to cover.
YES! a Mustard video on the Arrow would be awesome.
I want a video on the TSR-2.
The mother of all widebody twinjets, the entire industry basically follows the form factor the A300 pioneered - respect
Glad airbus survived, great competition for boeing
Definitely is now with that whole 787 MAX B.S.
MarloSoBalJr 787 max isn’t a thing dumbass. The 787 is one of the best planes ever created
Nothing like sport to boost development
@@KanyeTheGayFish69 apart from those battery problems
@@KanyeTheGayFish69 787 max 8 is, and its a tin can with wings, it goes 5 feet and slams the groundm
"nobody could commit to such a large project on their own"
_VC10 cries in the corner_
Exactly! The ultra-fast intercontinental VC-10 from British Vickers was in service years before the A300 was even designed. It still holds the fastest sub-sonic transatlantic time.
The video just said, not competitive enough. VC10 was wickedly expensive for its 4 engines at the time where turbofan was considered cutting edge.
Yeah but we still completed the project.
In fact _just Vickers_ completed the project.
Vickers just got fucked by whatever BA was called back then I forget.
@@hch1414 The phrase "none had ever built a large airliner" was particularly nonsensical, as the long-serving VC-10 was larger and longer-range than the first Airbus. It was in service until the late 90's, so clearly a viable commercial aircraft. A larger Comet 5 was also in development in the 50's, but was superseded by the successful HS Trident and various 'large' prototypes of other types had also been built. The claim and implication by Mustard are clear: and both are erroneous as any brief research into 50's/60's British airliners will make obvious.
You guys are all wrong. What Mustard meant was that the individual European aircraft companies could never break even on their planes - get this in y’all heads. Combining their resources was the only viable gamble to ensure a universal plane would be made and hence sold profitably.
I flew that plane when working for Eastern Airlines! We all loved that plane! The passengers loved it and it never broke! No nasty mechanical delays. So comfortable to fly on ❤❤❤❤❤❤
B thinking: How to get money from customers
A thinking: How to make customers happy to make money
"Make customers happy"
No one is thinking this in the airline industry.
@@matchesburn welp I think “customers” here is the airlines.
Boeing : stupid and greedy
Airbus. : *intelligence*
1973: Nah they’re gonna die lol
2000: Oh… we got some competition 😈😈
2020: NO HAVE MERCY, HAVE MERCY!!
*insert 737 being backed into a corner by an a320NEO with a Gatling Gun*
@@sirankleknocker3122 I respect you.
@@user-jx6gv9pp4s After creating a bad quality image of exactly that, here it is. imgur.com/a/wgyEaJF
A scared Boeing 737max in a corner against a aggressive A320NEO with a mini/gattling gun.
@@joshua9166 masterful
@@joshua9166 noice!!
•Wow a bus that flies•
*AIRPLANE*
I remember being on an Airbus as a kid. One of the most memorable flights of my life so far. It’s either that or my mentally grueling first flight over the Atlantic in a 757.
My day: pretty shit
*Mustard uploads*
My day: pretty good
Same here
Amateur Asian same
sameee
Boeing then: “They’ll only build a couple then go out of business, no biggie”
Airbus: (Becomes the largest aircraft manufacturer next to Boeing)
Boeing now (facing controversy over 737 MAX , delays with the 777x and profits hitting record lows): “It seems my calculations were incorrect .”
(Love both companies btw)
XXSwaggster202020 XX
Your joke is like my shlong
extremely long
Insert surprise Pikachu face
"(Love both companties btw)"
Nice way to avoid the fanboys. Why does such a company have fanboys in the first place?
AIRBUS WINS IN EVERY WAY (for me at least
theyre both gonna go to shit cause of corona
A300 was actually the son of Concorde. It has brake-by-wire, composites structures, supercritical wings, wide cargo compartment 2 x LD3 containers, 2 man cockpit crew and later on, c g control by shifting fuel in the tailplane. It was the first twin engine widebody and the first to be certified as ETOPS ready. Later versions were offered with carbon brakes, a Concorde innovation. It possessed a big commonality with McDonell Douglas DC 10s namely using the same GE CF6-50 engines, same environmental control system by Garrett and the same Auxiliary Power Unit Garrett TSCP-700. And of course it has better fuel consumption, 2 engine vs 3 engines
Additionally, the sidestick/digital flight control system that went into the A320 and formed the basis of all subsequent Airbus types was originally prototyped in a Concorde test airframe (it was called the "mini-manche" experiment).
You both make me feel stupid
@@Ben4A don't worry, you are not alone my friend
Everyone reading the comment, please note he is referring to the Concorde prototypes (001 and 002)
PLANE LORE
My day is always better when you upload! Keep up the great videos!
kikivoorburg same
Definitely, I've just finished a massive virus cleanup on a client's laptop and made an entire Rainmeter suite so I'm wiped out, but I feel so much better now that Mustard's got something new. Been watching the SR71 video and others on repeat while I waited, haha
Airbus: struggles
Eastern airlines: I’m gonna make this mans whole career
And it was KAL that help kickstarter Airbus' career....
Korean air(KAL) bought 30 A300B4 and A300-600 before Eastern..
yay korean air
"In an effort to impress airlines, Airbus sent its new jet to nearly all corners of the world....."
*shows America*
Dangaming10 it showed South America
Ian McGreevy it's America
@@edipires15 *Americas
Aliens in alien invasion movie:
Well, North America's aviation market is huge.
Boeing in 1970s: Hah, they won't survive for long.
Boeing in 2024: Help the door fell off (but our executives will still get 100M$)
AIRBUS: "give it a try, and then tell me if it's good or not.
not convinced? alright ill cut you a deal. the plane is available for FREE. And that's a great price! "
yeah, you know the reference. don't deny it...
Eastern Airlines: Hmm...okay, I think I'll give it a shot.
*_Later...._*
Eastern Airlines: OMG I'VE FALLEN IN LOVE WITH THIS PLANE!!! 😍💖✈️YO AIRBUS! WHERE U AT??? I'LL TAKE 23 MORE OF THOSE BIRDS FOR $778M!!!
WHAAAT? YOU NEVER BOUGHT AN AIRBUS? PFFFFTT!
yOu kNoW iTs FuN rIGhT??
@@mrbones2235 *_WHAAAAAT?!?!?_*
@AaronTheAviationAddict Boeing and airbus in a nutshell
Pan am: yo boeing give us a big plane
Boeing: okay
*747 exists in existence*
Boeing absorbs Douglas
Leaders of Boeing are money hungry
Airbus: *laughs in business*
Airbus in 1970s: Cheap and Efficient.
Airbus in 2005: LARGEST PASSENGER PLANE IN THE WORLD!
Eli Fybush also airbus: Still cheap and efficient and also safe (stares at 737 max 8)
I don't really question the A380, albeit it was bad market analysis and/or timing to market, but I don't really understand their mind when they did the A340, even tho it sold more. Like, they even mocked the tail engine of the DC-10 on the A300 promotions, I know ETOPS rules were still too hard for a long range twin but they could have taken the bet like Boeing did, given the restrictions weren't as strict after the A300...
@@Kalvinjj the a330 and a340 were built together, everyone wanted a twinjet but back in germany they wanted a quad jet, So they made 2 jets. the a330 and a340.
Antonov wants to know your location
Yeah, that did age well... after 15 years of service the ugly 380 is going out of business
Compare it with the 747
Boeing: Airbus is gonna turn into a failure.
Airbus: No, No I don’t think I will.
Christopher Xie *iT’s FrEe SaMpLe TiMe*
That meme is long dead, plus it is annoying and boring.
Jeshkam for once I can agree
I don't get it . Is that supposed to be funny ?
*revers card*
I can't stress this enough, this channel deserves all the love it gets. High quality renders of maps and aircraft, well researched history and overall great narration on some of history's most interesting projects.
I'd absolutely love to see the MD-11 or VC-10 get the Mustard treatment.
Definitely the awesome and fast VC-10.
Love your work! Very pleasing, I can only imagine the details I overlook that make your videos flow seamlessly, like water flowing through a creek. Also appreciate the way you incorporate sponsors, peaks interest without taking away from your content. DEFINITELY worth a sub!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the kind words :)
By far the best engineering channel on all of TH-cam. I love the history and animation.
I love that you use modeling in your videos to make a realistic aircraft flying through the skies _and_ what looks like a plastic scale model that sits on a desk. I know they are both digital, but they look distinct. The realistic one looks like a real flying aircraft; the model version looks like a plastic replica. Well done.
Boeing: lol airbus u gonna fail
also boeing: 737 max x_x
Airbus: nice try trying to make a competitor to our NEO
It does take 2 737-9 Max to beat a body count from the A330 for the similar failure.
NA AIRPLANES LULW
Airbus: "HA! Who's laughing now!?"
the max will fly agin just wait
Airbus: "Try our new plane we made for you"
America: "Eww, foreign stuff"
"We dont like YOUR kind of products here!"
"Our kind of product?"
"Govenment products!"
"Its free"
"I want 40!"
I find that ironic now since Delta is practically purging all American planes from their fleet.
Well, it worked for German and Japanese cars that now outsell American cars, too.
@@marxel4444 🤣🤣🤣
typical American mindset. still happens til his day
So the aircraft giant that is airbus
Rests almost entirely on a free sample
And a heaping pile of government backed loans, which allowed them to take risks that the American airline manufacturers couldn't like the A380 (which they're are discussions on when, how, and possibly even if those loans will be repaid). While Boeing typically has to woo a handful of launch customers before they can proceed with development beyond the preliminaries and make a prototype.
@Joel Schembri The U.S. government doesn't fund Boeing passenger airliners and never has. If Airbus didn't get decades worth of illegal subsidies, they would not have survived.
@@joeterzio7175
Subsidies aren't illegal.
@@joeterzio7175 lol the dumbness
@@joeterzio7175 I mean how much more one can get butthurt
Boeing’s hubris has always been their weak point. Now nearing the end of my airline career I’ve flown (among others) the B-727, 737 (-200 to NG), 744, 757, 767, and 777. I now fly the A-320 series because I want to.
Great job Airbus!
Nobody
Not a soul
Eastern airlines: *i’ll take your entire stock!*
@@cuy50 you're the dead meme
Also used inappropriately.
Isn't it strange how the one US airline that ordered the A300 later went into administration?
stonks
stonk*
9:35
Also the oil crisis helped the A300 as it was more efficient than many older planes like the 747 and MD-10.
Boeing: "lol Airbus is just going to fail"
Airbus: *REVERSE CARD*
also boeing : reverse card | Airbus and boeing now : best plane manufacturers making good planes
@@ThatIsALakeSir Yes, the 737-max was certainly a "good plane" hahaha
@@bathwater3196 loolololll
The Airbus A380 is the biggest financial failure in aviation history since the Concorde...
@@sandervanderkammen9230 No it isn’t.
Airbus truly does make some beautiful aircraft. The Europeans sure do know how to design some wonderful machinery.
I'm not so sure about appearances (I find A380 uglier than 747), but they have not lost their touch on reliability.
I think they’re a bit ugly but comfortable.
@@dbclass4075 the A380 is ugly and fat but the A330 is a really sleek design
@@mteagleworld A350 is a big step up.
@@jesdadotcom The "comfort" bit depends on the airline, say Spirit Airlines vs. Korean Air.
I can remember getting off Boeing airliners and boarding an Airbus A300, the first things you noticed was how quiet the Airbus was and how fast it climbed. USA has always had a 'not made here' mindset...
Everybody gangsta until airbus give free samples for 6 month
6:45 - That hurts. That hurts! Imperial units belong to a museum! Along with old Russian units for example.
Then time your clip as 405 seconds because the minute is not a metric unit but the second is.
A minute does not come from imperial either however it can be used as an SI unit.
FRANCE: Britain you'll design and build the wings; Germany you do the fuselage; Netherlands the control surfaces and I'll do the cockpit. All right, let's get this done!
SPAIN: Hey! What about me?
BRITAIN: Oh yeah you exist too
FRANCE: Uhhh... You design and build the bolts of the landing gear little buddy; do you think can you handle that? Sure? You promise? Fine, don't fuck it all up like you always do
SPAIN: I'm hanging out with the big boys now this is so exciting!
ITALY: *sits there slowly unrolling wire and cables...*
If the Italians had done the interior and design the exterior, I think it would have been perfection.
When Eastern got the first 4 A300's, it was the dominant carrier servicing PR. I flew sooo many times on the A300! It was so comfy - along the L1011'a that Eastern also had servicing the same routes. Once these two wide body jets were retired, I've only flown narrow body jets....319; 320; 321:737 and 757 (until the last one was retired also.).I flew a couple of times on 767's and were similar to the Airbus, but, I really miss the A300.
The best follow up for this video is the A380. From the first twin-aisle plane, to the first double-decker. From a successful Airbus, to a failed (but a passenger favorite) Airbus.
Then maybe A320 afterwards, their most successful airliner. It is the world's first fly-by-wire airliner after all.
This is just peak european spirit.
Put your heads together, cross borders and achieve greatness.
Unity in diversity - long live the EU!
I wholeheartedly agree! European unity is integral to its survival, safety, and long-term success! I wish certain fear-mongers, ethnocentrics, and xenophobes would just stop playing into Europe's adversaries hands because of a vague fear of "the other" and plenty of misinformation, much of which is spread by Europe's adversaries, especially Russia for the past few years.
Curious to see if Airbus will close the plant in Cheshire, UK rather than pay a WTO tariff to import each aircraft wing. They will hopefully stick with Rolls Royce as engine maker though seeing as Trump's tariff wars have made Europeans sceptical of buying from the US.
Airbus and the EEC were two different things. One grew by selling useful aircraft. The other grew itself for its own sake.
@@thomasjoyce7910 Well, that's why I talked about "spirit". What do mean for it's own sake?
Many European countries decided to work closer together to stand head on head to the US/RU/CN.
We have learned our lessons in two world wars, the EU isn't just smth economical. It's way more than that
@@minzemango
Whether they are constructing innovative passenger aircraft or gigantic, unaccountable power structures, the Europeans certainly deserve closer attention.
I love how the Europeans teamed up like a school group project
How people proved their planes were cool:
America: shows massive plane to everyone in the world
Europe: drinks a shit ton of champagne while flying all over the US
Barry Scott this is how we roll
Then drunk Europe decides to build even bigger plane... and the project fails.
@@RolandBizjets the cool Americans build a 4th malfunctioning generation of an aircraft designed more than 50 years ago with parts of an even older plane, while Europeans only needed a new engine option
eduardo Martínez Juárez thats because 737 is much older than a320, so it was designed closer to the ground.
The very first Airbus, A300, is amazing, but it amazes me much much more that Concorde was even earlier in the air.
I work at FedEx Express. We have mixed feelings regarding the Airbus A300 freighter. Most of us that offload cargo planes prefer the 767 due to the simplicity and less burdensome to work on. Airbus has a lot of odd and annoying quirks such as:
1) The tall landing gear requires you to use a ladder to open the lower deck doors. The 767 is low enough to the ground you can reach up and flip a switch.
2) Lower deck floor controls are not very user friendly compared to the 767
3) The aft section on the upper deck has a positive slope, which is hazardous pushing a cargo container that weighs 2 tons uphill.
4) Problematic rainwater drainage when working with the main cargo door open. The plane is sensitive to water damage.
Thanks for sharing :)
True but you are comparing planes that were build like a decade apart. And aren't A300's decommissioned in most countries nowadays? Or are you talking about airbus in general?
@@minumilati151 Pretty much all of Airbus’s designs are higher off the ground than Boeing’s competitors, it seems to be part of their design language - working as an aircraft refueler I learned that you need an 8ft ladder to reach the fuel cap on A320 family aircraft, while the job can be done with just a 6ft ladder on a 737NG. Additionally, FedEx still operates around 70 A300F’s and UPS operates around 50. They aren’t decommissioned in the freighter market by any means.
@@rumeru905 Part of the higher height reason is Airbus being relatively new; in the era of high-bypass turbofans, which are large. Hence, the need to ensure enough space to fit the engines. 737 was created in the era of low-bypass turbofans, which are quite small.
Also, the airport environment is very different between the two eras. 737s have to deal with airports with limited equipment, hence its low height to ensure minimal equipment needed to handle luggage. A320s are in more modern era where airports are better equipped.
And yet the very reason it's so high off the ground is why it could upgrade to newer engines, while Boeing planes started to fall off the sky. I do understand you are pointing out issues from your perspective, however each coin has two sides.
Monarch in the U.K. operated the A300. (I think they had four of them) There were no galleys between the front and read of the aircraft. The view of 352 seats, from the back row, was extraordinary!
They delivered safe and pleasant “bucket and spade” holidays to millions of deserving Brits ! Happy days.
It's fascinating to see how close Airbus got to closing up shop, especially when we couldn't imagine a world without it today. I've flown on an A330, A340, and A350, and all were impressive machines.
They got close to closing if you forget that Airbus also sold aircraft back then in Europe (where they were being made...) and Asia. But yeah, if you consider the USA to be 'the world' then yeah, they had a challenge getting their foot in the door in the USA...
@@someguy4915 USA was effectively "the world" back in the 70s, from an economical standpoint. You win there, you win everywhere, which is why when Airbus didn't see any sales coming from the US they were contemplating closing everything down.
The fact that Airbus turned out to be better than Boeing is impressive
Its not tho. Boeing still sells a lot more planes
@@lavaregion6968 selling alot because you got the public on your side doesnt mean anything if airbus literally had a better plane in almost every way. 20% more efficient than any american jets at the time? only a delusionalist would say boeing was better
@@lavaregion6968 just because you exist for so long that everyone still somehow trusts you, doesn’t make you better
@@lavaregion6968 no.
@@lavaregion6968 Not for much longer. A320 already overtook 737 as the best-selling airliner.
Hey Mustard, I have noticed that you have removed the links or names to the stock music you used in your videos from your description. Is there a reason for that? I am asking because I enjoy your choice of music and I used to listen to it just on its own. For example, that soundtrack you have used at the 9:43 is a particular favourite of mine but I cannot serach for it now because I don't know what its called.
If possible, could you please link the music you use in your videos in the description again?
It's called "To 80s" by red Fahren. But it's not available anywhere, unfortunately... :(
@@Nico-the-lupo-driver
That's a shame. I loved that bit of music. Anyway, thank you. 😊
"The operating language wasn't french or German it was English"
United Kingdom: That's my boy
They sit together in a room. France Germany and Briten
France: We should use french! its such a beautiful language.
Germany: Only over my dead body! we will use german to show dominance!
Briten: We once showed the world dominance using english.
France & Germany: Fair enough. English it is.
These videos are a great entertainment and learning value. Thanks Mustard!
Last time I was this early, TWA and Panam were still operational.
3:18 "in 1967 France, Britain and West Germany kicked off the project and they were soon joined by other European nations."
But the British government abandonned Airbus en 1969!!
Tony Benn, then British Minister for Technology, announced in December 1968 that the UK could not commit to participate financially in the project and might not support the consortium. The UK finally decided to abandon its participation in the project in 1969 (NYT April 11, 1969: Britain Abandons the European Airbus Project; Believes Building the Plane Is a Losing Proposition).
At the 1969 Paris Air Show, France and Germany signed a cooperation agreement 50%-50% for the 226-seat “A300B” jet.
The engine is awarded to General Electric in cooperation with French Snecma to develop the future CFM 56 engine.
Despite the withdrawal of the UK, Arnold Hall, director of Hawker-Siddeley, had already invested 35 million pounds in the design and the manufacture of the wings and decides to join forces with Sud-Aviation and Deutsche Airbus on the A300B project.
Fun fact: 1969 UK government "Believes Building the Plane Is a Losing Proposition".. Sure, sure..
The UK government may have pulled out of the deal on the face of it, but the consortium were savvy and knew the UK aerospace firms themselves had some of the best engineers and most advanced technologies in the world at the time - they were simply given "preferential subcontractor" roles in the project (and some of the people were out-and-out poached by the consortium directly). I'm more pro-enlightened use of government than many, and tend to be suspicious of corporate behaviour - but this was one occasion where my usual expectations would have wrong; as well as pleasantly surprising.
Brexit '69
Meanwhile on 21st century, boeing was begining to lose their footing on their most selling aircraft type, and failed spectacularly when they tried to catching up with the newest airbus’ A320
On the other hand, Airbus has had to end production of its unprofitable A380 just fourteen years after its first delivery. Meanwhile, Boeing is still building the spectacularly successful 747 (if only for another year or two.) The "Queen of the Skies" has been the standard for international travel for over half a century.
@@skunkbucket9408 - I've long suspected that Airbus considered the A380 project to be a calculated risk in financial terms, it was more about proving to the global market that they could pull off a project of that size and technological complexity as well as the US (and Boeing's 747 in particular). The B747 largely owes its success and longevity to being the first widebody to market, followed by the DC-10 and L-1011 tri-jet widebodies essentially competing each other out of the market by the late 1970s.
Whatever anyone may think of Airbus, you can't deny their business savvy - while the A380 was the flagship product, they already had big competitive advantages in the A320neo project in their back pocket, and when the original (rather pedestrian) A350 proposal wasn't to their customers' liking, they scrapped the original proposal and decided on a clean-sheet design capable of going toe-to-toe with the B777 and B787 - though it's designed to fit in the market space between the two Boeing types.
@@skunkbucket9408 Its not fair competition for the a380, because the 747 was the only one of its kind and was produced way earlier. The a380 is actually better than the 747 in term of safety record (literally 0 fatalities contributed over its entire life cycle) and extraordinary comfort, and what do you care most as a passenger?
Frank Kolk (American Airline Chief Engineer, later President) helped craft the requirements of the A300. Although AA would only buy the A300 much later, Kolk was highly instrumental in getting what he felt was the future of long range commercial airliners. A big twin widebody and not the DC-10/L1011 trijets or larger 747. Kolk worked closed with Roger Béteille and his early Airbus team (only a few dozen engineers).
Yup. American got the latest and greatest version of the type. They were the launch customer for the 2-crew, modernized and extended range A300-600R in 1988. Crandall ordered great airplanes. A300-600, 767-300, F100, MD-11 and later on the 777-200 when they were very unhappy with the fuel economy and range underperformance of the MD-11. They ended up putting MD-11s on routes the A300 and 767 could do on their own. They couldn't wait to get rid of them. The A300 made AA a fortune on the cargo capacity alone.
Eastern: I like Boeing but it’s very dead and boring
Airbus :we have the a300
Eastern : I want your whole stock!!!!
In current times boeing could potentially be out of business.
Nice micdonald Douglas dc10 Easter eggs in the background at 0:55 and some bits before that and later on in the video. Found it cool. Love learning new things thanks mustard.
My uncle was a captain for Eastern Airlines when the A300 was being introduced. EAL offered to move him and his family to France so that he could teach other pilots how to fly this new plane. He declined the offer, but was still one of the first pilots in the US to be flying the A300!
Thats incredible!
The Airbus A-300 was a successful plane. Now, Airbus is a wealthy and great aircraft manufacturer.
Your content is absolutely fantastic! As a commercial aviation geek, I think that this was well researched and you certainly covered most of what made the A300 so unique. I always look forward to your new videos. Thank you!
When Europeans cooperate, we matter on a meaningful scale and truly amazing things happen.
@Batman Summer This is the second time I see you bashing Europeans. Why? Europeans don't hate Americans. A little bit of capitalism and rivalry is what makes innovation happen. Hate causes wars and destruction. That's why so many innovations come from Europe and the US, and we haven't been at war with each other for a long time.
@Batman Summer Weak continent that colonized your shitty country
@Batman Summer If History had hands, it already would have reduced them to mush by repeatedly slapping you
Seriously, have you ever opened history books?
@Batman Summer Here's a quick list of basic errors you've already committed:
One: The US did NOT won both World wars by itself, especially the first
Two: Don't know diddly doo about Soviet purges (and neither get that Russia is culturally Eastern European)
Three: Apparently isn't aware of the existence of Imperial Japan nor Chineese hegemony
Four: The multiple genocides of Mao of its own people, but i guess 200 million chineese lives don't matter
Five: That the Marshall plan was out of generosity, and not a way of rallying European states to the US side instead of the USSR, who tended employ more "direct" means
Six: The US only intervening when absolutely forced too, they were neutral in WW1 and only reacted after the second Casus Belli, and Japan was the first to attack, and Germany declaring war, not the US
Seven: Ever asked the US what happened to the native? The repeated process of "reserves" in the shittiest places possible, only to massacre some tribes and repeat the whole thing with the survivors?
And most importantly: Condemning an entire Continent for the objective of the governments of some nations
I guess Ireland, Poland, Finland, Central Europe, the Baltics and Balkans don't ring any bells to you? Go tell a Pole or a slav that he is responsible for the deaths in WW2 and should have let himself get genocided to make the war quicker
Here is what you got right:
-The bordergore that is what France and the UK left behind them
-The France-Afrique post colonial system
Here's what you could have used:
-The treatment of non Europeans in the colonies like second class citizen, despite the end of slavery
-The Indian famine in 1943 that Churchill did not do anything about
-The treatment inflicted to the natives in the New World by most colonial powers
And here is what you should be aware of, for what is recent history:
-The Monroe doctrine, aka why Latin America can't get a break from the US
-Chineese post colonialism, just like France that you are (rightfully) accusing
-Slavery still being a thing in parts the Arab world
-Caste system in India alive and well, where many are treated like subhumans
And finally something primordial to History: Geography determine who wins and who loses
Eurasia+North Africa had the best positioning, allowing exchanges and progress to outpace more isolated/vertical areas like the Americas, Sub-Saharan Africa, Oceania and most islands
What happens when a city-state/nation gets enough power? Empire.
And as far as i know, the assyrians, babylonians, Egyptians and Persian, carthaginians, and ancient china were not exactly European, and had varying levels of tyranny depending on how their rulers though to maintain their power (Assyria being arguably the most brutal and Persia the least)
Of course on Europe's side there is a whole mess of empires Post-Rome, with the same varying levels on tyranny, depending on what ruler does what (and i should remember you that monarchs are one big family)
And even isolated regions have thoses: Mali, Abyssinia, various commercial empires in SEA like the Majapahit and Malaya, the New world with the Aztec triple alliance, the Mayan, and the Inca (with the incredible feat of sustaining an Andean empire with no work animal available other that the mediocre llama/alpaca, compared to the Afro-Eurasian horse, cow, camel etc...)
The first thing less technologically advanced groups does when encountering others? Ask to trade for it and raid/conquer your neighbours before they get it too, aka what happened in West-Africa, Northern America, and even Japan
What i want to say: who you descend from and the amount of melanin in your skin does not fucking determine how much you want to conquer thoses behind the next hill, no major power became major without questionable means (along what can basically be called luck), we in Europe hate our own governing bodies just as much as any other, since we have to vote against candidates and not for them, and they are gonna fuck us over no matter what
I am aware to be lucky to have been born where i am now, however i won't let anyone spit on History, as it's the only thing with any meaning to civilisation, and even before it, i understand that you are cultured and knowledgeable, but please do not let preconceived ideas make you think that the world revolves in bad vs evil with clear unity in each group, everyone is an asshole including me, a fucking loser wasting his time on YT comments and acting like a stupid smart-ass and holier-than-thou, that's me and i hate it, thank you for wasting your time on my long-ass crying
Scorpixel bravo.
And yet, A300s are still flying today.
oui :) Cause Européens make good planes
Iran still using A300 passenger today.
@@ruez Yes, DHL, UPS and Fed Ex still us it too as freight planes
@@darkcassoulet1041 frog
TROLLOLER O U I. je suis une grenouille
USA:We build our own planes. Why do we buy it from Europe? lol
A300:What if I told you... that I was designed using *imperial* units and not metric...?
USA:I'll take your entire stock.
Airbus is a success story that shows, what you can achieve with cooperation.
As a European I feel proud of what we have achieved.
I hope one day, we can do one better, by everyone in the world working together to conquer our solar system.
5:00: To get the A300 built, Airbus pulled off an extraordinary feat of logistics..
*Wendover production: Join the chat.*
0
0
0
0 0 0 0
Those airplane models make me wanna reach in and take it off the screen
Mustard is the only TH-camr who's videos I actually watch more than once! Unbelievable channel.