I was lucky to know Rowley Falk, the first Vulcan test pilot to survive a test flight. I believe about 6 or 7 previous pilots died during the previous test flights making Rowley the first person to survive a flight in a delta wing aircraft. A true hero.
What did you think of that the pilots got ejector seats and the other three crewmen didn't, All the V-bombers were the same apparently. It is annoying when Aviation videos by Idiots Is annoying We are a funny breed that way
I lived on that air base at Syerston. I used to fly on that airfield too. It always struck me that metal fatigue on an airframe as young as that was odd, perhaps not for the mid-50s.
Many moons ago I lived on Coney Grey Spinney.....Dad was a Snowdrop at Newton. I'm not a pilot so........ My understanding is that, being a prototype, VX 770 wasn't stressed to the same level as production airframes.... also, she was powered on this occasion by RR Conways - a lot more powerful than the Avons with which she was initially equipped. Officially Keith Sturt was blamed for overstressing the really quite conservative limits on this particular aircraft and, sadly, history continues to record that. However. Tony Blackman (ex Vulcan test pilot) reports that leading edge cracks were not unknown on Vulcans - they even had an especially petit chap at Avros/Hawker Siddelely who was small enough to squeeze inside the wing to conduct regular inspections of the leading edge structure and, occasionally, to indicate that repairs were necessary. Blackman is of the opinion (his book, 'Vulcan Test Pilot') that pilots at RR Hucknall were regularly flying unauthorised aeros with VX770....she was apparently a VERY hot ship with those Conways. This included rolling the aircraft. VX770 was expressly forbidden to fly aerobatics because of the combination of extra power and a structurally weaker than production airframe. Blackman does not believe that Keith Sturt exceeded the airframe limits. He thinks it highly probable that he and the other fatalities were victims of other's irresponsible attitude. The aircraft would have broken up anyway. Naturally, afterwards, there had to be a 'conspiracy of silence' to protect RR and any guilty individuals. Ergo - blame the pilot.
You guys used a f35, a f15, and a F4 to depict the F14. As good as you guys are you can’t do a tad bit of research to find the correct aircraft for that segment?
Man, this is completely normal for this channel. I unsubscribed months ago because of all the inaccuracies. I'll only watch this channel when it pops up as a suggestion and that's just to have a good laugh. People complain all the time and they do nothing about it.
@@madtrucker0983 Same. We all feel the channel has a talent, but it's wasted for not caring about what they put out at all. Not sure if they employ local drug users or Chinese slave labor overseas, but whomever they employ simply does not care.
There is a reason people in the military aviation field call Aviation Week "Aviation Leak". I have a friend who worked on the B-2, and there was quite the stir when Aviation Week published those famous overhead shots of the rollout. But honestly, nobody was surprised because "it was Aviation Leak, after all".
You just said “ordering a take out” which makes me imagine hearing your voice saying that… lol, sounds British or a colony of…. that’s not a U.S. phrase of words… and that’s AWESOME. 😉👍
@@jeffrenman4146 Answering questions like that is *_WAY_* above my pay grade. Aircraft companies have to sell their wares, and air shows are where buyers go to meet the people and see the products - and for the public, air shows are exciting and impressive - it's not often you get to have a military jet zoom over your head at 600 MPH - but those same planes are being used every day, and they're not having accidents every day. I'm not decrying air shows _per se_ - just noting that they are the venue for a *_lot_* of failures. My guess is that it's because aircraft are being shown off by making them do abnormal things at the edge of their envelope of safety.
Because they overstress it by pulling stunts not planned for, ie showing off. They should know better. Attending these Shows is risky, so think twice. One air show late 40s, a jet broke up & the engine mowed into the crowd killing scores. They carted off the dead & badly injured, cleaned up & just carried on that day & the next. Because of the War & casualties & 'Just Carry On' attitude, they thought no different about this tragedy.
The pilot who flew the F117 was trying his best to diminish the damage. "I'm sorry guys.." Yeah, that sums up how thoughtful he was even when he just ejected a tumbling piece of metal.
I watched a Vulcan crash in Glenview back in 77-78? My day camp was less than a mile from the dump where it went down and exactly one mile from where it took off. RIP boys.
Not only incorrect aircraft footage...but at 24:02 when mention the F14's "engine oil system" it shows someone pouring a quart of oil into a Honda Civic. Clown shoes...
Totally agree , it's weak and ruins what is otherwise good stuff albeit I find the narration difficult to cope with after seeing a few of these . Its like he has eaten some hot potato .
@@johnnunn8688 The normal four were not used in later flights. Many of the early flight tests flew directly over where I grew up. And when I say directly, I mean down a low flight corridor on the approaches to Lyneham, Brize Norton, Upper Heyford, Abingdon and Benson. We could see exactly what engines were in use from the smoke trails. So close, all the sash windows in the village shook.
"... ruined the happy ambiance of the crowd ...": I think it would probably ruin the entire day for the crew as well? That was a helluva thoughtless comment Dark.
A friend and myself went to that air show. We got there in time to see one stunt plane before the stealth fighter crashed. Very surreal moment hearing people yelling for him to punch out. The sound as the jet tore apart was this very loud popping and crackling.
I mean, there's a ton of just plain wrong details across this video. Picking one point out (19:53) - USS John Paul Jones is an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer, not another carrier. Picture shown at that time stamp appears to be that of a carrier and a Supply Class FCSS.
Some of her videos have been at normal talking speed lately and it’s much more watchable, Vulcan was one of the most successful and much loved of all British aircraft, it has phenomenal aerobic performance and can give many of its contemporary fighters a run for their money
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I am sure I saw the full footage either on TH-cam or hosted on an air disaster website - probably 2010 or earlier. However, everything I've seen since just shows stills of the collision incident.
So.. We are not talking about that thumbnail? With the crasched and recovered F-14 that has... Oh.. wait.. yeah. A car cluth sitting there on its back. Yeah.. so..
You’ve never worked in an aircraft program office. Losing as asset is a huge disaster for the engineers the employees, the pilots and the program. The government loses millions of dollars on that accident . And I know there were several deaths in this video by the way
Losing an aircraft with no injuries or deaths is still a disaster. Besides the cost of the aircraft, sometimes, all aircraft of the same make and model are grounded until full investigations of the cause of the accident have been completed. This could take months or years.
“I had to pull the lever or I might not have survived” No I don’t think there was any “might” involved here. You’re dropping out of the sky in a deadly piece of machinery 😂
Regarding the XB 70 accident,General Electric ,who had properly authorised the photo shoot and had done nothing wrong had most of the blame unfairly placed on them
I wouldn't blame the photo shoots for the loss of aircraft and life. Any flight, ANY FLIGHT can result in deadly mistakes, whether you deem that flight "worth it". What if that F105 had made the same mistake while in combat? Or for an airshow? Or a training mission? Or a transport mission? Would that have made any difference if the way your view this?
Yeah, its gotten worse- although I think it's actually audio software that removes silences between sounds and they just overdid it. It's similar do what you hear at the end of some car commercials where that last bit about MPG and regulations gets all squashed together
All enjoyable coverage of notorious incidents. I still a the issue of Life magazine that feature the XB-70 crash. I was 7 when it happened. One sloppy filler video later shows an F-35 several times while discussing the F-14 crash. The aircraft could not be more different and were decades apart in service.
I don't undeerstand why so many people are saying great video. This is the worse. Yes the narration is good but the images they use is ridiculus. This production is horrible.
my god,this is really bad, talking of F-14 and then show F-4, F-15 and a passenger plane, then I stopped watching, besides your way of speedy excited talking. ..
People complain, just for the sake of complaining. All of your incidents use the appropriate footage from the incidents described, and a few clips of maneuvers performed to show what breaking Supersonic speed looks like, or a clear depiction of a banking maneuver. Still after how many years, We are enjoying everything you put out there for us. Thank you.
Following the tragedy that took place on board the USS Iowa, which killed fifty or so sailors. the officer responsible for blaming the tragedy on a disgruntled sailor who took his own life and his shipmates with him, the family wanted proof. There was none.Eventually, this officer whose name and rank I don't recall, gave the family an apology. Then went on television and gave the country an apology and an explanation. I happened to have the television on when this occurred. Very angry I was, knowing well the pain of being wrongfully accused often, myself, I expect better. But by the time this man gave his tearful apology and explanation, I had once again become proud of the US Navy and the country's military. I mention this only to make your realize that he came clean on something no one but a select few knew. And they knew well. He said that no matter if they can or cannot determine the cause of some tragedy, the US Navy will always give a cause and stand behind it. Even when they cannot say what happened. They do this, because the men and women of the US Navy, many of whom are just kids, have to have complete confidence in their equipment, commanders and all they do. Because they do dangerous jobs and cannot have any doubt in the safety of their equipment, cannot doubt their commander's competency, etc. Further he added, that every officer in the US Navy knows from day one of his commission that there may come a time in the future when he might be asked and expected to take one for the team. To accept responsibility for something he was not at fault for, ending his career, and doing this so the US Navy can carry on and be strong. That's when he started tearing up. He said he made a mistake. The officers are like father figures to the enlisted men. The enlisted men their sons and daughters. And never should he have placed the blame for that tragedy on a son, when it's only the father figures, the officers, who are asked to fall on their swords. The enlisted men should never have been part of that and for that he was sorry and accepts all responsibility. I bring this up only to point out that in this video, the US Navy gave specific causes of their disasters when we now know how they operate. I'm not certain if other service branches do the same. But every explanation for any unintended event given by the US Navy should not be considered stone cold fact. It was also stated in that apology that the US Navy has been operating this way for a very long time. Make no mistake about this, I was filled with anger at this officer, his people, for framing a dead sailor who died serving his country when this apology began. By the time it was over, I not only accepted it, but was close to tearing up myself. That's how proud I was of these people. Sometimes, you just got to take one for the team. Goodnight
I think the Tomcat was actually slightly subsonic. 600 knots isn't supersonic at sea level, and there's no sonic boom in the video. That might actually be why they made it, the pilots never had to eject through a shockwave. Shockwaves are pretty brutal. A lot of people mention the vapour clouds, but they can actually happen at subsonic speeds depending on things like humidity levels.
It's commonly agreed that the greatest technical aircraft was, in fact, Concorde. Even NASA stated that getting Concorde in the air exceeded the moon landings in technical achievement
from what I understand just a terribly expensive craft that burned A LOT of fuel. But you could get from NY to London in a little over 3 hours. impressive
@@poindextertunes yes, but actually over the whole journey it burned less than a 747 - 8 in an 8 hour flight London to New York. Concorde burned 25 tons of fuel per hour so 75 tons, a 747 8 burns ten tons per hour so 80 tons for the flight.
Mrs Richards: "I paid for a room with a view !" Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) "That is Torquay, Madam ." Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!" Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window ? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically across the plains?..." Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!" Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky." Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction." Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment ?"
The wingtip vertices may have been a factor, but the cause was the massive low pressure area over the XB70's huge delta wing. Attracted the low pressure above the F104 like a magnet. That's why the F104 rolled inverted. Formation flight between two identical or similar aircraft can be done safely... between two wildly dissimilar aircraft, it's unpredictable and dangerous. The F104 was a gnat compared to the XB70, and the enormous low pressure area above the wing sucked it in like it wasn't even there.
Video won't play beyond 54 seconds, but what I recall about this tragedy is that uncontained flutter occurred, after which the aircraft broke up in flight!
The fact Buddha and Jennings survived is nothing short of miraculous. The fact they survived with just some missing facial hair is divine intervention.
The "Dark" group uses AI on all of their videos. The narration is way to fast and the use of the wrong videos of planes that AI is tlking about. This continues to get them a THUMBS DOWN.......
Thumbnail, after all the Comnents/complaints, I can't help myself with this one. >>> Looks like some kind of 'aircraft' being hauled up onto a pier. F-14, F-15, UFO/UAP ? Cannot figure out what the round dark object is in the center of the gray aircraft. It is not a VTOL fan. So, a few 'un'educated guesses: 1. Pier, probably Navy 2. Orange Leading Edges, hummm, Experimental, DARPA ? ( I know, no orange on DARPA) 3. Round Embedded Object, famous Navy Tic-tac (so its round & not oblong, I'm doing my best) 4. Men in Black, one standing in the foreground. I'm gonna say the thumbnail is, 'The Navy Meets Area 51' ! Yea, oh yea ! Whatchugot ? ! Bring it ! ! ! :- )
As a result of the Vulcan crash, the wing leading edge was redesigned, there is a kink on later models on the leading edge, you can see on the video how that one was totally straight
Fun Fact: GrndpaGaming low key dropped in an interview on the Unsubscribe Podcast that he's the nephew of Joe Walker, the NASA Chief Test Pilot, who flew the F-104 in the XB-70 collision.
@19:57: "two US Navy Carriers, the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS John Paul Jones". The JPJ is an Arleigh Burke *_destroyer,_* hull number DDG 53, not an aircraft carrier.
Scanned comments but amazingly didn't find one pointing out that the Valkerie XB-70 had its wing tips DOWN when Joe Walker in the F-104 somehow contacted that LOWERED wingtip with the high T-TAIL on the F-104 starting the event that took Walkers and Carl Cross's lives.
Regarding tomcat f-14 breaking up ! Have a good friend who flew them and he never liked going supersonic in dense air (low altitude) for this very reason He bailed once in his career and always had with him He said it would be none survivable at Mach numbers if the cat broke up due to stress , This ejection here They ejected below supersonic speed as the plane slowed rapidly being so low But still it was very fast and they were lucky to walk away from it sts with just wind burn .
GE had every right to want a picture of aircraft powered by their engines together for a brochure. Pilot error caused the tragedy not GE. Saying all for a brochure is small thinking and insulting. Marketing is a huge part of any business, it's not trivial.
I was lucky to know Rowley Falk, the first Vulcan test pilot to survive a test flight. I believe about 6 or 7 previous pilots died during the previous test flights making Rowley the first person to survive a flight in a delta wing aircraft. A true hero.
What did you think of that the pilots got ejector seats and the other three crewmen didn't,
All the V-bombers were the same apparently.
It is annoying when
Aviation videos by Idiots
Is annoying
We are a funny breed that way
Fun fact. The photo plane that accompanied the XB-70 was a Lear Jet on loan from Frank Sinatra.
Clay lacy was the pilot
It was Clay Lacy’s jet leased by various people at the time
Not a "fun fact" for the families of the pilots!
Too soon? It was freaking 60 years ago🙄@@m-arky66
I lived on that air base at Syerston. I used to fly on that airfield too. It always struck me that metal fatigue on an airframe as young as that was odd, perhaps not for the mid-50s.
Many moons ago I lived on Coney Grey Spinney.....Dad was a Snowdrop at Newton.
I'm not a pilot so........
My understanding is that, being a prototype, VX 770 wasn't stressed to the same level as production airframes.... also, she was powered on this occasion by RR Conways - a lot more powerful than the Avons with which she was initially equipped.
Officially Keith Sturt was blamed for overstressing the really quite conservative limits on this particular aircraft and, sadly, history continues to record that.
However.
Tony Blackman (ex Vulcan test pilot) reports that leading edge cracks were not unknown on Vulcans - they even had an especially petit chap at Avros/Hawker Siddelely who was small enough to squeeze inside the wing to conduct regular inspections of the leading edge structure and, occasionally, to indicate that repairs were necessary.
Blackman is of the opinion (his book, 'Vulcan Test Pilot') that pilots at RR Hucknall were regularly flying unauthorised aeros with VX770....she was apparently a VERY hot ship with those Conways. This included rolling the aircraft. VX770 was expressly forbidden to fly aerobatics because of the combination of extra power and a structurally weaker than production airframe.
Blackman does not believe that Keith Sturt exceeded the airframe limits. He thinks it highly probable that he and the other fatalities were victims of other's irresponsible attitude. The aircraft would have broken up anyway.
Naturally, afterwards, there had to be a 'conspiracy of silence' to protect RR and any guilty individuals.
Ergo - blame the pilot.
Saw a Vulcan in full camo at an airshow when I was a kid. Permanent awe.
Me too, the sound!
'Screams Like a Homesick Angel'
It was unreal. I was 4. RAF Finningley.
That vulcan....a beautiful beast. Love it.
21:38 The USAF never flew the F14
Oh…. I guess you have never seen the movie “Top Gun - USAF version”. 😅😅😅
What?
@@anandmorrisHe’s joking.
@kriley570 no, i meant the usaf never flew the f14? I presume it was just the navy then?
You guys used a f35, a f15, and a F4 to depict the F14. As good as you guys are you can’t do a tad bit of research to find the correct aircraft for that segment?
Man, this is completely normal for this channel. I unsubscribed months ago because of all the inaccuracies. I'll only watch this channel when it pops up as a suggestion and that's just to have a good laugh. People complain all the time and they do nothing about it.
Ai
@@madtrucker0983 Same. We all feel the channel has a talent, but it's wasted for not caring about what they put out at all. Not sure if they employ local drug users or Chinese slave labor overseas, but whomever they employ simply does not care.
There is a reason people in the military aviation field call Aviation Week "Aviation Leak". I have a friend who worked on the B-2, and there was quite the stir when Aviation Week published those famous overhead shots of the rollout. But honestly, nobody was surprised because "it was Aviation Leak, after all".
Far too many photos of aircraft that are not the ones being referred to in the narrative. That’s just lazy.
The AI generated voice is the laziest thing of all
@@MikeMcRoberts It isn't AI. The guy's been doing those intense-sounding voiceovers in his videos for years.
@@lusoverse8710 well then he sounds like a robot
That AI voice is def' too much, why program summat like that? Too irritating for me I quit the video half way through...
Pictures of F-35,F-4 & F-15 used in the F-14 crash, lazy and wrong!
Imagine hearing that voice when you're ordering a takeout on the phone.
You just said “ordering a take out” which makes me imagine hearing your voice saying that… lol, sounds British or a colony of…. that’s not a U.S. phrase of words… and that’s AWESOME. 😉👍
No, we say takeaway.
I would expect the food to come crashing thru the roof and like the video it would be the wrong order...LOL!
It's amazing how many accidents happen during air shows.
It is amazing isn't it… Machines kill people especially military ones. Do you think the airshow should go on?
@@jeffrenman4146 Answering questions like that is *_WAY_* above my pay grade. Aircraft companies have to sell their wares, and air shows are where buyers go to meet the people and see the products - and for the public, air shows are exciting and impressive - it's not often you get to have a military jet zoom over your head at 600 MPH - but those same planes are being used every day, and they're not having accidents every day. I'm not decrying air shows _per se_ - just noting that they are the venue for a *_lot_* of failures. My guess is that it's because aircraft are being shown off by making them do abnormal things at the edge of their envelope of safety.
Because they overstress it by pulling stunts not planned for, ie showing off. They should know better. Attending these Shows is risky, so think twice. One air show late 40s, a jet broke up & the engine mowed into the crowd killing scores. They carted off the dead & badly injured, cleaned up & just carried on that day & the next. Because of the War & casualties & 'Just Carry On' attitude, they thought no different about this tragedy.
They happen plenty at other times too, just air shows are where they are most likely to get caught on film.
@@scottthewaterwarrior Yes - I guess that's true. Good point - I don't know the proportion of all accidents that happen at air shows.
F104 in a deadly crash? Surely not...
thank you for the great content as always.
"God was looking out for us that day"..no truer words were never spoken.
That f117 pilot was awesome
16:00 The home owners were at the airshow. They were thinking, "Damn, that's pretty close to the house."
So, were they lucky or unlucky ? At least they're alive. Just homeless for a little while. :- )
Hello, State Farm, I need to talk to my agent . . .
@@BillSmith-fx7xxGood time to collect a nice check and move.
The pilot who flew the F117 was trying his best to diminish the damage. "I'm sorry guys.." Yeah, that sums up how thoughtful he was even when he just ejected a tumbling piece of metal.
I watched a Vulcan crash in Glenview back in 77-78? My day camp was less than a mile from the dump where it went down and exactly one mile from where it took off. RIP boys.
Best to listen at .75 speed!
Really wish you would stop using incorrect aircraft footage. It's so ridiculous that you would show footage of completely unrelated aircraft.
Not only incorrect aircraft footage...but at 24:02 when mention the F14's "engine oil system" it shows someone pouring a quart of oil into a Honda Civic. Clown shoes...
I stopped watching this because they kept showing the F-35 WTF during the F-14 segment. I paused it and now it shows an F-15.
Totally agree , it's weak and ruins what is otherwise good stuff albeit I find the narration difficult to cope with after seeing a few of these . Its like he has eaten some hot potato .
I quit the channel.......... I am insulted by the disrespect for the viewer
give it a thumbs down
The only time you have too much fuel on board is when you are on fire.
or tryin to land in heavy rain on a runway that to short....
Or taking off
If an engine is on fire you may have too little fuel to make the airfield.
The three most useless things to a pilot - altitude above you, runway behind you, and fuel on the ground.
Or above max weight during touchdown. Liners dump fuel all the time.
Thank you for putting a big bold red arrow on the big weird aircraft in the thumb. Otherwise, I'd have no idea what I'm looking at
Great video, thank you!
I like the declaritive tone -fact, fact, fact - no "wow!". Clinical.
The Vulcan was a quad jet. It had 4 Rolls Royce turbines not a pair. Great video.
Maybe is started out with two, but was so badass it grew a pair.
Pretty sure they kept two of the original engines and fitted two Conways for testing. 🤷♂️
One Vulcan routinely flew with just one Rolls-Royce engine, borrowed from another quad-engined aircraft.
@@bettyswallocks6411 it flew with the normal four, plus one Olympus 593 engine (for the Concorde) on the centreline.
@@johnnunn8688 The normal four were not used in later flights. Many of the early flight tests flew directly over where I grew up. And when I say directly, I mean down a low flight corridor on the approaches to Lyneham, Brize Norton, Upper Heyford, Abingdon and Benson. We could see exactly what engines were in use from the smoke trails. So close, all the sash windows in the village shook.
"... ruined the happy ambiance of the crowd ...": I think it would probably ruin the entire day for the crew as well? That was a helluva thoughtless comment Dark.
All mid to late September? That's crazy.
At 20:00, 2 US Navy aircraft carriers, USS Abraham Lincoln and USS John Paul Jones. USN had a secret aircraft carrier unknown to public
USS John Paul Jones is an Arleigh Burke class DDG.
A friend and myself went to that air show. We got there in time to see one stunt plane before the stealth fighter crashed. Very surreal moment hearing people yelling for him to punch out. The sound as the jet tore apart was this very loud popping and crackling.
I mean, there's a ton of just plain wrong details across this video. Picking one point out (19:53) - USS John Paul Jones is an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer, not another carrier. Picture shown at that time stamp appears to be that of a carrier and a Supply Class FCSS.
For the family's ty for the services may the lord be with yall amen 🙏 ❤❤❤❤❤
I've seen a ton of videos talking about the XB-70 crash. The segment in this one is literally the most comprehensive I've seen. Thank you for that.
This sounds so much better when played at 0.75x speed (slower)...✌😎💨
He's always spoken this fast. Keep up will ya!!!
Some of her videos have been at normal talking speed lately and it’s much more watchable, Vulcan was one of the most successful and much loved of all British aircraft, it has phenomenal aerobic performance and can give many of its contemporary fighters a run for their money
Just so over-dramatised... and they talk about an F14 but show an F15, F4 & F35!! And the narration is irritating.
I could swear I’ve seen the actual film of the Valkyrie accident. Can’t find it everywhere.
I've seen it too but it was years ago.
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I am sure I saw the full footage either on TH-cam or hosted on an air disaster website - probably 2010 or earlier. However, everything I've seen since just shows stills of the collision incident.
Mandela effect, I remember those videos as well.
I saw an airshow at Offutt AFB in the late 70s. The Vulcan could fly so slowly it seemed to be hovering. It was very cool to watch.
So.. We are not talking about that thumbnail? With the crasched and recovered F-14 that has... Oh.. wait.. yeah. A car cluth sitting there on its back.
Yeah.. so..
I love how an accident with an airplane that involved zero deaths and no injuries is a disaster.
You’ve never worked in an aircraft program office. Losing as asset is a huge disaster for the engineers the employees, the pilots and the program. The government loses millions of dollars on that accident . And I know there were several deaths in this video by the way
Losing an aircraft with no injuries or deaths is still a disaster. Besides the cost of the aircraft, sometimes, all aircraft of the same make and model are grounded until full investigations of the cause of the accident have been completed. This could take months or years.
22:22-22:32 that would be an F15. not an F14
F35 Footage shown depicting an F14,
“I had to pull the lever or I might not have survived”
No I don’t think there was any “might” involved here. You’re dropping out of the sky in a deadly piece of machinery 😂
🏆🤗🏆🙏
Thank you for sharing this
The USAF did not fly the F-14
That’s navy. Didn’t you guys see Top Gun 😉
@@BlakeMoran-l2s The narrator clearly said that the Navy and USAF were transitioning into the new engines. Didn't you listen to the narrator?
@@spinynorman887Narrator said they were transitioning to the F14 B, which would get the new engines
Regarding the XB 70 accident,General Electric ,who had properly authorised the photo shoot and had done nothing wrong had most of the blame unfairly placed on them
I wouldn't blame the photo shoots for the loss of aircraft and life. Any flight, ANY FLIGHT can result in deadly mistakes, whether you deem that flight "worth it". What if that F105 had made the same mistake while in combat? Or for an airshow? Or a training mission? Or a transport mission? Would that have made any difference if the way your view this?
"according to reports pieces could be seen falling off the aircraft"...as the video shows....pieces falling off the aircraft
Didn't even know about this RIP
No mention of the 1992 b-52 Stratofortress crash at Fairchild AFB Spokane WA.
Because it hit the ground intact and doesn't fit the theme of the video.
If the commentator is trying to dramatise the narration by speaking quickly in short sentences, it sounds ridiculous.
Terribilay terribilay oft putting, I mast saaay.
Yeah, its gotten worse- although I think it's actually audio software that removes silences between sounds and they just overdid it. It's similar do what you hear at the end of some car commercials where that last bit about MPG and regulations gets all squashed together
He does that for years on all his channels. He is just an idiot.
I think it’s an artificial voice.
This is normal. He isn’t human, no human talks like that, it’s either he is ET or Bigfoot.
All enjoyable coverage of notorious incidents. I still a the issue of Life magazine that feature the XB-70 crash. I was 7 when it happened.
One sloppy filler video later shows an F-35 several times while discussing the F-14 crash. The aircraft could not be more different and were decades apart in service.
I don't undeerstand why so many people are saying great video. This is the worse. Yes the narration is good but the images they use is ridiculus. This production is horrible.
I was at Barstow High school in class and we could see the smoke from the XB70 out in the desert to the North of town.
The USS John Paul Jones is NOT an Aircraft Carrier, it is an Arleigh Burke DDG. There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Damn!! 1956 and the immensity of that Brit bomber!!!!
What is with the narration?? This guy talks so fast it quickly becomes irritating to listen to him which greatly detracts from what he is saying.
my god,this is really bad, talking of F-14 and then show F-4, F-15 and a passenger plane, then I stopped watching, besides your way of speedy excited talking. ..
Omg super sonic ejection is insane. The wind burn
The GE photo flight had been approved as a Thank You to GE because GE had bent over backwards to assist the XB-70 program for years.
People complain, just for the sake of complaining. All of your incidents use the appropriate footage from the incidents described, and a few clips of maneuvers performed to show what breaking Supersonic speed looks like, or a clear depiction of a banking maneuver. Still after how many years, We are enjoying everything you put out there for us. Thank you.
Overlaying a pressure plate onto an image of a wrecked aircraft. Really?
Good video :-)
Thumbnail pic is an F14, or part of one, with a cgi something on it.
Showing everything but an F-14 in flight.🤔
Following the tragedy that took place on board the USS Iowa, which killed fifty or so sailors. the officer responsible for blaming the tragedy on a disgruntled sailor who took his own life and his shipmates with him, the family wanted proof. There was none.Eventually, this officer whose name and rank I don't recall, gave the family an apology. Then went on television and gave the country an apology and an explanation. I happened to have the television on when this occurred. Very angry I was, knowing well the pain of being wrongfully accused often, myself, I expect better. But by the time this man gave his tearful apology and explanation, I had once again become proud of the US Navy and the country's military.
I mention this only to make your realize that he came clean on something no one but a select few knew. And they knew well. He said that no matter if they can or cannot determine the cause of some tragedy, the US Navy will always give a cause and stand behind it. Even when they cannot say what happened. They do this, because the men and women of the US Navy, many of whom are just kids, have to have complete confidence in their equipment, commanders and all they do. Because they do dangerous jobs and cannot have any doubt in the safety of their equipment, cannot doubt their commander's competency, etc. Further he added, that every officer in the US Navy knows from day one of his commission that there may come a time in the future when he might be asked and expected to take one for the team. To accept responsibility for something he was not at fault for, ending his career, and doing this so the US Navy can carry on and be strong.
That's when he started tearing up. He said he made a mistake. The officers are like father figures to the enlisted men. The enlisted men their sons and daughters. And never should he have placed the blame for that tragedy on a son, when it's only the father figures, the officers, who are asked to fall on their swords. The enlisted men should never have been part of that and for that he was sorry and accepts all responsibility.
I bring this up only to point out that in this video, the US Navy gave specific causes of their disasters when we now know how they operate. I'm not certain if other service branches do the same. But every explanation for any unintended event given by the US Navy should not be considered stone cold fact. It was also stated in that apology that the US Navy has been operating this way for a very long time.
Make no mistake about this, I was filled with anger at this officer, his people, for framing a dead sailor who died serving his country when this apology began. By the time it was over, I not only accepted it, but was close to tearing up myself. That's how proud I was of these people. Sometimes, you just got to take one for the team.
Goodnight
I think the Tomcat was actually slightly subsonic. 600 knots isn't supersonic at sea level, and there's no sonic boom in the video. That might actually be why they made it, the pilots never had to eject through a shockwave. Shockwaves are pretty brutal. A lot of people mention the vapour clouds, but they can actually happen at subsonic speeds depending on things like humidity levels.
That would have been lef-tenant Parrott. ;-)
Thumbnail is bit crap for sure Dark. A photomanipulated image of recovered crashed F-14 Tomcat.
The inital thumbnail was far better, why did they change it?
Valkyrie ❤
It's commonly agreed that the greatest technical aircraft was, in fact, Concorde. Even NASA stated that getting Concorde in the air exceeded the moon landings in technical achievement
from what I understand just a terribly expensive craft that burned A LOT of fuel. But you could get from NY to London in a little over 3 hours. impressive
@@poindextertunes yes, but actually over the whole journey it burned less than a 747 - 8 in an 8 hour flight London to New York. Concorde burned 25 tons of fuel per hour so 75 tons, a 747 8 burns ten tons per hour so 80 tons for the flight.
Tried playing this at 75% speed, it's a bit better but it generates audio artifacts.
DUDE SLOW DOWN!!!
Why do I feel I suddenly need an umbrella when this guy narrates?
18:10 Nighthawk wreckage had OH on it's tail meaning it was from Ohio or property of an Ohio Air Force unit.
Dude,... why are you talking so fast?
Mrs Richards: "I paid for a room with a view !"
Basil: (pointing to the lovely view) "That is Torquay, Madam ."
Mrs Richards: "It's not good enough!"
Basil: "May I ask what you were expecting to see out of a Torquay hotel bedroom window ? Sydney Opera House, perhaps? the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically across the plains?..."
Mrs Richards: "Don't be silly! I expect to be able to see the sea!"
Basil: "You can see the sea, it's over there between the land and the sky."
Mrs Richards: "I'm not satisfied. But I shall stay. But I expect a reduction."
Basil: "Why?! Because Krakatoa's not erupting at the moment ?"
When you're in the air you always have sufficient fuel to reach the scene of the crash.
The wingtip vertices may have been a factor, but the cause was the massive low pressure area over the XB70's huge delta wing. Attracted the low pressure above the F104 like a magnet. That's why the F104 rolled inverted. Formation flight between two identical or similar aircraft can be done safely... between two wildly dissimilar aircraft, it's unpredictable and dangerous. The F104 was a gnat compared to the XB70, and the enormous low pressure area above the wing sucked it in like it wasn't even there.
F-104 was never a particularly stable aircraft to begin with.
Video won't play beyond 54 seconds, but what I recall about this tragedy is that uncontained flutter occurred, after which the aircraft broke up in flight!
The fact Buddha and Jennings survived is nothing short of miraculous. The fact they survived with just some missing facial hair is divine intervention.
@20:18 it is either an F22 or an F35 not a F14
With all the incorrect aircraft IDs, makes one wonder what else they got wrong.
Why in the Tomcat story, do you show footage of an F35, F22 , F18 , F15 and an F4? filler much?
The "Dark" group uses AI on all of their videos. The narration is way to fast and the use of the wrong videos of planes that AI is tlking about. This continues to get them a THUMBS DOWN.......
Thumbnail, after all the Comnents/complaints, I can't help myself with this one. >>> Looks like some kind of 'aircraft' being hauled up onto a pier. F-14, F-15, UFO/UAP ? Cannot figure out what the round dark object is in the center of the gray aircraft. It is not a VTOL fan.
So, a few 'un'educated guesses:
1. Pier, probably Navy
2. Orange Leading Edges, hummm, Experimental, DARPA ? ( I know, no orange on DARPA)
3. Round Embedded Object, famous Navy Tic-tac (so its round & not oblong, I'm doing my best)
4. Men in Black, one standing in the foreground.
I'm gonna say the thumbnail is, 'The Navy Meets Area 51' !
Yea, oh yea ! Whatchugot ? ! Bring it ! ! ! :- )
As a result of the Vulcan crash, the wing leading edge was redesigned, there is a kink on later models on the leading edge, you can see on the video how that one was totally straight
Fun Fact: GrndpaGaming low key dropped in an interview on the Unsubscribe Podcast that he's the nephew of Joe Walker, the NASA Chief Test Pilot, who flew the F-104 in the XB-70 collision.
@19:57: "two US Navy Carriers, the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS John Paul Jones". The JPJ is an Arleigh Burke *_destroyer,_* hull number DDG 53, not an aircraft carrier.
And then @22:10 you call the JPJ a _cruiser._
Speak a little faster if you could, i am a very slow reader.
great video, but could you have a different voice for the voiceover? it's pathetic....
Scanned comments but amazingly didn't find one pointing out that the Valkerie XB-70 had its wing tips DOWN when Joe Walker in the F-104 somehow contacted that LOWERED wingtip with the high T-TAIL on the F-104 starting the event that took Walkers and Carl Cross's lives.
I flashed on the 007 James Bond movie Thunderball where a 'Vulcan' was stolen and purposefully ditched in the ocean....
Regarding tomcat f-14 breaking up ! Have a good friend who flew them and he never liked going supersonic in dense air (low altitude) for this very reason He bailed once in his career and always had with him He said it would be none survivable at Mach numbers if the cat broke up due to stress , This ejection here They ejected below supersonic speed as the plane slowed rapidly being so low But still it was very fast and they were lucky to walk away from it sts with just wind burn .
GE had every right to want a picture of aircraft powered by their engines together for a brochure. Pilot error caused the tragedy not GE. Saying all for a brochure is small thinking and insulting. Marketing is a huge part of any business, it's not trivial.
John Paul Jones and Waylon Jennings, but has nothing to do with music. 😂😂😂
The video did not match the thumbnail.
you wouldnt happen to know what that plane is, would you?
They attributed the quote to Neil Waylon, but Waylon was his callsign
22:36 Great quote.
Yes! The proper voice is back. Excellent.
Was that JFK in the flight tower 😂